Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape Architecture, PC 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park, NJ 07932 P: (973) 240-1800, F: (973) 240-1818

www.matrixneworld.com WBE/DBE/SBE

May 13, 2021

New York State Department of State Office of Planning and Development Division of Coastal Resources One Commerce Plaza-Suite 1010 99 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12231

Attn: Matthew Maraglio, Consistency Review Unit Via E-mail to: [email protected]

RE: Joint Application for Permits for the NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment Project 4101 Arthur Kill Road Block 7202, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1 Borough of Staten Island, Richmond County, New York

To Whom It May Concern:

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC, the Applicant, is respectfully requesting the New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) to conduct a consistency determination for the proposed development, as described below, associated with the proposed revitalization of the 242± acre site located at 4101 Arthur Kill Road, along the western shoreline of the Arthur Kill, in the Borough of Staten Island, New York. On behalf of the Applicant, Matrix New World Engineering (Matrix) has prepared the attached Joint Application, which includes the Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) Consistency Assessment Form and Narrative, for seeking an approval of the proposed development. The proposed project involves construction of four (4) commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet along with associated site improvements, including new utilities to service the site, internal access roads, paved parking areas, improvements to offsite transportation facilities, and reactivation of a working waterfront use utilizing existing waterfront buildings and existing waterfront infrastructure, including bulkhead and paved platforms. No new development is proposed for the above-mentioned reactivation of the waterfront.

A copy of this Joint Application has been concurrently submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), and the New York City Department of City Planning (NYCDCP).

Attached for your review is a PDF copy of Joint Application report, which includes the following items: x NYSDEC Waterfront Activities – Application Checklist x Attachment 1.0 Joint Application Form x Attachment 2.0 Project Narrative x Attachment 3.0 Alternatives Analysis x Attachment 4.0 Site Location Maps x Attachment 5.0 Photo Key Map and Site Photographs x Attachment 6.0: USACE Environmental Questionnaire x Attachment 7.0: Tax Map x Attachment 8.0: Resource Maps x Attachment 9.0: NYSDEC Water Quality Certification Supplement WQC-1 x Attachment 10.0: NYSDEC Full Environmental Assessment Form x Attachment 11.0: NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form

1 of 2 x Attachment 12.0: NYSDEC Record of Compliance x Attachment 13.0: NYC WRP Consistency Assessment Form x Attachment 14.0 Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data x Attachment 15.0 Project Permit Plans (prepared by Langan Engineering, Environmental, Surveying, Landscape Architecture and Geology D.P.C.)

We trust that the enclosed is a complete submission package for the above-referenced application. Should you have any questions or need additional information regarding this application, please contact me by phone at 973- 585-9066 or via email at [email protected]. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Rejina Sharma Ecologist, Regulatory Specialist

Attachments

Cc: David Rickard, NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC, [email protected] Mike Clark, NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC, [email protected] Robert Fiorile, Matrix, [email protected] Ronald R. Pinzon, USACE, [email protected] Stephen Watts, NYSDEC, [email protected] Michael Marrella, NYCDCP, [email protected]

2 of 2 JOINT APPLICATION FORM For Permits for activities activities affecting streams, waterways, waterbodies, wetlands, coastal areas, sources of water, and endangered and threatened species.

You must separately apply for and obtain Permits from each involved agency before starting work. Please read all instructions.

1. Applications To: !NLong Island Well Excavation and Fill in ✔ 401 Water Quality Recreational Rivers Incidental Take of Navigable Waters Certification Coastal Erosion Endangered / Docks, Moorings or ✔ Freshwater Wetlands Management Threatened Species Platforms 6HH,QVWUXFWLRQV3DJH !USArmy Corps of Engineers ✔ Check here to confirm you sent this form to USACE. Check all permits that apply:✔ Section 404 Clean Water Act Section 10 Rivers and Harbors Act Is the project Federally funded? Yes No If yes, name of Federal Agency: General Permit Type(s), if known: Preconstruction Notification: Yes No

!NY6 Office of General Services Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSOGS. Check all permits that apply: State Owned Lands Under Water Utility Easement (pipelines, conduits, cables, etc.) Docks, Moorings or Platforms

!NY6 Department of State ✔ Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSDOS. Check if this applies:✔ Coastal Consistency Concurrence

2. Name of Applicant Taxpayer ID (if applicant is NOT an individual) NP Staten Island Industrial LLC ATTN David Rickard 85-0868506 Mailing Address Post Office / City State Zip 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside MO 64150

Telephone816-541-2881 Email [email protected] Applicant Must be (check all that apply):✔ Owner Operator Lessee

3. Name of Property Owner (if different than Applicant) Same as Applicant Mailing Address Post Office / City State Zip

Telephone Email

For Agency Use Only Agency Application Number:

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0/ Page 1 of 4 JOINT APPLICATION FORM – Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

4. Name of Contact / Agent Matrix New World Engineering ATTN: Robert Fiorile Mailing Address Post Office / City State Zip 26 Columbia Turnpike, 2nd Floor Florham Park NJ 07932

Telephone973-845-7505 Email [email protected]

5. Project / Facility Name Property Tax Map Section / Block / Lot Number: Port Mobil Redevelopment Block 7247, Lot 1 and Block 7207, Lot 60 Project Street Address, if applicable Post Office / City State Zip NY 4101 Arthur Kill Road Staten Island, New York City 10309 Provide directions and distances to roads, intersections, bridges and bodies of water The site is located adjacent to the Arthur Kill tidal strait. A portion of Arthur Kill Road borders the site to the southeast and Ellis Road borders the site to the southwest. Town Village City County Stream/Waterbody Name New York City Richmond Arthur Kill Project Location Coordinates: Enter Latitude and Longitude in degrees, minutes, seconds: Latitude: -74 14' 19.302 " Longitude: 40 32'" 44.4012

6. Project Description: Provide the following information about your project. Continue each response and provide any additional information on other pages. Attach plans on separate pages. a. Purpose of the proposed project: The project would serve to redevelop a currently underutilized property and fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse space in Staten Island, and New York City. The project would create a significant number of full-time equivalent jobs and temporary construction jobs. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

b. Description of current site conditions: The site is a former major oil storage facility (MOSF) that is subject to on-going remedial actions. The central, interior portion of the site has been developed with MOSF infrastructure, port facilities and a solar array. Undeveloped land areas, which includes 19-acres of wetlands and a segment of natural shoreline along the Arthur Kill, are concentrated along the property perimeter. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details. c. Proposed site changes: Site redevelopment includes four (4) buildings totaling approximately 2.15± million square feet; parking areas for passenger vehicles and commercial trailers; internal access roads and additional access point off Arthur Kill Road; new sanitary sewer, water, electrical, and gas infrastructure; and new stormwater management infrastructure. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details. d. Type of structures and fill materials to be installed, and quantity of materials to be used (e.g., square feet of coverage, cubic yards of fill material, structures below ordinary/mean high water, etc.): The project includes one new outfall and one replacement outfall. The project involves grading, and construction of roadways, buildings, and retaining walls which would impact freshwater wetlands and freshwater wetlands adjacent areas. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, and Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further details.

e. Area of excavation or dredging, volume of material to be removed, location of dredged material placement: No dredging is proposed for the project. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, and Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further details.

f. Is tree cutting or clearing proposed? Yes If Yes, explain below. No Timing of the proposed cutting or clearing (month/year): See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative. Number of trees to be cut:2,947 Acreage of trees to be cleared: 15.04 Acres

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0 Page 2 of 4 JOINT APPLICATION FORM – Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

g. Work methods and type of equipment to be used: See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative.

h. Describe the planned sequence of activities: See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative.

i. Pollution control methods and other actions proposed to mitigate environmental impacts: All best management practices including any general or special conditions as prescribed by the USACE/NYSDEC permits, shall be implemented to avoid discharge of pollutants into coastal waters. Further, the construction contractor will be required to develop a site-specific Health and Safety Plan, including Excess Materials Disposal Plan and Spill Prevention Plan. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details. j. Erosion and silt control methods that will be used to prevent water quality impacts: Sediment control measures (i.e. silt fences, catch basin and inlet protection, concrete truck wash areas, and stabilized construction entrances) will be installed as deemed necessary and in accordance with an approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

k. Alternatives considered to avoid regulated areas. If no feasible alternatives exist, explain how the project will minimize impacts: Alternatives for the proposed project that were evaluated by the Applicant include: Alternative Project Locations, Alternative Project Designs/Layouts and the No Action Alternative. See Attachment 3.0, Alternatives Analysis, for the full alternatives analysis.

l. Proposed use:✔✔ Private Public Commercial m. Proposed Start Date:August 2022 Estimated Completion Date: August 2024 n. Has work begun on project? Yes If Yes, explain below. No No. Demolition of existing MOSF infrastructure and site remediation is ongoing pursuant to two Consent Orders. This is a separate action to the proposed project. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

o. Will project occupy Federal, State, or Municipal Land? Yes If Yes, explain below. No The Project is located on privately owned parcels.

p. List any previous DEC USACE2*6RU'26 Permit / Application numbers for activities at this location: NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands 2-6405-00073/00076, NYSDEC Water Quality Certification 2-6405-00073/00077, NYSDEC Excavation & Fill in Navigable Waters 2-6405-00073/00078, NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands 2-6405-00073/00082, SPDES 2-6405-00073/00024 (Transfer NY0004961)

q. Will this project require additional Federal, State, or Local DXWKRUL]DWLRQs, including zoning changes? Yes If Yes, list below. No Yes. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for a list of additional approvals/authorizations needed.

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0 Page 3 of 4 JOINT APPLICATION FORM – Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

7. Signatures. Applicant and Owner (If different) must sign the application.,IWKHDSSOLFDQWLVWKHODQGRZQHUWKHODQGRZQHU DWWHVWDWLRQIRUPFDQEHXVHGDVDQHOHFWURQLFVLJQDWXUHDVDQDOWHUQDWLYHWRWKHVLJQDWXUHEHORZLIQHFHVVDU\ Appendadditionalpages ofthis Signature section if there are multiple Applicants, Owners or Contact/Agents. I hereby affirm that information provided on this form and all attachments submitted herewith is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Permission to Inspect - I hereby consent to Agency inspection of the project site and adjacent property areas. Agency staff may enter the property without notice between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm, Monday - Friday. Inspection may occur without the owner, applicant or agent present. If the property is posted with "keep out" signs or fenced with an unlocked gate, Agency staff may still enter the property. Agency staff may take measurements, analyze site physical characteristics, take soil and vegetation samples, sketch and photograph the site. I understand that failure to give this consent may result in denial of the permit(s) sought by this application. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the NYS Penal Law. Further, the applicant accepts full responsibility for all damage, direct or indirect, of whatever nature, and by whomever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the State from suits, actions, damages and costs of every name and description resulting from said project. In addition, Federal Law, 18 U.S.C., Section 1001 provides for a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both where an applicant knowingly and willingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up a material fact; or knowingly makes or uses a false, fictitious or fraudulent statement. SignatureSignnata ure of AApplicantpplica Date 

ApplicantAppliccant MuMustst bbe (check all that apply): ✔ Owner Operator Lessee

Printed Name Title David Rickard Development Manager

Signature of Owner (if different than Applicant) Date

Printed Name Title

Signature of Contact / Agent Date 

Printed Name Title Robert Fiorile Director, Planning and Ecology

For Agency Use Only DETERMINATION OF NO PERMIT REQUIRED Agency Application Number (Agency Name) has determined that No Permit is required from this Agency for the project described in this application. Agency Representative: Printed Title Name Signature Date

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0 Page 4 of 4 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

PROJECT NARRATIVE

Introduction NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC (the “Applicant”) proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island into a warehouse complex (the “Project”). The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, identified on the New York City Tax Map as Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1 (the “Site”).

Property Designation and Owner/Applicant The subject property consists of Block 7247, Lot 1 and Block 7207, Lot 60, which are owned by the Applicant.

Owner/Applicant: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Attn: David Rickard 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside, MO 64150 Phone: (816) 541-2881 Email: [email protected]

Contact/Agent: Matrix New World Engineering Attn: Robert Fiorile 26 Columbia Turnpike, 2nd Floor Florham Park, NJ 07932 Phone: (973) 845-7505 Email: [email protected]

Required Actions or Approvals City Actions/Approvals: i. New York City (NYC) Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) coastal consistency assessment ii. Three Zoning Authorizations pursuant to the NYC Zoning Resolution (ZR): a. Removal of trees pursuant to ZR 107-64 (to modify 107-32), b. Modification existing topography pursuant to ZR 107-65 (to modify 107-31), and c. Modification of group parking facility pursuant to ZR 107-68 (to modify 107-472) iii. One Zoning Certification of cross access connections pursuant to ZR 36-592 iv. New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) v. NYC Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Construction Permit – NYC Department of Environmental Protection

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 1 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

State Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act (CWA) – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) i. Tidal Wetlands Permit under Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) Article 25 – NYSDEC ii. Freshwater Wetlands Permit under ECL Article 24 – NYSDEC iii. State Pollution Discharge Elimination (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities – NYSDEC iv. SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity – NYSDEC v. 6 New York Code of Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 360.17 Nonspecific Facilities Permit – NYSDEC Federal Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 404 Clean Water Act – USACE

Project Purpose and Need The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the Site into a warehouse complex. The Site is currently one of the largest, unutilized sites on Staten Island. The completed Project would fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse building space in Staten Island, and New York City as a whole. The Project would meet increasing market demand for warehousing space through construction of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet (SF), dedicated to logistics and commercial warehousing uses (see Proposed Conditions section below for further details) and would additionally reactivate a maritime use along the waterfront for a marine service yard industrial use utilizing existing waterfront infrastructure including existing buildings, bulkhead, and paved platform. The proposed uses are consistent with the underlying M3-1 zoning district and would reactivate a former industrial property. The completed Project would also provide local residents with much needed on-Island employment opportunities. Staten Island has above average unemployment and lower workforce participation rates and approximately 74% of Staten Island residents employed within the Trade, Transportation and Utilities industry sector commute off-Island to work. It is projected that the Project will generate approximately 1,952 permanent positions at this locally accessible location. It is also noteworthy that Project is consistent with and furthers the goals and objectives of the Staten Island Working West Shore 2030 plan, which promotes projects that create quality local jobs within the borough and is consistent with the Industrial Businesses Zone (IBZ) designation which encourages utilization of industrial zoned properties for industrial uses.

Site Description and Existing Conditions The Site is a privately-owned 242-acre property that is situated along the West Shore of Staten Island adjacent to the Arthur Kill tidal strait. Maps depicting the project location are presented in Attachment 4.0, Site Location Maps, as Attachment Number 4.1, USGS Topographic Map, Attachment Number 4.2, Vicinity Map, and Attachment Number 4.3, Aerial Map. For photos of the Site, refer to Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs, of the Joint Application for Permit package. The Site is the location of the former Port Mobil Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF), which was previously owned by Kinder Morgan Liquids Terminals, LLC (Kinder Morgan), and was purchased by the Applicant Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 2 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

in December 2020. The Site operated as a MOSF from the 1930s until Kinder Morgan ceased the operation in 2019. The 242-acre Site includes approximately 120 acres within the central, interior portion of the property that has been previously developed with a MOSF that includes roads, buildings, and energy infrastructure such as petroleum storage tanks, port facilities and a solar array, much of which is situated within remedial area subject to two consent orders, discussed further below. The remaining acreage consists of undeveloped woodlands and herbaceous land areas, which include approximately 19.6 acres of wetlands of varying jurisdiction under New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), as well as a natural section of shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. Applications to USACE and NYSDEC to verify jurisdictional extents of delineated wetland areas have been submitted and are currently under review. The facilities associated with the former MOSF are located almost entirely on the Site’s western lot (Lot 1), which is currently developed with 38 petroleum storage tanks ranging in height from 30 to 60 feet, warehouse and office buildings, and associated industrial infrastructure. Each tank is enclosed with earthen secondary containment berms between 10 to 12 feet in elevation. Lot 1 is also developed with an approximately 3100’ bulkhead previously used for the import and export of petroleum products. Also located on Lot 1 is a 15.4± acre ground-mounted solar array field adjacent to the southeast of the existing MOSF operated under a ground lease with EnterSolar, LLC (“EnterSolar”). The eastern lot (Lot 60) is comprised almost entirely of undeveloped land areas, which include freshwater and tidal wetlands and a natural section of shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. The Applicant is currently in the process of fulfilling remedial obligations, as a responsible party, pursuant to two consent orders, initially dated August 2009 and September 2020, with both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and NYSDEC.1 Under these obligations, all MOSF infrastructure will be demolished and portions of the Site will be remediated. The Applicant is working with NYSDEC and USEPA to finalize a Remedial Investigation/Interim Remedial Measures Workplan that will dictate specific remedial activities in accordance with the consent orders. Mean higher high water (MHHW) and mean high water (MHW) elevations of the Arthur Kill at the Site are at 2.55 feet and 2.23 feet NAVD88, respectively. Limits of the federal jurisdictional waters of the United States correspond with the MHHW line (El. 2.55 NAVD88) of the Arthur Kill tidal strait. The NYSDEC tidal wetlands map (see Attachment 8.1, NYSDEC 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map) classifies the Arthur Kill at this location as littoral zone (LZ) with coastal shoals, bars and mudflats (SM) along the natural shoreline. The NYSDEC freshwater wetlands map (see Attachment 8.2, NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map), shows Class I freshwater wetlands located within the eastern portion of the Site (near Lot 60) and Class I freshwater wetlands in the southwestern forested portion of the Site. The United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) (see Attachment 8.3, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map) maps the Site with Estuarine and Marine Wetlands along

1 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12- 1111-A-SBC.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 3 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

the northern, natural shoreline portion of the Site; Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetlands along the eastern and southern portions of the Site; Freshwater Emergent Wetlands in the southern portion of the Site; and Freshwater Pond wetlands located in the southern, northern, and western portions of the Site. Above reference attachments are provided in Attachment 8.0, Resource Maps, of the Joint Application for Permit package. Waterbodies within the surrounding geographical area include: 1) the Arthur Kill tidal strait, classified as Class SD by the NYSDEC ERM; and 2) a stream intersecting with the southernmost portion of the Site (adjacent to the intersection of Ellis Road and Arthur Kill Road) classified by the NYSDEC ERM as Class SD/C. According to 6 NYCRR Part 701, the best usage of Class SD waters is fishing and the best usage of Class C waters is also fishing. The NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper (ERM) was reviewed to locate areas NYSDEC identifies as Significant Natural Communities2 and to review for the potential presence of Rare Plants and Animals3 (see Attachment 8.4, NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper Results). The post oak-blackjack oak barrens, located partially within and mostly adjacent to the Site, is identified as a NYSDEC upland Significant Natural Community (SNC) The red maple-sweetgum swamp is a NYSDEC freshwater wetland SNC. This SNC is located partially within the boundaries of the Site and extends onto the adjacent Clay Pit Ponds State Park (see Attachment 8.4, NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper Results, for specific locations of Significant Natural Communities near the Site). In order to protect Rare Plants and Animals, ERM only provides generalized locations of the species. Some of these generalized locations for Rare Plants and Animals are mapped on the project Site. The ERM identifies Rare Dragonflies and Damselflies in the vicinity of the Site, which are not listed by NYS, and identifies Chuck-will’s-widow in the vicinity of the Site, which is not listed by NYS. A data request for further information regarding the potential presence of protected species within the Site and the vicinity of the Site was sent to the New York Natural Heritage Program (NYNHP) on February 12, 2021. The NYNHP responded on March 25, 2021 confirming the information in the ERM regarding Significant Natural Communities (red maple-sweetgum swamp and the post oak-blackjack oak barrens) and providing the additional data on species presented in Table 2-1, Species Documented at the Site by NYNHP, and Table 2-2, Species Documented at Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve by NYNHP. Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, provides the data request and response letter from NYNHP.

2 The Significant Natural Communities layer in the ERM shows locations of rare or high-quality wetlands, forests, grasslands, ponds, streams, and other types of habitats, ecosystems, and ecological areas. 3 The Rare Plants and Animals layer in the ERM shows generalized locations of animals and plants that are rare in New York State, including but not limited to those listed as Endangered and Threatened. To protect species, the ERM does not disclose specific boundaries where rare plants and animals are present, but provides generalized buffers where species may be present.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 4 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Table 2-1 Species Documented at the Site by NYNHP

Common Scientific Name Type NY State Heritage Conservation Documented Location Name Listing Status

Fence Lizard Sceloporus Lizard Threatened - At the project site undulatus

Eastern Mud Kinosternon Turtle Endangered - Within 250 yards of the Turtle subrubrum project site

Chuck-will’s- (Antrostomus Bird Protected Critically Imperiled in NYS At site or in its vicinity widow carolinesis) Bird

Source: NYNHP agency correspondence dated March 25, 2021. Letter provided in Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, of this application.

Table 2-2 Species Documented at Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve by NYNHP

Common Scientific Name Type NY State Heritage Conservation Documented Location Name Listing Status

Low St. Hyperivum Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park John’s Wort stragulum Preserve

Southern Wild Viburnum nudum Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Raisin var. nudum Preserve

Whorled Pycnanthemum Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Mountain Mint verticillatum var. Preserve verticillatum

Sedge Rush Juncus Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park scirpoides var. Preserve scirpoides

Short-Leaved Pinus echinate Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Pine Preserve

Virginia Pine Pinus virginiana Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve

Torrey’s Eupatorium Plant Threatened Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Throughwort torreyanum Preserve

Yellow-sided Libellula flavida Dragonfly Unlisted Clay Pit Ponds State Park Skimmer Preserve

Source: NYNHP agency correspondence dated March 25, 2021. Letter provided in Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, of this application.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 5 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

The USFWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service were sent requests for information on the potential presence or protected species within the Site or vicinity of the Site on March 3, 2021, and February 12, 2021, respectively. Agency responses are currently pending. The USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system, provides data on the presence of threatened and endangered species under the jurisdiction of USFWS within the Site or the vicinity of the Site. According to the IPaC report generated on April 7, 2021, there are two species of bird that may potentially be affected by activities occurring at the Site: the Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) federally listed as Threatened, and the Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii dougallii) federally listed as Endangered. The IPaC does not report any critical habitat at the Site or within the vicinity of the Site. The IPaC lists ten migratory birds as potentially occurring on or near the project Site, nine of which are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC). The IPaC report is included in Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data. According to a wildlife survey conducted by Princeton Hydro during the Fall of 2020, a total of 70 avian species were observed within the Site. One NYSDEC threatened species, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and one NYSDEC special concern species, osprey (Pandion haliaetus) was observed during survey efforts. Both observations were of flyover birds, presumably, utilizing the Arthur Kill for foraging opportunities. No nests of either species were observed within the Site. The remainder of the sightings were comprised of both species that are common throughout the region year-round and nonresident migratory birds which utilize the Atlantic Flyway during both north (spring) and south (fall) bound migration events. An additional five mammal, one amphibia, fourteen lepidopteran, and four odonatan species were observed during survey efforts, all of which are common to widespread throughout Richmond County and the region. A summary of wildlife survey results including methodology and names of all species observed is shown in Attachment 2.1, Princeton Hydro Wildlife Survey Summary - Fall 2020. The New York City Department of City Planning (DCP) Flood Hazard Mapper indicates that portions of the Site are within the 500-year (0.2% annual chance flooding) floodplain and within the 100-year (1% chance annual flooding) floodplain (see Attachment 8.5, FEMA Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map). The potential presence of cultural resources within or adjacent to the Site was reviewed utilizing the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS). The CRIS includes state-regulated resources of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Additionally, the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) mapping system was screened for locally regulated historic resources within the Site. Both the CRIS and LPC were reviewed on February 16, 2021, and neither database systems indicated there are any buildings or districts within or contiguous to the Site that are identified as “eligible” or “listed” for inclusion in the State or National Register of Historic Places (see Attachment 8.7, New York Cultural Resources Information System Map). There is an LPC Individual Landmark located at 4210-4212 Arthur Kill Road, just north of the intersection of Arthur Kill Road and Storer Avenue, and over 550 feet from the Site. In a letter from the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified Westfield Township School #7 located at 4210 Arthur Kill Road as an LPC designated and S/NR eligible property with Architectural significance in the radius of the Project and identified no properties with

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 6 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Architectural significance within the Site (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for a copy of the LPC letter). Coordination with the OPRHP regarding the presence of architectural and archaeological resources is ongoing. The entire Site is mapped by the CRIS as an archaeologically sensitive area. The majority of the proposed project development will occur within the footprint of existing MOSF facilities and remedial area and as such would not be expected to result in any potential disturbance of any archeological resources. In a letter from the LPC dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified the Site (BBL 5072070060 and 5072470001) as containing properties with Archaeological significance and indicated that there is potential for the recovery of remains from native American occupation on the Site. The LPC recommended an archaeological documentary study be performed for the Site to clarify initial determinations and provide the threshold for the next level of review (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for a copy of the letter from LPC). The Applicant will follow recommendations and guidance from the LPC and OPRHP in order to protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts within the Site and is in the process of scheduling archaeology investigations for the Site. The Site is located within the New York City WRP Coastal Zone Boundary (CZB) and is therefore, subject to a coastal consistency review (see Attachment 8.6, New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Map). The WRP maps the entire Site as a Significant Maritime and Industrial Area (SMIA), with the existing bulkhead area mapped as a Priority Marine Activity Zone (PMAZ). Within the eastern lot (Lot 60), the WRP maps the Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands as a Recognized Ecological Complex (REC). According to New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) Coastal Boundary Map, areas adjacent to and within the Site were not identified as Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats or Scenic Areas of Statewide. NYSDOS Natural Heritage Communities were identified in the southwestern portion of the Site, specifically a Freshwater Wetlands system with a Forested Mineral Soil Wetlands subsystem and a small Upland system with Barrens and Woodlands Subsystem (see Attachment 8.8, Natural Heritage Communities).

Proposed Conditions The Project would include the following elements: x Construct four (4) commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximately 2.15± million SF with the following breakdown for each building; o Building 1: approximately 229,632 SF o Building 2: approximately 477,880 SF o Building 3: approximately 1,225,120 SF o Building 4: approximately 215,280 SF x Construct parking areas that would support tenant requirements and include passenger (employee) vehicle parking totaling 1,999 spaces and additionally include approximately 400 loading berths and approximately 550 commercial trailer parking spaces; x Construct internal access roads and an additional access point (curb cut) off Arthur Kill Road at the southeastern region of the Site; x Relocate the existing ground-mouted solar array to top of proposed buildings;

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 7 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

x Perform several offsite road frontage improvements along Arthur Kill Road including widening the roadway, providing curb and gutter improvements, constructing sidewalks, and installing a new traffic signal; x Install new sanitary sewer, water, electrial, and gas infrastructure within the Site; x Preserve the existing developed, waterfront portion of the Site, including existing bulkhead and three of the five existing buildings4 with a total of approximately 30,333 SF that support waterfront uses, to be tenanted as a marine service yard with industrial use; and x Construct a series of catch basins and subsurface conveyance piping connecting to two proposed stormwater quality basins with vegetation that would ultimately discharge to the Arthur Kill through two new outfalls (one new outfall and one replacement outfall).

4 Existing Buildings A, H, and I to be preserved. See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 8 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Summary of Projects and Fill Materials Below is a summary table of the impacts resulting from the proposed work encompassed by this application. Summary of Disturbance in Jurisdictional Areas

Volume of Fill Description of Disturbance Area (SF) Area (acre) (CY)

MHW/MHHW/SHT

Disturbance Below Mean High Water Line 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY Disturbance Below Mean Higher High Water Linea 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY

TIDAL WETLANDS

Disturbance in NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY Disturbance in NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Adjacent Area (AA) 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY

FRESHWATER WETLANDS

Disturbance in USACE Freshwater Wetlands 990 SF 0.02 acre 735 CY Disturbance in NYSDEC/USACE Freshwater Wetlands 5,585 SF 0.13 acre 3,845 CY Disturbance in NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands AA 72,395 SF 1.66 acre 29,270 CY

Disturbance in Non-Jurisdictional Freshwater Wetlands 56,960 SF 1.31 acre 12,200 CY

Total Disturbance in Jurisdictional Freshwater Wetlands 6,575 SF 0.15 acre 4,580 CY Total Disturbance in Jurisdictional Freshwater Wetlands AA 72,395 SF 1.66 acre 29,270 CY

IMPERVIOUS/PERVIOUS SURFACESb

Total new impervious surfaces in Wetlands 43,790 SF 1.00 acre - Total new impervious surfaces in Wetlands AA 34,795 SF 0.79 acre - Total existing impervious surfaces in Wetlands 0 SF 0.00 acre - Total existing impervious surfaces in Wetlands AA 1,785 SF 0.04 acre - Note: a Based on conversations with the USACE, the Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) Line will suffice as equivalent to the Spring High Tide (SHT) Line for impact calculations and regulatory compliance b Wetlands under impervious/pervious surfaces section includes jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional

No dredging activity is proposed at or near the navigable waterway. Refer to Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further project design details.

Method of Work and Type of Equipment Upland work: x Activities: Excavation, grading, paving, and concrete placement

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 9 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York x Equipment to be used: Excavator, front-loaders, graders, pavement rollers, dump truck, concrete truck, and compacter x Use of a barge or similar type of floating platform would likely only be used to import fill material over the existing wharf for remedial/development cap construction. Stormwater outfalls work would be performed above the MHHW line and are not anticipated to require a barge or spud barge.

Planned Sequence of Activities The remediation will not impact any wetlands or adjacent areas. The site will be remediated in accordance with Consent Orders and the development will occur above the remedial cap. The planned sequence of activities for the Project includes: x Install erosion and sediment control measures including surface water protection, construction entrance stabilization, and perimeter sediment control x Clear existing trees and vegetation within footprint of development x Demolish existing buildings and tanks x Begin phased remediation of uplands per DEC consent order x Milling and paving of existing street asphalt within project limits to accommodate new utilities x Placement of clean fill material for remedial/development capping x Construction of upland utilities x Install drainage pipes and outfalls x Install retaining headwall structure at outfall x Upland construction concurrent with on-going phased remediation x Seeding/planting upland areas x Restoration of all disturbed areas

Pollution Control The Project is not anticipated to discharge any pollutants, toxic, solid waste or hazardous substances at concentrations above regulated levels into coastal waters. All best management practices (BMPs), including any general or special conditions as prescribed by the USACE or NYSDEC permits, shall be implemented to avoid discharge of pollutants into coastal waters. Further, the construction contractor would be required to develop a site-specific Health and Safety Plan, including Excess Materials Disposal Plan, and Spill Prevention Plan prior to implementing invasive site work. All spoils and associated liquids (such as contaminated groundwater) on-site would be excavated/collected, stored and transported in accordance with applicable local, State and Federal laws. Additionally, all contaminated soil and liquid waste generated by the proposed activities would be disposed of in appropriate facilities off-site. Construction activities associated with the Project are expected to generate waste common to construction (e.g., hydrocarbon-based fuels, lubricants, oils, paints, and cleaning solvents for the construction equipment). These materials would be handled and stored in accordance with applicable Federal, State, or local regulations, and a site-specific Health and Safety Plan, Excess Materials Disposal Plan, and Spill Prevention Plan developed for the Project. All necessary precautions would be taken to prevent any potential spills, leaching or emission of contaminated substances into the environment or

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 10 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

onto adjacent properties. In case of an unintentional release of petroleum, such as an accidental spill during refueling, any such discharge would be cleaned up and removed in accordance with the guidelines contained in the NYSDEC Spill Guidance Manual.

Erosion and Silt Control Potential temporary surface water impacts to the Arthur Kill tidal strait resulting from upland construction activities, such as increased turbidity or pollution from stormwater runoff, would be managed through the erosion and sediment control BMPs. As required, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed in accordance with the New York SPDES program, which includes erosion and sediment control measures that comply with the New York Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control. The SWPPP also includes measures to manage post-construction stormwater in accordance with the Stormwater Management Design Manual. Refer to Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for Erosion and Sediment Control Plans. Design plans and specifications would require that the contractor install appropriate sediment control measures (i.e., silt fences, catch basin and inlet protection, concrete truck wash areas, and stabilized construction entrances). The erosion and sediment control BMPs may include the following: x Precautions to minimize spillage and tracking of sand and silt on the road surfaces and prompt cleanup. x Utilizing silt fences, catch basin silt sack, straw bales, turbidity barrier, and stabilized construction entrances in accordance with the SWPPP. x Underlining and covering all stockpiles of erodible materials with poly sheeting to prevent sediment washout. x Placing mulch or other suitable ground cover on all slopes following grading. x Soil restoration through seeding slopes with plant materials approved by the appropriate local jurisdictions, including NYC Parks, as applicable. x Establishing timing/construction restrictions to avoid spawning periods and sensitive life stage timeframes for various aquatic species in the Arthur Kill tidal strait. x Contractor compliance with all requirements of the Project’s Remedial Action Plan.

Alternatives Considered to Avoid Regulated Areas Attachment 3.0, Alternatives Analysis, of this Joint Application for Permit package includes a detailed assessment of alternatives considered to avoid and minimize impacts to regulated areas.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 11 of 11

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This document presents the Alternatives Analysis for NP Staten Island Industrial LLC (“the Applicant’s”) proposed development project (“Project”) at 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, NY (“Site”). It conforms with the US Army Corps of Engineer (USACE’s) guidance document “Information for Preparing an Alternatives Analysis Under Section 404” (June 2014), as well as New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Article 24 and Article 25 permit review requirements. Alternatives for the proposed Project that were evaluated by the Applicant include: Alternative Project Locations, Alternative Project Designs/Layouts and the No Action Alternative. Each of these alternatives is described below.

2.0 BACKGROUND

Over the last two decades, trends for consumer shopping have been increasingly shifting to online and major shifts in distribution and transportation networks have created a steadily increasing demand for modern logistical parks with new warehousing space designed specifically for e-commerce clients. This shift has recently been exacerbated due to the COVID-19 pandemic as in person shopping has been restricted and consumers seek to utilize online shopping options. Additionally, it is expected that this will in turn result in new purchase habits that will further increase the shift to online shopping and thus further increase the need for new warehousing facilities. Another expected result of the pandemic is that due to supply shortages experienced during the pandemic, suppliers will hold significantly more stock on-hand, which will also further increase the need for additional warehousing space.

The New York/New Jersey Metro-region is one of the largest consumer markets in the world, driving local demand for well-located e-commerce facilities. Currently, on a regional basis, warehousing vacancy is at a historic low of less than 2-percent and there is limited new construction currently in progress. In order to meet market demand and trending tenant requirements, new warehousing facilities have to provide the right balance between location and functionality. Operational effectiveness for multi-market distribution requires efficient transportation access to multiple consumption centers, as well as building- level features such as size, clearance height, layout, parking, and dock doors that dictate functionality for high-throughput distribution operations. As a result, current market demand focuses on new facilities designed specifically for e-commerce operational efficiencies which require larger, adaptable buildings located at key transportation hubs along the periphery of major urban areas where there is high level of labor availability within the local workforce.

3.0 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT SITES

Suitable locations for warehousing and distribution facilities within the NY/NJ Metro Region require meeting specific site-selection criteria that are essential for such facilities to operate in a technically and economically viable manner. These criteria include:

x Availability of land for sale and purchase cost x Adequate “buildable” land area for development x Appropriate zoning and compatibility of surrounding land uses x Building square footage yield relative to cost of construction and land x Adequate access to main arterial roadways x Adequate available workforce

1 | Page

Additionally, densely developed markets such as the NY/NJ Metro Region have the greatest challenges to on-time delivery due to several factors, such as high traffic congestion, which increases the importance of well-located facilities.

The Applicant sought potential sites situated within a roughly 20-mile radius of midtown Manhattan. Potential sites included locations within the five boroughs of New York City as well as adjacent counties in New Jersey. Due to the intensity of development within the NY/NJ Metro region there are relatively few sites currently available that meet required site-selection criteria. A total of five site locations in addition to the proposed location were evaluated and considered as alternate locations to develop the Project. A description of each of the five alternative site locations is provided below along with the rationale for not pursuing each location. Also included below is a detailed description of the Preferred Site Alternative location and rationale for site selection.

3.1 SITE ALTERNATIVE 1

Site Alternative 1 consists of a +/- 45 acres property located at 1900 South Avenue, Staten Island, which is situated within the City’s Working West Shore 2030 planning area and readily accessible to State Route 440. This location is zoned for industrial use and is partially occupied by three existing tenants with long-term leases: an asphalt plant, a clean fill operator and a rail transfer operator. Proposed development would need to be built around these existing uses which limits the potential developable area to +/- 25 acres. This available land area would limit potential total building square footage to less than 400,000 square feet (SF). While workforce availability and site accessibility are favorable at this location, the Applicant did not pursue this site due to the low building yield that is constrained by the existing property development and land uses.

3.2 SITE ALTERNATIVE 2

Site Alternative 2 consists of a +/- 50 acre property located at 278 South Avenue, Staten Island, which is also situated within the City’s Working West Shore 2030 planning area and readily accessible to State Route 440. The site is a former landfill that is zoned for industrial use and surrounded by residential, commercial and industrial development. The site contains +/- 500,000 cubic yards of waste within two large, mounded areas which cause geotechnical and environmental concerns in regards to building construction. The site is also constrained by the presence of extensive areas of wetlands that are located within the boundaries of the site as well as adjacent to the site. The site constraints for this location limit potential total building square footage to +/- 500,000 square feet (SF). While workforce availability and site accessibility are also favorable at this site, the Applicant did not pursue this location as the building yield is low relative to the cost to develop the property due to the environmental and geotechnical challenges along with and extensive wetland permitting requirements.

3.3 SITE ALTERNATIVE 3

Site Alternative 3 consists of a +/- 75 acre property consisting of +/- 60 acres of developable area located at Avenue A and West 1ST Street in the City of Bayonne, NJ. The site is readily accessible to State Route 440 however, workforce availability is limited. The site, which is zoned for industrial use, is the location of the former Texaco refinery which is a known contaminated site. The site is situated entirely within the 100 Year flood plain of Newark Bay. Development of the site would

2 | Page

require extensive amounts of fill to be imported in order to raise the site above the base flood elevation. Development would also require significant geotechnical improvements. Deep foundation pilings would be needed due to soil contamination and vapor mitigation systems would be necessary due to groundwater contamination. The site constraints for this location limit potential total building square footage to +/- 600,000 square feet (SF). The Applicant did not pursue this location due to the low building yield relative to the cost to develop the property as well as operational challenges associated with limited workforce availability.

3.4 SITE ALTERNATIVE 4

Site Alternative 4 consists of a +/- 70 acre property located at East 22nd Street and Avenue J in the City of Bayonne, NJ. The site is situated entirely within the 100 Year flood plain of New York Harbor. The site is not readily accessible to State Route 440 and workforce availability is limited. Development of the site would require extensive amounts of fill to be imported in order to raise the site above the base flood elevation and deep foundation pilings would be required due to geotechnical concerns. The property is also a known contaminated site with documented soil and groundwater contamination requiring a vapor intrusion system for health and human safety. Site constraints for this location limit potential available building square footage to +/- 700,000 square feet (SF). The Applicant did not pursue this location due to the low building yield relative to the cost to develop the property as a result of the geotechnical and environmental challenges along with the limited site accessibility and workforce availability.

3.5 SITE ALTERNATIVE 5

Site Alternative 5 consists of a +/- 50 acre property located at 135 Main Street in South Amboy, NJ. The site consists of an irregularly shaped parcel bisected by high voltage transmission lines. Additionally, the site is situated entirely within the 100 Year flood plain of the Raritan River and Sandy Hook Bay. The site is not readily accessible to State Route 440 and workforce availability is limited. The irregularity of the property dimensions limits development of larger scale warehousing facilities to a 16-acre portion of the interior of the property. In addition, site development would require relocation of the high voltage transmission lines and extensive amounts of fill to be imported in order to raise the site above the base flood elevation. Site constraints for this location limit potential available building square footage to +/- 350,000 square feet (SF). The Applicant did not pursue this location due to the low building yield relative to the cost to develop the property as well as limited site accessibility and workforce availability.

3.6 SELECTED SITE ALTERNATIVE

The selected site consists of a 242-acre property located at 4101 Arthur Kill Road which is situated within the City’s Working West Shore 2030 planning area. The site is the location of the former Port Mobil major oil storage facility (MOSF), which is a known contaminated site that is currently vacant and subject to on-going state and federally mandated remediation. The applicant selected the subject site based on property size, potential total building yield (> 2,000,000 GSF), zoning (Industrial Business Zone IBZ, Heavy Industrial M3), availability within the local work force and accessibility to State Route 440. In addition, the site includes existing marine port facilities along the Arthur Kill that provide critical waterborne access required for site remediation and

3 | Page

redevelopment activities and which contributes to the economic feasibility of the Project through the preservation and subsequent leasing of the marine port facilities.

The majority of the existing site development is situated within the central, interior portions of the site while primary site constraints (e.g. wetlands, tidal waters) are concentrated along the property perimeter. This arrangement offers the unique opportunity to generate a total buildable yield (2,150,000 GSF) that is large enough to enable both a technically and economically viable modern logistics park with minimal impacts to regulated natural features (e.g., freshwater wetlands, tidal wetlands/tidal waters and associated adjacent areas). Additionally, it should be noted that the impervious coverage associated with the site development (buildings, pavement, etc.) would also serves as a final remedy for remediation of the MOSF.

Local land use designations and planning efforts support the proposed use of the site as a modern logistics park. The Project Site is located entirely within the Rossville Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) and underlying heavy industrial (M3-1) zoning district. These zoning designations promote industrial and manufacturing uses such as those proposed. The site also lies within the Special South Richmond Development District (SSRD) which guides development and manages growth in a manner that is consistent with the topography and natural assets unique to the area. Based on review of SSRD requirements, it was determined that the proposed logistics park could be designed in a manner that could achieve SSRD plan certification.

Local workforce availability demographics and planning area goals presented within Working West Shore 2030 plan also favorable to and supportive of the proposed use of the site. The Applicant estimates that staffing of the proposed logistical center will require 1,952 individuals as part of regular operations. As such, availability within the local workforce is a significant consideration. Staten Island is proximate to a large, targeted demographic labor pool totaling approximately 52,000 individuals. Research indicates that there is a net targeted demographic labor pool supply/demand surplus of 9,435 individuals within a five-mile radius of the site with estimates that indicate the region can support up to 3,000 additional warehouse jobs. Currently, approximately 74% of Staten Island residents employed within the Trade, Transportation and Utilities industry sector commute to jobs outside the borough, which requires 2-½ times more commuting time than jobs located on Staten Island. The Project’s ability to provide borough residents on-island employment opportunities is consistent with the first of the four main objectives of the Working West Shore 2030 plan which is to create, quality local jobs for Staten Island residents and reduce the need for off-island commutes, which will also has the added benefit of reducing traffic congestion associated with off-island commuting.

As noted previously, dense markets such as the NY/NJ Metro Region present the warehousing and distribution industry with the greatest challenges to on-time delivery due to several factors, such as high congestion, which increases the importance of well-located facilities. One of the key features of the selected site location is its close proximity to SR 440. First planned by Robert Moses in 1930 as the "West Shore Parkway" in the Staten Island arterial development plan, SR 440 connects the Staten Island Expressway (I-278) with the Korean War Veterans Parkway and the Outerbridge Crossing approaches and provides the only north-south express route that extends the length of Staten Island. SR 440 provides convenient access to the regional highway network, major air and seaports in New York and New Jersey, as well as dense consumer delivery

4 | Page

destinations within each of New York City’s five boroughs and New Jersey. The level of accessibility provided by the site’ proximity to SR 440 enables the logistic park to access approximately 14.2 million people living within a 30-mile radius of the site and a total of population of approximately 23 million people within a 3-hour delivery range, which are important factors to future tenants.

While not a requirement of the alternative analysis process, it is important to note that the proposed Project is consistent with and furthers the goals and objectives of the Staten Island Working West Shore 2030 plan not only to create quality local jobs within the borough but also to promote and redevelop maritime infrastructure. The plan, which identifies the selected site for industrial use, targets growth opportunities to a limited number of areas within the West Shore that:

• Have concentrated amounts of developable and vacant/underutilized land; • Are accessible to current and future transit stops and highway exits; • Are near existing and future employment and commercial centers; and • Would support existing communities by their development.

The plan also promotes the establishment, improvement and expansion of economic development programs intended to help retain and to recruit industrial users and to support the redevelopment of maritime infrastructure and sites. The proposed Project meets these goals and objectives and does so in a manner that also preserves an extensive amount of the site’s undeveloped land areas.

4.0 Alternative Project Designs

Due to the nature of the warehousing and distribution market, level of fiscal investment, unique site features and lengthy processes associated with discretionary and non-discretionary approvals, in addition to meeting site specific regulatory and land use requirements, it is critical that the project design for the project also meet certain design thresholds and a wide range of industry specific design parameters to generate marketable space upon completion of construction. These site design parameters include total buildable yield, restoring maritime uses, building sizes and dimensions that meet industry specific standards and parking requirements that meet industry standards.

The costs associated with property acquisition and redevelopment of the site require certain critical design thresholds to be met in order for the project to be financially viable. These thresholds include a total buildable yield that is greater than two million square feet, construction of an anchor building that is greater than one million square feet and preservation of a waterfront area that is large enough to reactivate maritime usage. Additionally, in order for the project to be technically viable the site design and layout must meet requirements that are industry specific. These include buildings that are wide enough (620’ min.) to accommodate a two-bay layout that provides required operational space and office space as well as adaptability to provide a range occupancy square footage. The warehousing industry also has highly specific parking demands that need to be able to accommodate full time staff, multi-shift workers and a high number of distribution vehicles and trailers. Due to the various type of parking needs and the complexity of high level internal vehicular movement, the total number of available parking spaces, stall size and location as well as internal circulation require careful thought and planning to develop a design that prioritizes safety while also meeting tenant needs and local zoning requirements.

5 | Page

As part of the preliminary planning design process multiple design configurations were considered. Primary factors evaluated during the preliminary design process included total buildable yield, building designs (size, dimensions) that can meet tenant operational requirements, avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features and local land use requirements, including zoning requirements of the South Richmond Special Area. A total of four design alternatives were evaluated. A brief summary of each alternative is presented below along with the rationale for not pursuing the alternative design. Also included below is a detailed description of the Preferred Alternative Design and rationale for design.

4.1 Alternative Design #1

Figure 4-1 presents the site access design approach originally envisioned for the project which was intended to occur via Ellis Road; an existing single lane road along the Site’s southern boundary. This access approach was preferred by the applicant in that, in combination with the existing access from Arthur Kill Road, use of Ellis road would reduce the area of internal roadways required and would provide direct access to the waterfront. In accordance with local zoning requirements and NY Fire Department requirements, this Alternative would require widening Ellis Road to 34 feet. This design alternative meets project requirements for total buildable yield, building design and tenant operational requirements, however, the alternative does not meet the goal of avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features. As depicted Figure 4-1, Ellis Road bisects wetlands both on-site and offsite. As such, widening of the roadway would result in significant impacts to wetlands and adjacent areas that would not otherwise be affected by the proposed redevelopment.

This Alternative was excluded from advancement as it would not meet the goal of avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated features. Widening of Ellis Road would increase disturbance to wetlands by approximately 1.25 acres and increase disturbance to adjacent areas by 0.65 acres.

4.2 Alternative Design #2

Figure 4-2 presents the conceptual design for Alternative 2. This Alternative concept evaluated a revised site access approach with a single, large (±1,709,000 S.F.) building. Access to the site would be established via two entrances. One entrance would be through an existing curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road at the existing gated entrance to the site, adjacent to and east of the existing solar array facility and another entrance via a new curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road proximate to the easternmost corner of the Project Site. This single building approach identified complexities in providing code compliant and industry standard parking and circulation around a single large building and highly limited ability to incorporate adaptive design measure to accommodate tenant requirements.

This design alternative meets project requirements for providing an anchor building with required design dimensions while preserving the waterfront for maritime use. However, this alternative

6 | Page

does not meet project requirements for total buildable yield or goals for avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features. This alternative also creates difficulties in meeting local land use requirements due to less flexibility in shifting internal circulation. While this alternative primarily focuses the footprint of redevelopment over the existing MOSF, the single building approach results internal driveways and parking extending further into undeveloped portions of the site where regulated features exist. This Alternative, when compared to the effects of the Preferred Alternative, results in increased disturbance to regulated wetlands by 0.58 acres and increased adjacent area disturbance by 1.77 acres.

This Alternative was excluded from advancement due to the fact that it does not meet buildable yield requirements, likely conflicts with local zoning requirements for parking and circulation requirements and does not meet the goal of avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated features.

4.3 Alternative Design #3

Figure 4-3 presents the conceptual design for Alternative 3. This design provides a four building layout similar to that presented in the Preferred Alternative, below. This Alternative concept evaluated a layout that could meet the total buildable yield, building designs (size, dimensions) that can meet tenant operational requirements and local land use requirements while also preserving the waterfront for maritime use. This conceptual design approach also focuses redevelopment over the existing MOSF and reduced impacts to regulated wetlands and adjacent areas when compared to Alternatives Design 1 and 2, however, upon examination it was noted that impacts to regulated areas could likely be further reduced. This Alternative, when compared to the effects of the Preferred Alternative, results in increased disturbance to regulated wetlands by 0.36 acres and increased adjacent area disturbance by 1.15 acres. This Alternative was subsequently advanced to further avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and adjacent areas through the use of multiple design measures which eventually produced the Preferred Design Alternative presented below.

4.4 Alternative Design #4

Figure 4-4 presents the conceptual design for Alternative 4. This design provides a four building layout similar to that presented in Alternative Design 3 and the Preferred Alternative, however, in an effort to avoid impacting wetlands situated within the southwestern portion of the property, Building 3 and associated support facilities were rotated to the north away from the wetland complex, thereby shifting the western corner of the development closer to the Arthur Kill waterfront.

This design alternative meets project requirements for total buildable yield and building design, however, the alternative does not meet operational requirements of preserving maritime use along the waterfront; does not meet goals for avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated features; and, conflicts with local land use guidance for preserving maritime use. As depicted in Figure 4-4, this design alternative highly conflicts with the ability to preserve operational uses of the waterfront facilities that are to be re-tenanted by a maritime user. The rotation results in an encroachment of the building envelope associated with Building 3 facilities within areas critical to

7 | Page

port operations significantly hindering the ability to preserve viable maritime usage. Inclusion of maritime usage is instrumental to the redevelopment of the site from both a fiscal perspective and is highly encouraged by various City agencies and policies. Additionally, while meeting the goal of reducing impacts to wetlands along the southwestern portion of the site by 3,929 SF, the rotation causes an increased impact to wetlands located in the northern portion of the site adjacent to the Arthur Kill by 4,179 SF resulting in a total net increase of project related wetland impacts of 250 SF. Additionally, guidance provided by the Department of City Planning (DCP) was to develop a site plan with an orderly building layout and circulation plan. Rotation of the western development area in a non-linear manner is inconsistent with this guidance and would be highly discouraged by DCP.

Based upon the above, this Alternative was not further considered due conflicts with preservation of the maritime usage, increased impacts to wetlands and inconsistency with DCP design guidance.

5.0 Preferred Alternative

The site engineering plans submitted with the Joint Permit Application present the detailed design approach for the Preferred Alternative. This design provides a four building layout developed to meet the required design parameters as well as avoid and minimize impacts to regulated wetlands and associated adjacent areas to the greatest extent practicable. As previously noted, the majority of the existing site development is situated within the central, interior portions of the site while regulated wetlands and adjacent areas are concentrated along the property perimeter. This arrangement enable the applicant with a unique opportunity to develop a Preferred Alternative Design that meets all necessary design requirements with minimal impacts to regulated features. Additionally, it should be noted that the impervious coverage associated with the site redevelopment (buildings, pavement, etc.) also serves as a final remedy for remediation of the MOSF.

The Preferred Alternative would redevelop the subject property in a manner that provides a total of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet (GSF), comprised of four one-story, 55-foot tall buildings of the following sizes and uses: (1) Building 1, a 229,632 GSF commercial warehouse building; (2) Building 2, a 477,880 GSF commercial warehouse building; (3) Building 3, a 1,225,120 GSF commercial warehouse building; and (4) Building 4, a 215,280 GSF commercial warehouse building. It is anticipated that the three commercial warehouse buildings would be tenanted by online fulfillment firms and conventional storage companies for storage, distribution, and logistics purposes. The light manufacturing and light assembly building is anticipated to operate as an enterprise manufacturer working with building materials (wood, metal, paint, adhesives, and / or plaster). Further, the existing ground-mounted solar array would be relocated to the rooftop of Building 3 and potentially expanded to the rooftops of other buildings to increase the solar energy generated.

Primary access to the Project Site would be established via two entrances along Arthur Kill Road. One entrance would be through an existing curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road at the existing gated entrance to the site, adjacent to and east of the existing solar array facility and another entrance via a new curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road proximate to the easternmost corner of the Project

8 | Page

Site. Internal access roads and paved parking areas would be accessible via both entrances and sidewalks would be provided throughout the site for use by tenants/employees of the Proposed Project.

The proposed stormwater management system would include a series of catch basins and manholes directed via subsurface conveyance piping to two proposed stormwater quality basins to the north of Buildings 2 and 3, respectively, each ultimately discharging treated stormwater into the Arthur Kill waterway via two proposed outfalls. The proposed stormwater quality basins would be designed to incorporate landscaping vegetation.

A portion of the site’s waterfront is already developed, including five existing warehouses (totaling approximately 36,661 GSF), 40 accessory off-street parking spaces, and a 1,500-foot bulkhead, which would be preserved and re-tenanted by a maritime user. It is anticipated that the selected maritime tenant would utilize the existing waterfront area including the bulkhead as a marine service yard or for similar operations (e.g., storage, mobilization, or repair of marine equipment). Access to the existing bulkhead, upon reactivation, would be provided via internal access drive that has been incorporated into the overall site design and circulation plan.

5.1 Avoidance and Minimization Measures

The Preferred Alternative Design was advanced with the specific goal of avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated wetlands and adjacent areas to the greatest extent practicable. This has been accomplished through several design measures that include:

x Focusing development over existing MOSF x Developing an internal circulation and parking design that minimizes encroachments into regulated features to greatest extent practicable x Modification to the size and dimensions of Building 2 x Extensive use of retaining walls to limit disturbance to wetlands and adjacent areas x Development of a stormwater management design that incorporates outfall placement in a manner that avoids impacts to wetlands, adjacent areas and tidal waters

These design measures, when combined, provide for the least impactive design approach that is also technically and economically viable.

6.0 No Action Alternative

Under the No-Action Alternative, remediation of the site would be completed pursuant to the Consent Order, however, no additional development on top of the former MOSF would occur. Specifically, in accordance with the Consent Order and DEC Remediation Plan, the 38 former oil storage tanks and associated infrastructure would be decommissioned and demolished, and a remedial cap comprised of a minimum one-foot clean topsoil would be layered across the site, and then seeded with native grasses. The remedial cover design is currently being finalized with DEC. It is deemed likely that a limited amount of ground disturbance beyond the MOSF area may be required to construct sedimentation basins to manage stormwater and erosion from the remedial cover in accordance with the NYSDEC Stormwater Manual and Blue Book.

9 | Page

This alternative would meet the goal of avoiding all impacts to wetlands and adjacent areas and would be consistent with local zoning requirements, however, as no development would occur this alternative would not meet Applicant’s project objectives for developing a commerce center with a viable buildable yield with building designs that can meet tenant market demand and operational requirements. Further, it should be noted that the No Action Alternative would also be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Staten Island Working West Shore 2030 plan, which specifically promotes industrial use of the site in a manner that will not only to create quality local jobs within the borough but also to promote and redevelop maritime infrastructure.

7.0 Conclusion

The preferred alternative was selected as it is the one alternative that could meet each of the primary consideration factors: total buildable yield, building designs that can meet tenant operational requirements, avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features and local land use requirements. It is important to note that this alternative is also the alternative that results in the least amount of impacts to regulated features.

10 | Page

FIGURE 4-1 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #1

FIGURE 4-2 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #2 FIGURE 4-3 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #3

FIGURE 4-4 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #4 p

Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

LEGEND Project Site

NOTES: 1. The Project Site is located in the southwest quadrant of the Arthur Kill Quadrangle, NY-NJ. 2. Approximate Project Site Coordinates: N40° 32' 43.862", W74° 14' 20.509"

0500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

SCALE IN FEET

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .1 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 2,000 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att Map 2.1 021121.mxd - USGSTopographic LEGEND Project Site

0250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 SCALE IN FEET p

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT VICINITY MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .2 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 1,250 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 2.2 - Vicinity Map 021121.mxd LEGEND Project Site

0250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 SCALE IN FEET p

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT AERIAL MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .3 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 1,250 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\AttAerial 2.3 Map - 021121.mxd

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 1 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 1. Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at dilapidated MOSF infrastructure and fuel storage tanks (part of Structure 1, to be demolished under Consent Orders) in the background.

Photograph 2: Southern portion of the project site atop a berm looking northeast down a corridor lined with fuel storage tanks (Structure 1).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 2 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 3: Northwestern portion of the project site looking southeast at an existing stormwater quality basin and fuel storage tanks (Structure 1).

Photograph 4: Eastern portion of the project site atop a berm looking southwest down roadway lined with storage tanks (Structure 1).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 3 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 5:Eastern portion of project site looking northwest down perimeter roadway and naturally vegetated areas.

Photograph 6:Eastern portion of project site looking southeast down perimeter roadway at forested areas. Fuel storage tank berm shown in foreground (right).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 4 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 7: Southern portion of the project site looking west at the solar array (foreground) with several fuel storage tanks visible in the background.

Photograph 8: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at Structure G.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 5 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 9: Southwestern portion of the project site looking north at the front of Structure G.

Photograph 10: Southwestern portion of the project site looking northwest at Structure G front and side.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 6 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 11: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at Structure H (left) and Structure G (right), Arthur Kill tidal strait in background.

Photograph 12: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at the front of Structure H, to be retained under the proposed project.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 7 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 13: Southwestern portion of the project site looking southeast at the front and side of Structure H.

Photograph 14: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at MOSF infrastructure (background) and Structure I (right, background).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 8 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 15: Southwest portion of the project site looking north at the front of Structure I.

Photograph 16: Southwestern portion of the project site looking northeast at Structure I front and side.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 9 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 17: Northwestern portion of the project site looking southwest along the existing bulkhead and Arthur Kill tidal strait.

Photograph 18: Northwestern portion of the project site looking east at tidal wetlands along the Arthur Kill and forested areas.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 10 of 10 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

This document serves to address the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) New York District Environmental Questionnaire and supplement the Joint Application for Permit used in the State of New York.

GENERAL - APPLICABLE TO ALL PROJECTS

1. Explain the need for, and purpose of, the proposed work.

The Project would serve to redevelop the currently unutilized Site and fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse building space in Staten Island, and New York City as a whole. The Project is on a brownfield that is one of the largest, unutilized sites in the area. Site selection included consideration of a few slightly smaller sites on Staten Island, but these sites have more restrictive environmental constraints, mainly relating to presence of tidal and freshwater wetlands. The Site was selected for multiple reasons including its historic use as a significant industrial development and its existing developed and disturbed nature that minimizes encroachments into previously undisturbed environments when compared to the aforementioned sites. Development on this Site has several constraints due to the redevelopment occurring above a remedial cap for the former Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF); adjacency to the Arthur Kill River; and the presence of natural areas adjacent to the existing developed and disturbed footprint of the MOSF. These unique Site conditions necessitate a project of sufficient size to off-set costs for a complex, large-scale development.

The Applicant has performed extensive market analyses in selecting both the location for the Project and the proposed redevelopment design. Specifically, market analyses performed for the Project indicate a continued trend toward online shopping that has resulted in a deficit of warehouse space available to serve Long Island and the 5 boroughs of NYC, and indicates this location would address the market demand to serve at least 14 million people, and up to 23 million people, in a 30 mile radius. The redevelopment has been designed to provide the 2.15 million square feet of space required for the client to see a return on their investment. The building sizes and layouts identified in the project plans have been selected specifically to meet the target markets identified for this location; one anchor logistics tenant with supporting warehouse buildings specifically sized to meet the requirements of the anticipated tenant needs. In order to meet very specific storage and loading requirements, the largest proposed building design includes interior spaces for racking and movement of equipment and exterior loading/offloading areas on both sides of the building. Without the building depth identified on the plans, the building would not be marketable to a logistics tenant that is intended as the anchor for this entire redevelopment. Additionally, due to the remedial cap, the former MOSF area will be elevated to a grade that limits extending or changing orientation of the development further toward the waterfront area as it would encroach into the area necessary to attract the future marine service operator.

The formerly operating MOSF within the Site was decommissioned in 2019 and the Site is undergoing

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 1 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

remediation pursuant to two consent orders.1 Although the proposed redevelopment is expediting Site remediation and being carried out by the Applicant, it is not subject to discretionary approvals and is not part of the proposed Project discussed herein.

The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned Site into a warehouse complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehouse space, reactivating a working waterfront use (marine service yard industrial use) utilizing existing bulkhead and existing buildings along the waterfront, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, while preserving valuable natural resources within the Site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goals of the comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses.

The Project would meet the increasing market demand for warehousing space through construction of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet (SF), dedicated to warehousing and logistics uses, and would activate a marine service yard industrial use along the waterfront. The waterfront use would not require any additional development or upgrades to existing waterfront infrastructure and would utilize existing bulkhead, the existing paved platform, and existing buildings along the waterfront.2 The proposed warehouse and marine service yard industrial uses are consistent with the underlying M3-1 zoning district that the Site is within and would be reactivating a former industrial area which had closed in 2019, consistent with IBZ intents. The scale of the Project is critical to support future success of the development at the Site and to meet the needs of potential local and national retail distribution networks. Other logistics parks on Staten Island – including the 200-acre Matrix Global Logistics Park in the Bloomfield neighborhood to the north, which houses Amazon and Ikea facilities – have documented the creation of a significant number of full-time equivalent jobs and temporary construction positions. Along with job creation, fulfilling market demand for commercial warehousing, and creating industrial uses in the IBZ, the Project would preserve natural features in the perimeter of the Site to the maximum extent practicable through avoiding and minimizing encroachment on natural features.

2. Provide the names and addresses of property owners adjacent to your work site (if not shown on the application form or project drawings).

List of Adjacent Property Owners

Block Lot Zip Code Address Owner Name NYS DEPARTMENT OF 7132 100 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

1 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12-1111-A-SBC. 2 Existing Buildings A, H, and I to be preserved. See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 2 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Block Lot Zip Code Address Owner Name 7144 463 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD NYS DEPT OF ENVIR CONSV 7144 490 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD UNAVAILABLE OWNER 7144 500 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD NYS DEPT OF ENVIR CONSV 7144 510 10309 3120 ARTHUR KILL ROAD THOMAS TIRRO 7144 523 10309 3090 ARTHUR KILL ROAD CLAY, MICHAEL 7144 528 10309 3080 ARTHUR KILL ROAD DOUBLE T LLC 7144 538 10309 3044 ARTHUR KILL ROAD NYS DEPT OF ENVIR CONSV 7207 280 10309 JOHNSON STREET 11 JOHNSON ST LLC 7207 283 10309 JOHNSON STREET BLUEPRINT METALS INC 7207 293 10309 135 JOHNSON STREET EGBERT SQUARE RELATY LLC 7207 300 10309 115 JOHNSON STREET 115 JOHNSTON STREET INC 7207 305 10309 101 MILA WAY BLOCK 7207 REALTY LLC 7207 55 10309 3015 ARTHUR KILL ROAD PULIAFICO, THOMAS A 7207 57 10309 3011 ARTHUR KILL ROAD UNAVAILABLE OWNER 7207 140 0 JOHNSON AVENUE COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. 7207 150 10309 JOHNSON AVENUE COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. 7207 239 10309 50 JOHNSON STREET JOHNSON ST VENTURES, LLC 7207 241 10309 30 JOHNSON STREET JOHN P PRIMIRONO 7207 243 10309 26 JOHNSON STREET JOHNSON STREET ENTERPRISES, LLC 7207 253 10309 18 JOHNSON STREET 16-18 JOHNSON STREE, LLC 7207 255 10309 151 JOHNSON STREET COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. 7207 260 10309 JOHNSON STREET 16-18 JOHNSON STREE, LLC 7207 35 10309 27 JOHNSON STREET BLOCK 7207 REALTY LLC 7293 20 10309 CLAY PIT ROAD NYS OFFICE OF GENERAL SERVICES 7293 250 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD UNAVAILABLE OWNER 7385 28 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD DYSTON LLC 7385 45 10309 4167 ARTHUR KILL ROAD RAYMOND W ROE 7385 300 10309 ELLIS ROAD DYSTON LLC 7385 275 10309 ELLIS ROAD DYSTON LLC

Attachment 7.0, Tax Map, shows the tax block and lot information graphically in relation to the Site.

3. Photographs of the project site should be submitted. For projects in tidal areas, photographs of the waterway vicinity should be taken at low tide. Using a separate copy of your plan view, indicate the

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 3 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

location and direction of each photograph as well as the date and time at which the photograph was taken. Provide a sufficient number of photographs so as to provide a clear understanding of conditions on and proximate to your project site.

See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs.

4. Provide a copy of any environmental impact statement, or any other environmental report which was prepared for your project.

The Project is required to undergo New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is under preparation. As the EIS is in progress and a draft has not been officially accepted by the lead agency, the New York City Department of City Planning (NYCDCP), the NYSDEC State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Full Environmental Assessment Form has been prepared to supplement this Joint Application for Permit. See Attachment 10.0, NYSDEC Full Environmental Assessment Form.

5. Provide a thorough discussion of alternatives to your proposal. This discussion should include, but not necessarily be limited to, the "no action" alternative and alternative(s) resulting in less disturbance to waters of the United States. For filling projects in waters of the United States, including wetlands, your alternatives discussion should demonstrate that there are no practicable alternatives to your proposed filling and that your project meets with current mitigation policy (i.e. avoidance, minimization and compensation).

See Attachment 3.0, Alternatives Analysis, for detailed alternatives analysis.

DREDGING PROJECTS

Not applicabe. No dredging is proposed.

MOORING FACILITIES

Not applicable. No construction or rehabilitation of recreational mooring facilities is proposed.

BULKHEADING/ BANK STABILIZATION/ FILLING ACTIVITIES

1. Indicate the total volume of fill (including backfill behind a structure such as a bulkhead) as well as the volume of fill to be placed into waters of the United States. The amount of fill in waters of the United States can be determined by calculating the amount of fill to be placed below the plane of spring high tide in tidal areas and below ordinary high water in non-tidal areas.

Approximately 4,580 CY of fill would be placed into waters of the United States.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 4 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

2. Indicate the source(s) and type(s) of fill material.

Fill material will consist of clean soil and/or rock.

3. Indicate the method of fill placement (i.e. by hand, bulldozer, crane, etc.). Would any temporary fills be required in waterways or wetlands to provide access for construction equipment? If so, please indicate the area of such waters and/or wetlands to be filled and show on the plan and sectional views.

Fill would be placed with bull dozers and backhoes. No temporary fills in wetlands would be required. For further project details, refer to Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 5 of 5 LEGEND Project Site Buildings Over 50 Years Old I Approximate Remedial Cap Limits

0200400600100

SCALE IN FEET

Structure 1 (one) Solar Major Oil Storage Array Facility (MOSF) and Associated Infrastructure Arthur Kill Road 021.mxd

Building G

Building H Ellis Road

Building I

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

SAAF - /RFDWLRQVRI ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Existing StructuresOver BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 50 Years Old Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 13.2 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 05-10-2021 05-10-2021 1 " = 392 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 11.2 - SAAF Existing Structures Over 50 Years Old 051 OldF:\2020\20-383 KinderMorganSAAF Staten Existing - Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDsYears Structures Over 50 Permitting\Att11.2 - FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY WRP No. ______Date Received: ______DOS No. ______

NEW YORK CITY WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM Consistency Assessment Form

Proposed actions that are subject to CEQR, ULURP or other local, state or federal discretionary review procedures, and that are within New York City’s Coastal Zone, must be reviewed and assessed for their consistency with the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) which has been approved as part of the State’s Coastal Management Program. This form is intended to assist an applicant in certifying that the proposed activity is consistent with the WRP. It should be completed when the local, state, or federal application is prepared. The completed form and accompanying information will be used by the New York State Department of State, the New York City Department of City Planning, or other city or state agencies in their review of the applicant’s certification of consistency.

A. APPLICANT INFORMATION

Name of Applicant: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard

Name of Applicant Representative: Robert Fiorile

Address: 26 Columbia Turnpike, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

Telephone: 973-845-7505 Email: [email protected]

Project site owner (if different than above): NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard

B. PROPOSED ACTIVITY If more space is needed, include as an attachment. 1. Brief description of activity NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island into a warehouse complex. The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, 10309. The proposed project would construct four one-story buildings with a net total floor area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet. Developed waterfront portions of the site would be retained for a marine service yard industrial use. Refer to the attached Consistency Assessment Form Narrative for further details.

2. Purpose of activity The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned Site into a warehouse complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehouse space, reactivating a working waterfront use, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, while preserving valuable natural resources within the Site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goals of the comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses. Refer to the attached Consistency Assessment Form Narrative for further details.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

1 C. PROJECT LOCATION

Borough: Staten Island Tax Block/Lot(s): Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1

Street Address: 4101 Arthur Kill Road

Name of water body (if located on the waterfront): Arthur Kill tidal strait

D. REQUIRED ACTIONS OR APPROVALS Check all that apply.

City Actions/Approvals/Funding

City Planning Commission Yes No City Map Amendment ✔ Zoning Certification Concession Zoning Map Amendment ✔ Zoning Authorizations UDAAP Zoning Text Amendment Acquisition – Real Property Revocable Consent Site Selection – Public Facility Disposition – Real Property Franchise Housing Plan & Project Other, explain: ______Special Permit (if appropriate, specify type: Modification Renewal other) Expiration Date:

Board of Standards and Appeals Yes No Variance (use) Variance (bulk) Special Permit (if appropriate, specify type: Modification Renewal other) Expiration Date:

Other City Approvals Legislation Funding for Construction, specify: Rulemaking Policy or Plan, specify: Construction of Public Facilities Funding of Program, specify: 384 (b) (4) Approval ✔ Permits, specify: See attached Narrative Other, explain:

State Actions/Approvals/Funding

✔ State permit or license, specify Agency: See attached Narrative Permit type and number: Funding for Construction, specify: Funding of a Program, specify: Other, explain:

Federal Actions/Approvals/Funding

✔ Federal permit or license, specify Agency: See attached Narrative Permit type and number: Funding for Construction, specify: Funding of a Program, specify: Other, explain:

Is this being reviewed in conjunction with a Joint Application for Permits? Yes No

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

2 E. LOCATION QUESTIONS

1. Does the project require a waterfront site? Yes No

2. Would the action result in a physical alteration to a waterfront site, including land along the shoreline, land under water or coastal waters? Yes No 3. Is the project located on publicly owned land or receiving public assistance? Yes No

4. Is the project located within a FEMA 1% annual chance floodplain? (6.2) Yes No

5. Is the project located within a FEMA 0.2% annual chance floodplain? (6.2) Yes No

6. Is the project located adjacent to or within a special area designation? See Maps – Part III of the Yes No NYC WRP. If so, check appropriate boxes below and evaluate policies noted in parentheses as part of WRP Policy Assessment (Section F).

✔ Significant Maritime and Industrial Area (SMIA) (2.1) Special Natural Waterfront Area (SNWA) (4.1) ✔ Priority MariWLPe Activity Zone (PMAZ) (3.5) ✔ Recognized Ecological Complex (REC) (4.4) West Shore Ecologically Sensitive Maritime and Industrial Area (ESMIA) (2.2, 4.2)

F. WRP POLICY ASSESSMENT Review the project or action for consistency with the WRP policies. For each policy, check Promote, Hinder or Not Applicable (N/A). For more information about consistency review process and determination, see Part I of the NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program. When assessing each policy, review the full policy language, including all sub-policies, contained within Part II of the WRP. The relevance of each applicable policy may vary depending upon the project type and where it is located (i.e. if it is located within one of the special area designations). For those policies checked Promote or Hinder, provide a written statement on a separate page that assesses the effects of the proposed activity on the relevant policies or standards. If the project or action promotes a policy, explain how the action would be consistent with the goals of the policy. If it hinders a policy, consideration should be given toward any practical means of altering or modifying the project to eliminate the hindrance. Policies that would be advanced by the project should be balanced against those that would be hindered by the project. If reasonable modifications to eliminate the hindrance are not possible, consideration should be given as to whether the hindrance is of such a degree as to be substantial, and if so, those adverse effects should be mitigated to the extent practicable. Promote Hinder N/A Support and facilitate commercial and residential redevelopment in areas well-suited 1 to such development.

1.1 Encourage commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate Coastal Zone areas.

Encourage non-industrial development with uses and design features that enliven the waterfront 1.2 and attract the public.

Encourage redevelopment in the Coastal Zone where public facilities and infrastructure are 1.3 adequate or will be developed.

In areas adjacent to SMIAs, ensure new residential development maximizes compatibility with 1.4 existing adjacent maritime and industrial uses.

Integrate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of 1.5 waterfront residential and commercial development, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

3 Promote Hinder N/A Support water-dependent and industrial uses in New York City coastal areas that are 2 well-suited to their continued operation.

2.1 Promote water-dependent and industrial uses in Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas.

Encourage a compatible relationship between working waterfront uses, upland development and 2.2 natural resources within the Ecologically Sensitive Maritime and Industrial Area.

Encourage working waterfront uses at appropriate sites outside the Significant Maritime and 2.3 Industrial Areas or Ecologically Sensitive Maritime Industrial Area.

2.4 Provide infrastructure improvements necessary to support working waterfront uses.

Incorporate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of 2.5 waterfront industrial development and infrastructure, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2.

Promote use of New York City's waterways for commercial and recreational boating 3 and water-dependent transportation.

3.1. Support and encourage in-water recreational activities in suitable locations.

Support and encourage recreational, educational and commercial boating in New York City's 3.2 maritime centers.

3.3 Minimize conflicts between recreational boating and commercial ship operations.

Minimize impact of commercial and recreational boating activities on the aquatic environment and 3.4 surrounding land and water uses.

In Priority Marine Activity Zones, support the ongoing maintenance of maritime infrastructure for 3.5 water-dependent uses.

Protect and restore the quality and function of ecological systems within the New 4 York City coastal area.

Protect and restore the ecological quality and component habitats and resources within the Special 4.1 Natural Waterfront Areas.

Protect and restore the ecological quality and component habitats and resources within the 4.2 Ecologically Sensitive Maritime and Industrial Area.

4.3 Protect designated Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats.

4.4 Identify, remediate and restore ecological functions within Recognized Ecological Complexes.

4.5 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. In addition to wetlands, seek opportunities to create a mosaic of habitats with high ecological value 4.6 and function that provide environmental and societal benefits. Restoration should strive to incorporate multiple habitat characteristics to achieve the greatest ecological benefit at a single location. Protect vulnerable plant, fish and wildlife species, and rare ecological communities. Design and 4.7 develop land and water uses to maximize their integration or compatibility with the identified ecological community.

4.8 Maintain and protect living aquatic resources.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

4 Promote Hinder N/A

5 Protect and improve water quality in the New York City coastal area.

5.1 Manage direct or indirect discharges to waterbodies.

Protect the quality of New York City's waters by managing activities that generate nonpoint 5.2 source pollution.

Protect water quality when excavating or placing fill in navigable waters and in or near marshes, 5.3 estuaries, tidal marshes, and wetlands.

5.4 Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands.

Protect and improve water quality through cost-effective grey-infrastructure and in-water 5.5 ecological strategies.

Minimize loss of life, structures, infrastructure, and natural resources caused by flooding 6 and erosion, and increase resilience to future conditions created by climate change.

Minimize losses from flooding and erosion by employing non-structural and structural management 6.1 measures appropriate to the site, the use of the property to be protected, and the surrounding area.

Integrate consideration of the latest New York City projections of climate change and sea level 6.2 rise (as published in New York City Panel on Climate Change 2015 Report, Chapter 2: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Storms) into the planning and design of projects in the city’s Coastal Zone. Direct public funding for flood prevention or erosion control measures to those locations where 6.3 the investment will yield significant public benefit.

6.4 Protect and preserve non-renewable sources of sand for beach nourishment. Minimize environmental degradation and negative impacts on public health from solid 7 waste, toxic pollutants, hazardous materials, and industrial materials that may pose risks to the environment and public health and safety. Manage solid waste material, hazardous wastes, toxic pollutants, substances hazardous to the 7.1 environment, and the unenclosed storage of industrial materials to protect public health, control ✔ pollution and prevent degradation of coastal ecosystems.

7.2 Prevent and remediate discharge of petroleum products. ✔

Transport solid waste and hazardous materials and site solid and hazardous waste facilities in a 7.3 ✔ manner that minimizes potential degradation of coastal resources.

8 Provide public access to, from, and along New York City's coastal waters. ✔

8.1 Preserve, protect, maintain, and enhance physical, visual and recreational access to the waterfront. ✔

Incorporate public access into new public and private development where compatible with 8.2 ✔ proposed land use and coastal location.

8.3 Provide visual access to the waterfront where physically practical. ✔

Preserve and develop waterfront open space and recreation on publicly owned land at suitable 8.4 ✔ locations.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

5 Promote Hinder N/A

8.5 Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the State and City. ✔

Design waterfront public spaces to encourage the waterfront’s identity and encourage 8.6 ✔ stewardship. Protect scenic resources that contribute to the visual quality of the New York City 9 ✔ coastal area.

Protect and improve visual quality associated with New York City's urban context and the historic 9.1 ✔ and working waterfront.

9.2 Protect and enhance scenic values associated with natural resources. ✔

Protect, preserve, and enhance resources significant to the historical, archaeological, 10 ✔ architectural, and cultural legacy of the New York City coastal area.

Retain and preserve historic resources, and enhance resources significant to the coastal culture of 10.1 ✔ New York City.

10.2 Protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts. ✔

G. CERTIFICATION

The applicant or agent must certify that the proposed activity is consistent with New York City’s approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, pursuant to New York State’s Coastal Management Program. If this certification cannot be made, the proposed activity shall not be undertaken. If this certification can be made, complete this Section.

"The proposed activity complies with New York State's approved Coastal Management Program as expressed in New York City’s approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, pursuant to New York State’s Coastal Management Program, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program."

Applicant/Agent's Name: Robert Fiorile 26 Columbia Turnpike, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932 Address: 973-845-7505 [email protected] Telephone: Email:

Applicant/Agent's Signature:

Date:

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

6 Submission Requirements

For all actions requiring City Planning Commission approval, materials should be submitted to the Department of City Planning.

For local actions not requiring City Planning Commission review, the applicant or agent shall submit materials to the Lead Agency responsible for environmental review. A copy should also be sent to the Department of City Planning.

For State actions or funding, the Lead Agency responsible for environmental review should transmit its WRP consistency assessment to the Department of City Planning.

For Federal direct actions, funding, or permits applications, including Joint Applicants for Permits, the applicant or agent shall also submit a copy of this completed form along with his/her application to the NYS Department of State Office of Planning and Development and other relevant state and federal agencies. A copy of the application should be provided to the NYC Department of City Planning.

The Department of City Planning is also available for consultation and advisement regarding WRP consistency procedural matters.

New York City Department of City Planning New York State Department of State Waterfront and Open Space Division Office of Planning and Development 120 Broadway, 31st Floor Suite 1010 New York, New York 10271 One Commerce Place, 99 Washington Avenue 212-720-366 Albany, New York 12231-0001 [email protected] 518474-6000 www.nyc.gov/wrp www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/consistency

Applicant Checklist

✔ Copy of original signed NYC Consistency Assessment Form

✔ Attachment with consistency assessment statements for all relevant policies

✔ )RU-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQVIRU3HUPLWVRQH  FRS\RIWKHFRPSOHWHDSSOLFDWLRQSDFNDJH

✔ (QYLURQPHQWDO5HYLHZGRFXPHQWV

✔ 'UDZLQJV SODQVVHFWLRQVHOHYDWLRQV VXUYH\VSKRWRJUDSKVPDSVRURWKHULQIRUPDWLRQRUPDWHULDOV ZKLFKZRXOGVXSSRUWWKHFHUWLILFDWLRQRIFRQVLVWHQF\DQGDUHQRWLQFOXGHGLQRWKHUGRFXPHQWV VXEPLWWHG$OOGUDZLQJVVKRXOGEHFOHDUO\ODEHOHGDQGDWDVFDOHWKDWLVOHJLEOH

✔ 3ROLF\)ORRG(OHYDWLRQZRUNVKHHWLIDSSOLFDEOH)RUJXLGDQFHRQDSSOLFDELOLW\UHIHUWRWKH:533ROLF\ *XLGDQFHGRFXPHQWDYDLODEOHDWZZZQ\FJRYZUS

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

7 NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM CONSISTENCY ASSESMENT FOR

PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT

BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 AND BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BOUNDED BY ARTHUR KILL ROAD, ELLIS ROAD, AND PART OF JOHNSON STREET BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND, RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK

Submitted to: New York City Department of City Planning Waterfront and Open Space Division 120 Broadway, 31st Floor New York, New York 10271

Prepared For: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside, MO 64150

Prepared By: Matrix New World Engineering 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

Matrix Project No.: 20-383

May 2021 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

This narrative has been prepared in support of the New York City’s Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) policy consistency assessment for the Port Mobil Redevelopment project.

B. PROPOSED ACTIVITY

Description of the proposed activity: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC (the “Applicant”) proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island into a warehouse complex (the “Project”). The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, identified on the New York City Tax Map as Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1 (the “Site”). The Project would include the following elements:

x Construct four (4) commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximately 2.15± million SF with the following breakdown for each building; o Building 1: approximately 229,632 SF o Building 2: approximately 477,880 SF o Building 3: approximately 1,225,120 SF o Building 4: approximately 215,280 SF x Construct parking areas that would support tenant requirements and include passenger (employee) vehicle parking totaling 1,999 spaces and additionally include approximately 400 loading berths and approximately 550 commercial trailer parking spaces; x Construct internal access roads and an additional access point (curb cut) off Arthur Kill Road at the southeastern region of the Site; x Relocate the existing ground-mouted solar array to top of proposed buildings; x Perform several offsite road frontage improvements along Arthur Kill Road including widening the roadway, providing curb and gutter improvements, constructing sidewalks, and installing a new traffic signal; x Install new sanitary sewer, water, electrial, and gas infrastructure within the Site; x Preserve the existing developed, waterfront portion of the Site, including bulkhead and three of the five existing buildings1 with a total of approximately 30,333 SF that support waterfront uses, to be tenanted as a marine service yard with industrial use; and x Construct a series of catch basins and subsurface conveyance piping connecting to two proposed stormwater quality basins with vegetation that would ultimately discharge to the Arthur Kill through two new outfalls (one new outfall and one replacement outfall). The NYCDCP is the lead agency for the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR). Site remediation pursuant to two consent orders2 is ongoing, and is not part of the Project.

1 Buildings A, H, and I to be preserved. See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs. 2 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12-1111-A-SBC.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 1 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Purpose of the proposed activity: The Project would serve to redevelop the currently unutilized Site and fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse building space in Staten Island, and New York City as a whole. The Project is on a brownfield that is one of the largest, unutilized sites in the area. Site selection included consideration of a few slightly smaller sites on Staten Island, but these sites have more restrictive environmental constraints, mainly relating to presence of tidal and freshwater wetlands. The Site was selected for multiple reasons including its historic use as a significant industrial development and its existing developed and disturbed nature that minimizes encroachments into previously undisturbed environments when compared to the aforementioned sites. Development on this Site has several constraints due to the redevelopment occurring above a remedial cap for the former Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF); adjacency to the Arthur Kill River; and the presence of natural areas adjacent to the existing developed and disturbed footprint of the MOSF. These unique Site conditions necessitate a project of sufficient size to off-set costs for a complex, large-scale development. The Applicant has performed extensive market analyses in selecting both the location for the Project and the proposed redevelopment design. Specifically, market analyses performed for the Project indicate a continued trend toward online shopping that has resulted in a deficit of warehouse space available to serve Long Island and the 5 boroughs of NYC, and indicates this location would address the market demand to serve at least 14 million people, and up to 23 million people, in a 30 mile radius. The redevelopment has been designed to provide the 2.15 million square feet of space required for the client to see a return on their investment. The building sizes and layouts identified in the project plans have been selected specifically to meet the target markets identified for this location; one anchor logistics tenant with supporting warehouse buildings specifically sized to meet the requirements of the anticipated tenant needs. In order to meet very specific storage and loading requirements, the largest proposed building design includes interior spaces for racking and movement of equipment and exterior loading/offloading areas on both sides of the building. Without the building depth identified on the plans, the building would not be marketable to a logistics tenant that is intended as the anchor for this entire redevelopment. Additionally, due to the remedial cap, the former MOSF area will be elevated to a grade that limits extending or changing orientation of the development further toward the waterfront area as it would encroach into the area necessary to attract the future marine service operator. The formerly operating MOSF within the Site was decommissioned in 2019 and the Site is undergoing remediation pursuant to two consent orders. Although the proposed redevelopment is expediting Site remediation and being carried out by the Applicant, it is not subject to discretionary approvals and is not part of the proposed Project discussed herein. The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned Site into a warehouse complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehouse space, reactivating an industrial maritime use, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, while preserving valuable natural resources within the Site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goals of the comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses. The Project would meet the increasing market demand for warehousing space through construction of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet (SF), dedicated to warehousing and logistics uses, and would activate a marine service yard industrial use along the waterfront. The proposed warehouse and marine service yard industrial uses are consistent with the underlying M3-1 zoning district

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 2 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

that the Site is within and would be reactivating a former industrial area which had closed in 2019, consistent with IBZ intents. The scale of the Project is critical to support future success of the development at the Site and to meet the needs of potential local and national retail distribution networks. Other logistics parks on Staten Island – including the 200-acre Matrix Global Logistics Park in the Bloomfield neighborhood to the north, which houses Amazon and Ikea facilities – have documented the creation of a significant number of full-time equivalent jobs and temporary construction positions. Along with job creation, fulfilling market demand for commercial warehousing, and creating industrial uses in the IBZ, the Project would preserve natural features in the perimeter of the Site to the maximum extent practicable through avoiding and minimizing encroachment on natural features.

D. REQUIRED ACTIONS OR APPROVALS City Actions/Approvals: i. New York City (NYC) Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) coastal consistency assessment ii. Three Zoning Authorizations pursuant to the NYC Zoning Resolution (ZR): a. Removal of trees pursuant to ZR 107-64 (to modify 107-32), b. Modification existing topography pursuant to ZR 107-65 (to modify 107-31), and c. Modification of group parking facility pursuant to ZR 107-68 (to modify 107-472) iii. One Zoning Certification of cross access connections pursuant to ZR 36-592 iv. New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) v. NYC Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Construction Permit – NYC Department of Environmental Protection State Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act (CWA) – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) i. Tidal Wetlands Permit under Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) Article 25 – NYSDEC ii. Freshwater Wetlands Permit under ECL Article 24 – NYSDEC iii. State Pollution Discharge Elimination (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities – NYSDEC iv. SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity – NYSDEC v. 6 New York Code of Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 360.17 Nonspecific Facilities Permit – NYSDEC Federal Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 404 Clean Water Act – USACE

F. WRP POLICY ASSESSMENT

Policy 1 – Support and facilitate commercial and residential redevelopment in areas well-suited to such development.

Policy 1.1 – Encourage commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate Coastal Zone areas.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 3 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

The Project includes commercial development and industrial uses within the Coastal Zone and does not include any residential development. The Site is mapped for Industrial and Manufacturing land uses and was formerly operating a MOSF. Additionally, the Site lies within the Rossville Industrial Business Zone (IBZ), which encourages Industrial and Manufacturing development within its’ borders. The Project proposes to redevelop the Site with commercial warehouse buildings and marine service yard industrial uses, appropriate for the Site and consistent with the land uses and manufacturing zoning for the Site. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 1.1.

Policy 1.3 – Encourage redevelopment in the Coastal Zone where public facilities and infrastructure are adequate or will be developed. The Project includes commercial development and industrial uses that would not strain existing public facilities (such as schools, community centers, etc.) or require new public facilities to be constructed. The Project would utilize existing infrastructure within the Site to the extent feasible and would include construction of additional infrastructure to support redevelopment of the Site. Infrastructure proposed under the Project includes construction of a stormwater management system that would include a series of catch basins and manholes directed via subsurface conveyance piping to two proposed stormwater quality basins that ultimately would discharge to the Arthur Kill (including one new outfall and one replacement outfall); new potable water and sanitary sewer infrastructure that would connect to existing NYC DEP water and sewer infrastructure along Arthur Kill Road; and transportation improvements including widening of Arthur Kill Road adjacent to the Site. As public facilities are adequate in the surrounding areas and infrastructure would be developed to support the proposed redevelopment, the Project is consistent with and promotes this policy. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 1.1.

Policy 1.5 – Integrate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of waterfront residential and commercial development, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2. The Project includes commercial development and industrial uses and would not include residential uses. The Project would promote Policy 6.2 (see discussion below). Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 1.5.

Policy 2 – Support water-dependent and industrial uses in New York City coastal areas that are well-suited to their continued operation.

Policy 2.1 – Promote water-dependent and industrial uses in Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas. The Site lies entirely within a SMIA and a portion of the Site’s waterfront is already developed with buildings, parking, and a functional bulkhead. This developed waterfront region is in the northwestern portion of the Site and is also mapped as a Priority Marine Activity Zone (PMAZ) by the NYC WRP. The working waterfront region of the Site was formerly used to support the transport of petroleum products when the Site operated as a MOSF. This developed waterfront portion of the Site would be protected and preserved under the Project for a future maritime user that would use the existing marine infrastructure as a marine service yard, or for similar operations such as storage, mobilization, or repair of marine equipment. These water-dependent and industrial uses would be consistent with uses in the New York City coastal area and consistent with former uses of the working waterfront region of the Site. Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 4 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 2.1.

Policy 2.4 – Provide infrastructure improvements necessary to support working waterfront uses. The northwestern portion of the Site is already developed with buildings, parking, and a functional bulkhead. Infrastructure improvements in the working waterfront region of the Site are not necessary to support waterfront uses and are not proposed for this Project. Therefore, Policy 2.4 is not applicable to the Project.

Policy 2.5 – Incorporate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of waterfront industrial development and infrastructure, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2. The Project would promote Policy 6.2 (see discussion below). Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 2.5.

Policy 3 – Promote use of New York City’s waterways for commercial and recreational boating and water-dependent transportation.

Policy 3.5 – In Priority Marine Activity Zones, support the ongoing maintenance of maritime infrastructure for water-dependent uses. The northwestern region of the Site is mapped as a PMAZ and is already developed with buildings, parking, a functional bulkhead, and supporting marine infrastructure. The existing maritime infrastructure currently does not require any upgrades and would be retained under the Project for future maritime uses. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 3.5.

Policy 4 – Protect and restore the quality and function of ecological systems within the New York City coastal area.

Policy 4.4 – Identify, remediate, and restore ecological functions within Recognized Ecological Complexes. The Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands Recognized Ecological Complex (REC) is in the eastern portion of the Site (see Attachment Number 8.6, New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program, for mapped location). There are additional wetlands in the northwestern, eastern, and southern portions of the Site (see Policy 4.5 discussion for further information). The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize disturbance to regulated wetlands and regulated wetland Adjacent Areas within the Site through coordination with the USACE and the NYSDEC. Measures to limit wetland disturbance, including retaining walls, have also been incorporated into the design. There would be no impacts to the regulated wetlands within the Port Mobil Swamp Forest Tidal Wetlands REC under the Project and minor impacts to the regulated adjacent areas of these wetlands. A retaining wall would be constructed to help minimize Adjacent Area encroachment within the REC; improvements to the stormwater management system as part of the project would aide in preventing and reducing stormwater runoff into wetlands; and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be prepared for the Project and erosion and sediment

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 5 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

control practices would be implemented during demolition and construction activities to aid in the protection of wetlands.. Although avoidance, minimization, and protection of the eastern REC wetlands has been incorporated into the design and planning of the Project, remediation and restoration of this REC is not proposed under the Project; therefore, the Project would hinder Policy 4.4. While the Project hinders Policy 4.4, USACE and NYSDEC permits will require minimization of such effects and will result in requirements for mitigation that would offset these effects.

Policy 4.5 – Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. Based on a review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data, the Site contains a mixture of Estuarine and Marine Deepwater, Estuarine and Marine Wetlands, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetlands, Freshwater Ponds, and Freshwater Emergent Wetlands (see Attachment 8.3, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map). A review of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map (see Attachment 8.1, NYSDEC 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map) indicates the presence of Littoral Zone (LZ); Coastal Shoals, Bars and Mudflats (SM); and Adjacent Area (AA) within the Site. The NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map (see Attachment 8.2, NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map) identifies Class I Freshwater Wetlands in the eastern and southern portions of the Site and associated Freshwater Wetlands Check Zones (Check Zones act as buffers areas to account for errors in wetland boundaries and wetlands may occur within Check Zones). Class I wetlands are the most valuable and subject to the most stringent standards. Due to the presence of NYSDEC and USFWS mapped wetlands, a wetland delineation was performed for the Site by Matrix New World Engineering in 2020. Applications to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and NYSDEC to verify jurisdictional extents are currently under review. The wetland delineation reports approximately 19.6 acres of both tidal and freshwater wetlands in the northeastern, eastern, and southern regions of the Site under varying jurisdiction (NYSDEC and/or USACE, or non- jurisdictional). The eastern wetlands within the Site additionally contain the Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands Recognized Ecological Complex (REC) (see Attachment 8.6, New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Map), mapped by the NYC WRP. This is discussed further under Policy 4.4, above. The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize disturbance to regulated wetlands and regulated wetland Adjacent Areas within the Site to the maximum extent feasible through close coordination with the NYSDEC and USACE. Wetland protection measures such as the use of retaining walls have also been incorporated into the design, along with several BMPs and protection measures that would be implemented during construction of the Project to protect tidal and freshwater wetlands. Three retaining walls would be constructed under the Project to minimize encroachment into wetlands. The proposed Project involves the construction of two outfalls within tidal wetland areas, as well as buildings and roadways that would minimally encroach on existing wetlands and wetland Adjacent Areas. No dredging activity is proposed for the Project. Construction of the Project would result in a permanent disturbance of approximately 0.02 acres USACE Jurisdiction freshwater wetlands in the northern portion of the Site; permanent disturbance of approximately 0.13 acres USACE/NYSDEC Dual Jurisdiction wetlands in the southwestern portion of the Site; permanent disturbance of approximately 1.66 acres of

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 6 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

NYSDEC Jurisdiction Adjacent Areas in the eastern and southwestern portions of the Site; and permanent disturbance of 1.31 acres of Non-Jurisdictional wetlands in the southern portion of the Site. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be prepared for the Project and erosion and sediment control practices would be implemented during demolition and construction activities to aid in the protection of tidal and freshwater wetlands. A turbidity curtain would be placed during outfall construction to minimize the likelihood of sediment migration beyond the work area. Additionally, all wetland impacts would comply with applicable Federal and State wetland regulations to ensure no significant impact is made to wetlands and associated habitats. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 4.5.

Policy 4.7 – Protect vulnerable plant, fish and wildlife species, and rare ecological communities. Design and develop land and water uses to maximize their integration or compatibility with the identified ecological community. The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts on existing forested and wetland regions of the Site containing plant, fish, and wildlife species. These ecological communities would be protected during construction and implementation of the Project through adherence to all Federal, State, and local environmental permitting conditions. The proposed stormwater quality basins would be designed to incorporate landscaping vegetation. Ecological communities within the Site would be expected to experience temporary construction-related impacts due to increased activity and noise during development. However, species that currently utilize the Site are expected to be accustomed to development and human activity due to the Site’s former operation as a MOSF and these species would be expected to re-establish use of the Site following construction. Coordination with NYSDEC, USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on the potential presence of rare, threatened, or endangered species within the Site is ongoing. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 4.7.

Policy 4.8 – Maintain and protect living aquatic resources. The Project is located adjacent to the Arthur Kill tidal strait and would include construction of one new outfall and one replacement outfall along the northern shoreline within the Site. The Project would utilize all necessary and applicable protection measures such as BMPs, measures to control noise in accordance with City ordinances, and obtain and comply with the conditions of all required Federal, State, and local environmental permits. All work for the outfalls would occur above the Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) line. Thus, the Project is not expected to adversely affect the aquatic living resources. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 4.8.

Policy 5 – Protect and improve water quality in the New York City coastal areas.

Policy 5.1 – Manage direct or indirect discharges to waterbodies. The Project development would occur mainly in the approximately 120-acre footprint of the former MOSF that was impervious. These impervious surfaces will be removed in order to remediate the site under a separate action. The Project would result in a net increase in impervious surfaces above that of the remediated site (post-removal of MOSF infrastructure/tanks/etc.) of approximately 3,879,346 SF (89.1

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 7 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York acres) . Stormwater discharge would be treated through construction of two stormwater quality basins and associated outfalls (one new outfall and one replacement outfall) at the northern portion of the Site that would discharge to the Arthur Kill tidal strait. New impervious surfaces constructed under the Project would mainly occur in the footprint of the northeastern storm water quality basin and Building 1 (see Attachment 15, Project Permit Plans, for further details). The stormwater quality treatment basins would adhere with all conditions of the NYSDEC Stormwater Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) general permit for the Project and would be designed in accordance with the New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual. The construction activities to develop the Project may temporarily introduce suspended sediment into the Arthur Kill tidal strait, however, such events would be mitigated through installation of turbidity curtains and other sediment control measures as necessary. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.1.

Policy 5.2 – Protect the quality of New York City’s waters by managing activities that generate nonpoint source pollution. This policy aims to protect waterbodies from non-point pollution sources such as stormwater run-off. BMPs such as implementing pollution prevention measures would be utilized throughout the course of the Project to manage activities that could generate non-point sources of pollution. Prevention of flooding the upland area would further prevent creating nonpoint source pollution. Additional precautions such as minimizing the sources of pollution and preventing stormwater runoff from upland surfaces would also be implemented. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.2.

Policy 5.3 – Protect water quality when excavating or placing fill in navigable waters and in or near marshes, estuaries, tidal marshes, and wetlands. The Project would ensure protection of water quality by utilizing all necessary and applicable measures such as BMPs during construction to prevent discharge of debris and excavated soil into the waterway. All debris would be disposed at an approved offsite location. A Section 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act would be obtained from NYSDEC prior to initiating construction. All applicable Federal and State permit requirements would be addressed and implemented prior to and/or during construction of the Project, as applicable. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.3.

Policy 5.4 – Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands. No significant impacts to the quality and quantity of surface and groundwater supplies is anticipated due to construction and implementation of the Project. As discussed in Section B. Proposed Activity above, the Site is currently undergoing remediation (in compliance with consent orders, not as part of the Project) and will be capped to prevent the leaching of contaminants and to restrict surface water and rainwater infiltration into the contamination source area. Construction of the Project would add coverage and impervious surfaces on top of the remediation cap, which would further aide in keeping surface water and rainwater from infiltrating through contaminated materials as they do in current conditions. Groundwater within and adjacent to the Site is not used for drinking water or other purposes in the Project vicinity.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 8 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

The Project would utilize all necessary and applicable protection measures such as BMPs and comply with the conditions of all required environmental permits and NYSDEC and USACE specifications. Erosion and sediment control practices would be implemented to ensure there are no adverse impacts to the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.4.

Policy 6 – Minimize loss of life, structures, infrastructure, and natural resources caused by flooding and erosion, and increase resilience to future conditions created by climate change.

Policy 6.1 – Minimize losses from flooding and erosion by employing non-structural and structural management measures appropriate to the site, the use of the property to be protected, and the surrounding area. The redevelopment would occur above the remedial cap that elevates it above the flood hazard area thereby minimizing potential for flooding and related losses/damage. While the redevelopment does not specifically implement other resiliency measures, it is important to note that it does maintain and preserve the existing coastal area, including the bulkhead and existing shoreline, thereby minimizing changes that affect the current tidal flows and minimizing potential for erosion. More detail on the elevation and effects on floodplains and flood hazard areas is provided below in response to Policy 6.2. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 6.1. Policy 6.2 – Integrate consideration of the latest New York City projections of climate change and sea level rise (as published in New York City Panel on Climate Change 2015 Report, Chapter 2: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Storms) into the planning and design of projects in the city’s Coastal Zone. As the Project involves development of new vulnerable features (buildings), the detailed methodology in the WRP’s Climate Change Adaptation Guidance was followed to assess the Project’s consistency with Policy 6.2. The detailed methodology consists of three steps: 1) identify vulnerabilities and consequences; 2) identify adaptive strategies; and 3) assess policy consistency, which are followed for the Project in the text below. 1) Identify Vulnerabilities and Consequences 1a) Complete the Flood Elevation Worksheet to identify current and future flood elevations in relation to the elevations of the site and project features. See Attachment 13.2, Policy 6.2 Flood Evaluation Worksheet. 1b) Identify any project features that may be located below the elevation of the 1% floodplain over the lifespan of the project under any sea level rise scenario. As indicated in Attachment 13.2, Policy 6.2 Flood Evaluation Worksheet, the buildings, roadways, and parking areas would be well above the 1% Flood Elevation for the lifespan of the project under all sea level rise (SLR) scenarios. The stormwater ponds would be below the 2100 High SLR projection and the stormwater outfalls would be below the low SLR projection for the entire lifespan of the project. Coastal flooding at outfalls may drive backflow into the system, causing upland flooding through street drains and drainage ditches. The reactivated waterfront use (marine service yard) would be below the 1% Flood Elevation for the lifespan of the project under all SLR projections, however, the waterfront region of the Site including existing bulkhead, Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 9 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

existing paved areas, and existing buildings, would not introduce any new vulnerable features as they are already existing on the Site and would be retained under the Project. 1c) Identify any vulnerable, critical, or potentially hazardous features that may be located below the elevation of Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) over the lifespan of the project under any sea level rise scenario. The stormwater outfalls are the only new project feature that would be below the MHHW elevation for the 2080s High-Mid SLR projection and the 2100 Mid SLR projection. Daily inundation of this feature could cause backflow into the stormwater management system inducing flooding through street drains and drainage ditches. The reactivated waterfront use (marine service yard) would be below the MHHW elevation for the 2100 High SLR projection. However, the waterfront region of the Site including existing bulkhead, existing paved areas, and existing buildings, would not introduce any new vulnerable features as they are already existing on the Site and would be retained under the Project. 1d) Describe how any additional coastal hazards are likely to affect the project, both currently and in the future, such as waves, high winds, or debris. The New York City Department of City Planning (DCP) Flood Hazard Mapper indicates that portions of the Site are within the 500-year (0.2% annual chance flooding) floodplain and within the 100-year (1% chance annual flooding) floodplain (see Attachment 8.5, FEMA Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map). The Site is located partially within a coastal VE and AE zones. 2) Identify Adaptive Strategies 2a) The stormwater detention basins and outfalls were identified in step 1b) as below the 1% Flood Elevation for portions of the project lifespan. While these features would likely sustain damage during a flood event of severe magnitude, there is minimal damage to human life as there are no occupiable structures at any of these features and these features are designed to withstand inundation. Additionally, natural elevations on the Site along with proposed topographic modifications would protect vulnerable upland features from flooding, including the buildings and roadways/parking areas proposed for the Project. These vulnerable features would be constructed at approximately 40 feet elevation, minimally, reducing potential for damage from flooding. 2b) The stormwater outfalls are the only project feature identified in step 1c) as below the MHHW for the 2080s High-Mid and 2100s Mid SLR projections, respectively. These features are designed to be inundated and would not experience damage due to regular daily inundation. 2c) Due to Site remediation constraints, the final grade of the Site post-remediation may be elevated at approximately 45 feet above sea level, or greater. This substantial elevation for a waterfront Site would protect Project features from coastal hazards such as waves, high winds, or debris. As previously mentioned, all buildings, roadways, and parking areas would be located at a minimum elevation of 40 feet, providing ample protection from coastal hazards and the amplification of coastal hazards due to of sea level rise. 2d) The Project is not anticipated to significantly affect the flood protection of adjacent sites. Wooded, pervious regions along the shoreline in the northern and eastern portions of the Site would be preserved, and there are additional large, pervious areas located along the shoreline to the south of the Site that remain undeveloped. Preservation of these natural areas would provide Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 10 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

regions within and adjacent to the Site for flood inundation and the proposed Project would not create conflicts with any known, planned, or adjacent flood protection projects. 3) Assess Policy Consistency The Project would substantially elevate vulnerable features (buildings) that would protect them from flooding and coastal hazards. Project elements that would be below the 1% Flood Elevation and MHHW include the stormwater outfalls and stormwater detention ponds, which are features designed to be inundated. Based on the foregoing, the Project is consistent with Policy 6.2.

Policy 7 – Minimize environmental degradation and negative impacts on public health from solid waste, toxic pollutants, hazardous materials, and industrial materials that may pose risks to the environment and public health and safety.

Policy 7.1 – Manage solid waste material, hazardous wastes, toxic pollutants, substances hazardous to the environment, and the unenclosed storage of industrial materials to protect public health, control pollution and prevent degradation of coastal ecosystems. As discussed in Section B. Proposed Activity above, the Site is currently undergoing remediation (in compliance with consent orders, not as part of the Project) and will be capped to prevent the leaching of contaminants and to restrict surface water and rainwater infiltration into the contamination source areas. Construction of the Project would occur after remediation activities are complete and would add impervious surface coverage on top of the remediation cap. This additional impervious coverage would limit the potential for human disturbance of the remedial cap and would aide in keeping surface water and rainwater from infiltrating the capped, contaminated material, which would assist in controlling pollution. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 7.1.

Policy 8 – Provide public access to, from, and along New York City’s coastal waters. As discussed in Section B. Proposed Activity above, the Site is currently undergoing remediation activities pursuant to two consent orders. These orders state that the Site will not be accessible to the public. Therefore, Policy 8 is not applicable to the Project.

Policy 9 – Protect scenic resources that contribute to the visual quality of the New York City coastal area.

Policy 9.1 – Protect and improve visual quality associated with New York City’s urban context and the historic and working waterfront. The western portion of the Site contains functional bulkhead, piers, and docks that were formerly used to transport petroleum products when the Site was operating as a MOSF. This working waterfront region of the Site would be protected and preserved under the Project for a future maritime user to be used as a

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 11 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

marine service yard / industrial use. This use would be consistent with the historic working waterfront context of the Site. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 9.1.

Policy 10 – Protect, preserve, and enhance resources significant to the historical, archaeological, architectural, and cultural legacy of the New York City coastal area.

Policy 10.1 – Retain and preserve historic resources, and enhance resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City. A review of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS), which includes the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), does not indicate any historic resources listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Register of Historic Places (S/NR) are present within the Site or immediate surrounding areas. The Site’s former use as a MOSF with heavy industrial infrastructure, limits the possibility that any significant historic resources would be present within the Site. In a letter from the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified Westfield Township School #7 located at 4210 Arthur Kill Road as an LPC designated and S/NR eligible property with Architectural significance in the radius of the Project. This property is located approximately 550 feet from the Site boundary, outside the 400 foot radius study area for the Project, and is not anticipated to be affected by the Project. The LPC identified the Site (BBL 5072070060 and 5072470001) as containing no properties with Architectural significance (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for letter from LPC). Consultation with the OPRHP is ongoing to verify that there are no historic resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City within the Site or the vicinity of the Site that may be affected by the Project. As historic resources and resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City have not been identified within the Site or study area for the Project (400 foot radius from the Site), Policy 10.1 would not be applicable to the Project.

Policy 10.2 – Protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts. A review of the OPRHP CRIS, which includes the SHPO, maps the entire Site as an Archaeological Sensitive Area. Additionally, a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study was performed for the southeastern portion of the Site in 2018.3 The Phase 1A study identified this small southeastern portion of the Site to have moderate to high sensitivity for precontact archaeological resources and moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources associated with the historic period (early 18th century through early 20th century) occupation of the Site. A Phase 1B investigation was recommended in the Phase 1A study to confirm the presence or absence of archaeological resources within this small southeastern portion of the Site. Archaeological studies for the remainder of the Site have not been performed to date. In a letter from the LPC dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified the Site (BBL 5072070060 and 5072470001) as containing properties with Archaeological significance and indicated that there is potential for the recovery of remains from native American occupation on the Site. The LPC recommends an archaeological documentary study be performed for the Site to clarify initial determinations and provide the threshold for

3 BioGas Corp Proposed Anaerobic Digester. 4101 Arthur Kill Road: Block 7247, Part of Lot 1 and Block 7207, Part of Lot 60. Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study. Prepared by AKRF, Inc. May 2018. Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 12 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

the next level of review (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for letter from LPC). Consultation with the OPRHP is ongoing regarding the potential presence of archaeological resources and artifacts within the Site and recommendations for performing archaeological studies for the Site. The Applicant will follow recommendations and guidance from the LPC and OPRHP in order to protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts within the Site and is in the process of scheduling archaeology investigations for the Site. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 10.2.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 13 of 13 NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program - Policy 6.2 Flood Elevation Workhsheet

COMPLETE INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO USE THIS WORKSHEET ARE PROVIDED IN THE "CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION GUIDANCE" DOCUMENT AVAILABLE AT www.nyc.gov/wrp

Enter information about the project and site in highlighted cells in Tabs 1-3. Tab 4, "Summary Charts" contains primary results. Tab 5, "0.2%+SLR" produces charts to be used for critical infrastructure or facilities. Tab 6, "Calculations" contains background computations. Appendix A contains tide elevations for station across the city to be used for the elevation of MHHW if a site survey is not available. Non-highlighted cells have been locked.

Background Information Project Name Port Mobil Redevelopment

Location 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, NY 10309 (Block 7207 Lot 60 and Block 7247 Lot 1)

Type(s) Residential, Commercial, Parkland, Open Space, and Critical Infrastructure or Tidal Wetland Restoration Industrial Uses Community Facility Natural Areas Facility

Wastewater Over-water Structures Shoreline Structures Transportation Coastal Protection Treatment/Drainage Description Site development includes four (4) buildings totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet to be used for warehouse commercial or logistics uses; reactivation of a working waterfront use as a marine service yard industrial use; parking areas for passenger vehicles and commercial trailers; internal access roads and an additional access point off Arthur Kill Road; new sanitary sewer, water, electrial, and gas infrastructure; and new stormwater management infrastructure. See Attachment 13.1 NYC WRP CAF Narrative for further information.

Planned Completion Date Aug-24 Expected Project Lifespan 60 years

The New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Climate Change Adaptation Guidance document was developed by the NYC Department of City Planning. It is a guidance document only and is not intended to serve as a substitute for actual regulations. The City disclaims any liability for errors that may be contained herein and shall not be responsible for any damages, consequential or actual, arising out of or in connection with the use of this information. The City reserves the right to update or correct information in this guidance document at any time and without notice.

For technical assistance on using this worksheet, email [email protected], using the message subject "Policy 6.2 Worksheet."

Last update: Sept. 7, 2018 Establish current tidal and flood heights.

FT (NAVD88) Feet Datum Source MHHW 2.55 2.55 NAVD88 Site survey/ wetland delineation 1% flood height 13.00 13.00 NAVD88 NYC Flood Hazard Mapper Design flood elevation 15.00 15.00 NAVD88 BFE+2' As relevant: 0.2% flood height -->

Data will be converted based on the following datums: Datum FT (NAVD88) NAVD88 0.00 NGVD29 -1.10 Manhattan Datum 1.65 Bronx Datum 1.51 Brooklyn Datum (Sewer) 0.61 Brooklyn Datum (Highway) 1.45 Queens Datum 1.63 Richmond Datum 2.09 Describe key physical features of the project.

Ft Above Ft Above Ft Above Feature (enter name) Feature Category Lifespan Elevation Units Datum Ft NAVD88 MHHW 0.2% flood height A Four Buildings Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 60 years 43.0 Feet NAVD88 43.0 43.0 40.5 #VALUE! Commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximatelyil215 2.15 million square feet. Elevations range between 43 and 62 feet.

Other B Roadways/Parking Areas Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous 20 years 40.0 Feet NAVD88 40.0 40.0 37.5 #VALUE! Parking areas and circulation roadways surroundingding each building bu with internal circulation and two connections to Arthur Kill Road. Elevations range between 40 and 57 feet.

C Stormwater Ponds Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 100 years 19.0 Feet NAVD88 19.0 19.0 16.5 #VALUE! Two stormwater detention basins in the northern portionsif of the Site made of compacted firm, soil/clay liner, with plantings. Elevation surrounding wet ponds are 19 feet for Wet Pond A and 21 feet for Wet Pond B.

D Stormwater Outfalls Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 100 years 5.7 Feet NAVD88 5.7 5.7 3.2 #VALUE! Discharge points to the Arthur Kill tidal strait for the two stormwaterstor ponds. Min elevation for Wet Pond A outfall is 8.15 feet and minimum elevation for Wet Pond B outfall is 5.7 feet.

E Reactivated Waterfront Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 100 8.0 Feet NAVD88 8.0 8.0 5.5 #VALUE! Use existing waterfront bulkhead, paved areas, and three exiexisting buildings for a marine service yard industrial use. No new construction would occur along the waterfront

F Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other Feet NAVD88 Description of Planned Uses and Materials

G Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other Feet NAVD88 Description of Planned Uses and Materials

H Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other Feet NAVD88 Description of Planned Uses and Materials Assess project vulnerability over a range of sea level rise projections.

Mean Higher High Water + Sea Level Rise 1% Flood Elevation + Sea Level Rise 50 50 48 48 46 46 44 A… 44 42 A Four Buildings 42 40 B… 40 B Roadways/Parking 38 38 Areas 36 36 34 34 32 32 30 30 28 28 26 26 24 24

Feet above NAVD88 above Feet 22 20 22 C Stormwater Ponds NAVD88 above Feet 20 18 C Stormwater Ponds 16 18 16 14 DFE 12 14 10 12 E Reactivated8 10 E Reactivated WaterfrontD Stormwater Outfalls 8 6 Waterfront 4 6 D Stormwater Outfalls 2 4 0 HGF 2 Baseline 2020s 2050s 2080s 2100 0 HFG Baseline 2020s 2050s 2080s 2100 SLR PROJECTIONS SLR PROJECTIONS High High High-Mid High-Mid Mid Mid Low-Mid Low-Mid Low Low JOINT APPLICATION FOR PERMITS FOR THE NP STATEN ISLAND INDUSTRIAL, LLC PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 AND BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK

Prepared For: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside, MO 64150

Prepared By: Matrix New World Engineering 26 Columbia Turnpike, 2nd Floor Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

Matrix Project No.: 20-383

May 2021 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard

4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York Port Mobil Redevelopment - Construction of commercial warehouses and reactivation of a working waterfront use

x x x x x

x x x x x x

X

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York  

CONTENTS

ATTACHMENT 1.0 JOINT APPLICATION FORM

ATTACHMENT 2.0 PROJECT NARRATIVE

ATTACHMENT 3.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

ATTACHMENT 4.0 SITE LOCATION MAPS

ATTACHMENT 5.0 PHOTO KEY MAP AND SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

ATTACHMENT 6.0 USACE ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE

ATTACHMENT 7.0 TAX MAP

ATTACHMENT 8.0 RESOURCE MAPS

ATTACHMENT 9.0 NYSDEC WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION SUPPLEMENT WQC-1

ATTACHMENT 10.0 NYSDEC FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM

ATTACHMENT 11.0 NYSDEC STRUCTURAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FORM

ATTACHMENT 12.0 NYSDEC RECORD OF COMPLIANCE

ATTACHMENT 13.0 NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM

ATTACHMENT 14.0 RESOURCE AGENCIES CORRESPONDENCE AND DATA

ATTACHMENT 15.0 PROJECT PERMIT PLANS (PREPARED BY LANGAN)

Joint Application for Permit Table of Contents 1 of 1 Attachment 1.0 Joint Application Form JOINT APPLICATION FORM For Permits for activities activities affecting streams, waterways, waterbodies, wetlands, coastal areas, sources of water, and endangered and threatened species.

You must separately apply for and obtain Permits from each involved agency before starting work. Please read all instructions.

1. Applications To: !N

!NY6 Office of General Services Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSOGS. Check all permits that apply: State Owned Lands Under Water Utility Easement (pipelines, conduits, cables, etc.) Docks, Moorings or Platforms

!NY6 Department of State ✔ Check here to confirm you sent this form to NYSDOS. Check if this applies:✔ Coastal Consistency Concurrence

2. Name of Applicant Taxpayer ID (if applicant is NOT an individual) NP Staten Island Industrial LLC ATTN David Rickard 85-0868506 Mailing Address Post Office / City State Zip 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside MO 64150

Telephone816-541-2881 Email [email protected] Applicant Must be (check all that apply):✔ Owner Operator Lessee

3. Name of Property Owner (if different than Applicant) Same as Applicant Mailing Address Post Office / City State Zip

Telephone Email

For Agency Use Only Agency Application Number:

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0/ Page 1 of 4 JOINT APPLICATION FORM – Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

4. Name of Contact / Agent Matrix New World Engineering ATTN: Robert Fiorile Mailing Address Post Office / City State Zip 26 Columbia Turnpike, 2nd Floor Florham Park NJ 07932

Telephone973-845-7505 Email [email protected]

5. Project / Facility Name Property Tax Map Section / Block / Lot Number: Port Mobil Redevelopment Block 7247, Lot 1 and Block 7207, Lot 60 Project Street Address, if applicable Post Office / City State Zip NY 4101 Arthur Kill Road Staten Island, New York City 10309 Provide directions and distances to roads, intersections, bridges and bodies of water The site is located adjacent to the Arthur Kill tidal strait. A portion of Arthur Kill Road borders the site to the southeast and Ellis Road borders the site to the southwest. Town Village✔ City County Stream/Waterbody Name New York City Richmond Arthur Kill Project Location Coordinates: Enter Latitude and Longitude in degrees, minutes, seconds: Latitude: -74 14' 19.302 " Longitude: 40 32'" 44.4012

6. Project Description: Provide the following information about your project. Continue each response and provide any additional information on other pages. Attach plans on separate pages. a. Purpose of the proposed project: The project would serve to redevelop a currently underutilized property and fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse space in Staten Island, and New York City. The project would create a significant number of full-time equivalent jobs and temporary construction jobs. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

b. Description of current site conditions: The site is a former major oil storage facility (MOSF) that is subject to on-going remedial actions. The central, interior portion of the site has been developed with MOSF infrastructure, port facilities and a solar array. Undeveloped land areas, which includes 19-acres of wetlands and a segment of natural shoreline along the Arthur Kill, are concentrated along the property perimeter. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details. c. Proposed site changes: Site redevelopment includes four (4) buildings totaling approximately 2.15± million square feet; parking areas for passenger vehicles and commercial trailers; internal access roads and additional access point off Arthur Kill Road; new sanitary sewer, water, electrical, and gas infrastructure; and new stormwater management infrastructure. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details. d. Type of structures and fill materials to be installed, and quantity of materials to be used (e.g., square feet of coverage, cubic yards of fill material, structures below ordinary/mean high water, etc.): The project includes one new outfall and one replacement outfall. The project involves grading, and construction of roadways, buildings, and retaining walls which would impact freshwater wetlands and freshwater wetlands adjacent areas. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, and Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further details.

e. Area of excavation or dredging, volume of material to be removed, location of dredged material placement: No dredging is proposed for the project. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, and Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further details.

f. Is tree cutting or clearing proposed?✔ Yes If Yes, explain below. No Timing of the proposed cutting or clearing (month/year): See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative. Number of trees to be cut:2,947 Acreage of trees to be cleared: 15.04 Acres

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0 Page 2 of 4 JOINT APPLICATION FORM – Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

g. Work methods and type of equipment to be used: See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative.

h. Describe the planned sequence of activities: See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative.

i. Pollution control methods and other actions proposed to mitigate environmental impacts: All best management practices including any general or special conditions as prescribed by the USACE/NYSDEC permits, shall be implemented to avoid discharge of pollutants into coastal waters. Further, the construction contractor will be required to develop a site-specific Health and Safety Plan, including Excess Materials Disposal Plan and Spill Prevention Plan. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details. j. Erosion and silt control methods that will be used to prevent water quality impacts: Sediment control measures (i.e. silt fences, catch basin and inlet protection, concrete truck wash areas, and stabilized construction entrances) will be installed as deemed necessary and in accordance with an approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

k. Alternatives considered to avoid regulated areas. If no feasible alternatives exist, explain how the project will minimize impacts: Alternatives for the proposed project that were evaluated by the Applicant include: Alternative Project Locations, Alternative Project Designs/Layouts and the No Action Alternative. See Attachment 3.0, Alternatives Analysis, for the full alternatives analysis.

l. Proposed use:✔✔ Private Public Commercial m. Proposed Start Date:August 2022 Estimated Completion Date: August 2024 n. Has work begun on project? Yes If Yes, explain below.✔ No No. Demolition of existing MOSF infrastructure and site remediation is ongoing pursuant to two Consent Orders. This is a separate action to the proposed project. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

o. Will project occupy Federal, State, or Municipal Land? Yes If Yes, explain below.✔ No The Project is located on privately owned parcels.

p. List any previous DEC USACE2*6RU'26 Permit / Application numbers for activities at this location: NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands 2-6405-00073/00076, NYSDEC Water Quality Certification 2-6405-00073/00077, NYSDEC Excavation & Fill in Navigable Waters 2-6405-00073/00078, NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands 2-6405-00073/00082, SPDES 2-6405-00073/00024 (Transfer NY0004961)

q. Will this project require additional Federal, State, or Local DXWKRUL]DWLRQs, including zoning changes?

✔ Yes If Yes, list below. No Yes. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for a list of additional approvals/authorizations needed.

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0 Page 3 of 4 JOINT APPLICATION FORM – Continued. Submit this completed page as part of your Application.

7. Signatures. Applicant and Owner (If different) must sign the application.,IWKHDSSOLFDQWLVWKHODQGRZQHUWKHODQGRZQHU DWWHVWDWLRQIRUPFDQEHXVHGDVDQHOHFWURQLFVLJQDWXUHDVDQDOWHUQDWLYHWRWKHVLJQDWXUHEHORZLIQHFHVVDU\ Appendadditionalpages ofthis Signature section if there are multiple Applicants, Owners or Contact/Agents. I hereby affirm that information provided on this form and all attachments submitted herewith is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Permission to Inspect - I hereby consent to Agency inspection of the project site and adjacent property areas. Agency staff may enter the property without notice between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm, Monday - Friday. Inspection may occur without the owner, applicant or agent present. If the property is posted with "keep out" signs or fenced with an unlocked gate, Agency staff may still enter the property. Agency staff may take measurements, analyze site physical characteristics, take soil and vegetation samples, sketch and photograph the site. I understand that failure to give this consent may result in denial of the permit(s) sought by this application. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the NYS Penal Law. Further, the applicant accepts full responsibility for all damage, direct or indirect, of whatever nature, and by whomever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the State from suits, actions, damages and costs of every name and description resulting from said project. In addition, Federal Law, 18 U.S.C., Section 1001 provides for a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both where an applicant knowingly and willingly falsifies, conceals, or covers up a material fact; or knowingly makes or uses a false, fictitious or fraudulent statement. SignatureSignnata ure of AApplicantpplica Date 

ApplicantAppliccant MuMustst bbe (check all that apply): ✔ Owner Operator Lessee

Printed Name Title David Rickard Development Manager

Signature of Owner (if different than Applicant) Date

Printed Name Title

Signature of Contact / Agent Date 

Printed Name Title Robert Fiorile Director, Planning and Ecology

For Agency Use Only DETERMINATION OF NO PERMIT REQUIRED Agency Application Number (Agency Name) has determined that No Permit is required from this Agency for the project described in this application. Agency Representative: Printed Title Name Signature Date

JOINT APPLICATION FORM 0 Page 4 of 4 Attachment 2.0 Project Narrative

Attachment 2.1 Princeton Hydro Wildlife Survey Summary – Fall 2020 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

PROJECT NARRATIVE

Introduction NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC (the “Applicant”) proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island into a warehouse complex (the “Project”). The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, identified on the New York City Tax Map as Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1 (the “Site”).

Property Designation and Owner/Applicant The subject property consists of Block 7247, Lot 1 and Block 7207, Lot 60, which are owned by the Applicant.

Owner/Applicant: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Attn: David Rickard 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside, MO 64150 Phone: (816) 541-2881 Email: [email protected]

Contact/Agent: Matrix New World Engineering Attn: Robert Fiorile 26 Columbia Turnpike, 2nd Floor Florham Park, NJ 07932 Phone: (973) 845-7505 Email: [email protected]

Required Actions or Approvals City Actions/Approvals: i. New York City (NYC) Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) coastal consistency assessment ii. Three Zoning Authorizations pursuant to the NYC Zoning Resolution (ZR): a. Removal of trees pursuant to ZR 107-64 (to modify 107-32), b. Modification existing topography pursuant to ZR 107-65 (to modify 107-31), and c. Modification of group parking facility pursuant to ZR 107-68 (to modify 107-472) iii. One Zoning Certification of cross access connections pursuant to ZR 36-592 iv. New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) v. NYC Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Construction Permit – NYC Department of Environmental Protection

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 1 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

State Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act (CWA) – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) i. Tidal Wetlands Permit under Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) Article 25 – NYSDEC ii. Freshwater Wetlands Permit under ECL Article 24 – NYSDEC iii. State Pollution Discharge Elimination (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities – NYSDEC iv. SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity – NYSDEC v. 6 New York Code of Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 360.17 Nonspecific Facilities Permit – NYSDEC Federal Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 404 Clean Water Act – USACE

Project Purpose and Need The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the Site into a warehouse complex. The Site is currently one of the largest, unutilized sites on Staten Island. The completed Project would fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse building space in Staten Island, and New York City as a whole. The Project would meet increasing market demand for warehousing space through construction of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet (SF), dedicated to logistics and commercial warehousing uses (see Proposed Conditions section below for further details) and would additionally reactivate a maritime use along the waterfront for a marine service yard industrial use utilizing existing waterfront infrastructure including existing buildings, bulkhead, and paved platform. The proposed uses are consistent with the underlying M3-1 zoning district and would reactivate a former industrial property. The completed Project would also provide local residents with much needed on-Island employment opportunities. Staten Island has above average unemployment and lower workforce participation rates and approximately 74% of Staten Island residents employed within the Trade, Transportation and Utilities industry sector commute off-Island to work. It is projected that the Project will generate approximately 1,952 permanent positions at this locally accessible location. It is also noteworthy that Project is consistent with and furthers the goals and objectives of the Staten Island Working West Shore 2030 plan, which promotes projects that create quality local jobs within the borough and is consistent with the Industrial Businesses Zone (IBZ) designation which encourages utilization of industrial zoned properties for industrial uses.

Site Description and Existing Conditions The Site is a privately-owned 242-acre property that is situated along the West Shore of Staten Island adjacent to the Arthur Kill tidal strait. Maps depicting the project location are presented in Attachment 4.0, Site Location Maps, as Attachment Number 4.1, USGS Topographic Map, Attachment Number 4.2, Vicinity Map, and Attachment Number 4.3, Aerial Map. For photos of the Site, refer to Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs, of the Joint Application for Permit package. The Site is the location of the former Port Mobil Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF), which was previously owned by Kinder Morgan Liquids Terminals, LLC (Kinder Morgan), and was purchased by the Applicant Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 2 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

in December 2020. The Site operated as a MOSF from the 1930s until Kinder Morgan ceased the operation in 2019. The 242-acre Site includes approximately 120 acres within the central, interior portion of the property that has been previously developed with a MOSF that includes roads, buildings, and energy infrastructure such as petroleum storage tanks, port facilities and a solar array, much of which is situated within remedial area subject to two consent orders, discussed further below. The remaining acreage consists of undeveloped woodlands and herbaceous land areas, which include approximately 19.6 acres of wetlands of varying jurisdiction under New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), as well as a natural section of shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. Applications to USACE and NYSDEC to verify jurisdictional extents of delineated wetland areas have been submitted and are currently under review. The facilities associated with the former MOSF are located almost entirely on the Site’s western lot (Lot 1), which is currently developed with 38 petroleum storage tanks ranging in height from 30 to 60 feet, warehouse and office buildings, and associated industrial infrastructure. Each tank is enclosed with earthen secondary containment berms between 10 to 12 feet in elevation. Lot 1 is also developed with an approximately 3100’ bulkhead previously used for the import and export of petroleum products. Also located on Lot 1 is a 15.4± acre ground-mounted solar array field adjacent to the southeast of the existing MOSF operated under a ground lease with EnterSolar, LLC (“EnterSolar”). The eastern lot (Lot 60) is comprised almost entirely of undeveloped land areas, which include freshwater and tidal wetlands and a natural section of shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. The Applicant is currently in the process of fulfilling remedial obligations, as a responsible party, pursuant to two consent orders, initially dated August 2009 and September 2020, with both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and NYSDEC.1 Under these obligations, all MOSF infrastructure will be demolished and portions of the Site will be remediated. The Applicant is working with NYSDEC and USEPA to finalize a Remedial Investigation/Interim Remedial Measures Workplan that will dictate specific remedial activities in accordance with the consent orders. Mean higher high water (MHHW) and mean high water (MHW) elevations of the Arthur Kill at the Site are at 2.55 feet and 2.23 feet NAVD88, respectively. Limits of the federal jurisdictional waters of the United States correspond with the MHHW line (El. 2.55 NAVD88) of the Arthur Kill tidal strait. The NYSDEC tidal wetlands map (see Attachment 8.1, NYSDEC 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map) classifies the Arthur Kill at this location as littoral zone (LZ) with coastal shoals, bars and mudflats (SM) along the natural shoreline. The NYSDEC freshwater wetlands map (see Attachment 8.2, NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map), shows Class I freshwater wetlands located within the eastern portion of the Site (near Lot 60) and Class I freshwater wetlands in the southwestern forested portion of the Site. The United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) (see Attachment 8.3, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map) maps the Site with Estuarine and Marine Wetlands along

1 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12- 1111-A-SBC.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 3 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

the northern, natural shoreline portion of the Site; Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetlands along the eastern and southern portions of the Site; Freshwater Emergent Wetlands in the southern portion of the Site; and Freshwater Pond wetlands located in the southern, northern, and western portions of the Site. Above reference attachments are provided in Attachment 8.0, Resource Maps, of the Joint Application for Permit package. Waterbodies within the surrounding geographical area include: 1) the Arthur Kill tidal strait, classified as Class SD by the NYSDEC ERM; and 2) a stream intersecting with the southernmost portion of the Site (adjacent to the intersection of Ellis Road and Arthur Kill Road) classified by the NYSDEC ERM as Class SD/C. According to 6 NYCRR Part 701, the best usage of Class SD waters is fishing and the best usage of Class C waters is also fishing. The NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper (ERM) was reviewed to locate areas NYSDEC identifies as Significant Natural Communities2 and to review for the potential presence of Rare Plants and Animals3 (see Attachment 8.4, NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper Results). The post oak-blackjack oak barrens, located partially within and mostly adjacent to the Site, is identified as a NYSDEC upland Significant Natural Community (SNC) The red maple-sweetgum swamp is a NYSDEC freshwater wetland SNC. This SNC is located partially within the boundaries of the Site and extends onto the adjacent Clay Pit Ponds State Park (see Attachment 8.4, NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper Results, for specific locations of Significant Natural Communities near the Site). In order to protect Rare Plants and Animals, ERM only provides generalized locations of the species. Some of these generalized locations for Rare Plants and Animals are mapped on the project Site. The ERM identifies Rare Dragonflies and Damselflies in the vicinity of the Site, which are not listed by NYS, and identifies Chuck-will’s-widow in the vicinity of the Site, which is not listed by NYS. A data request for further information regarding the potential presence of protected species within the Site and the vicinity of the Site was sent to the New York Natural Heritage Program (NYNHP) on February 12, 2021. The NYNHP responded on March 25, 2021 confirming the information in the ERM regarding Significant Natural Communities (red maple-sweetgum swamp and the post oak-blackjack oak barrens) and providing the additional data on species presented in Table 2-1, Species Documented at the Site by NYNHP, and Table 2-2, Species Documented at Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve by NYNHP. Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, provides the data request and response letter from NYNHP.

2 The Significant Natural Communities layer in the ERM shows locations of rare or high-quality wetlands, forests, grasslands, ponds, streams, and other types of habitats, ecosystems, and ecological areas. 3 The Rare Plants and Animals layer in the ERM shows generalized locations of animals and plants that are rare in New York State, including but not limited to those listed as Endangered and Threatened. To protect species, the ERM does not disclose specific boundaries where rare plants and animals are present, but provides generalized buffers where species may be present.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 4 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Table 2-1 Species Documented at the Site by NYNHP

Common Scientific Name Type NY State Heritage Conservation Documented Location Name Listing Status

Fence Lizard Sceloporus Lizard Threatened - At the project site undulatus

Eastern Mud Kinosternon Turtle Endangered - Within 250 yards of the Turtle subrubrum project site

Chuck-will’s- (Antrostomus Bird Protected Critically Imperiled in NYS At site or in its vicinity widow carolinesis) Bird

Source: NYNHP agency correspondence dated March 25, 2021. Letter provided in Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, of this application.

Table 2-2 Species Documented at Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve by NYNHP

Common Scientific Name Type NY State Heritage Conservation Documented Location Name Listing Status

Low St. Hyperivum Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park John’s Wort stragulum Preserve

Southern Wild Viburnum nudum Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Raisin var. nudum Preserve

Whorled Pycnanthemum Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Mountain Mint verticillatum var. Preserve verticillatum

Sedge Rush Juncus Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park scirpoides var. Preserve scirpoides

Short-Leaved Pinus echinate Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Pine Preserve

Virginia Pine Pinus virginiana Plant Endangered Critically Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve

Torrey’s Eupatorium Plant Threatened Imperiled in NYS Clay Pit Ponds State Park Throughwort torreyanum Preserve

Yellow-sided Libellula flavida Dragonfly Unlisted Clay Pit Ponds State Park Skimmer Preserve

Source: NYNHP agency correspondence dated March 25, 2021. Letter provided in Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, of this application.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 5 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

The USFWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service were sent requests for information on the potential presence or protected species within the Site or vicinity of the Site on March 3, 2021, and February 12, 2021, respectively. Agency responses are currently pending. The USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system, provides data on the presence of threatened and endangered species under the jurisdiction of USFWS within the Site or the vicinity of the Site. According to the IPaC report generated on April 7, 2021, there are two species of bird that may potentially be affected by activities occurring at the Site: the Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) federally listed as Threatened, and the Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii dougallii) federally listed as Endangered. The IPaC does not report any critical habitat at the Site or within the vicinity of the Site. The IPaC lists ten migratory birds as potentially occurring on or near the project Site, nine of which are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC). The IPaC report is included in Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data. According to a wildlife survey conducted by Princeton Hydro during the Fall of 2020, a total of 70 avian species were observed within the Site. One NYSDEC threatened species, the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and one NYSDEC special concern species, osprey (Pandion haliaetus) was observed during survey efforts. Both observations were of flyover birds, presumably, utilizing the Arthur Kill for foraging opportunities. No nests of either species were observed within the Site. The remainder of the sightings were comprised of both species that are common throughout the region year-round and nonresident migratory birds which utilize the Atlantic Flyway during both north (spring) and south (fall) bound migration events. An additional five mammal, one amphibia, fourteen lepidopteran, and four odonatan species were observed during survey efforts, all of which are common to widespread throughout Richmond County and the region. A summary of wildlife survey results including methodology and names of all species observed is shown in Attachment 2.1, Princeton Hydro Wildlife Survey Summary - Fall 2020. The New York City Department of City Planning (DCP) Flood Hazard Mapper indicates that portions of the Site are within the 500-year (0.2% annual chance flooding) floodplain and within the 100-year (1% chance annual flooding) floodplain (see Attachment 8.5, FEMA Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map). The potential presence of cultural resources within or adjacent to the Site was reviewed utilizing the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS). The CRIS includes state-regulated resources of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Additionally, the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) mapping system was screened for locally regulated historic resources within the Site. Both the CRIS and LPC were reviewed on February 16, 2021, and neither database systems indicated there are any buildings or districts within or contiguous to the Site that are identified as “eligible” or “listed” for inclusion in the State or National Register of Historic Places (see Attachment 8.7, New York Cultural Resources Information System Map). There is an LPC Individual Landmark located at 4210-4212 Arthur Kill Road, just north of the intersection of Arthur Kill Road and Storer Avenue, and over 550 feet from the Site. In a letter from the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified Westfield Township School #7 located at 4210 Arthur Kill Road as an LPC designated and S/NR eligible property with Architectural significance in the radius of the Project and identified no properties with

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 6 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Architectural significance within the Site (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for a copy of the LPC letter). Coordination with the OPRHP regarding the presence of architectural and archaeological resources is ongoing. The entire Site is mapped by the CRIS as an archaeologically sensitive area. The majority of the proposed project development will occur within the footprint of existing MOSF facilities and remedial area and as such would not be expected to result in any potential disturbance of any archeological resources. In a letter from the LPC dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified the Site (BBL 5072070060 and 5072470001) as containing properties with Archaeological significance and indicated that there is potential for the recovery of remains from native American occupation on the Site. The LPC recommended an archaeological documentary study be performed for the Site to clarify initial determinations and provide the threshold for the next level of review (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for a copy of the letter from LPC). The Applicant will follow recommendations and guidance from the LPC and OPRHP in order to protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts within the Site and is in the process of scheduling archaeology investigations for the Site. The Site is located within the New York City WRP Coastal Zone Boundary (CZB) and is therefore, subject to a coastal consistency review (see Attachment 8.6, New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Map). The WRP maps the entire Site as a Significant Maritime and Industrial Area (SMIA), with the existing bulkhead area mapped as a Priority Marine Activity Zone (PMAZ). Within the eastern lot (Lot 60), the WRP maps the Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands as a Recognized Ecological Complex (REC). According to New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) Coastal Boundary Map, areas adjacent to and within the Site were not identified as Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats or Scenic Areas of Statewide. NYSDOS Natural Heritage Communities were identified in the southwestern portion of the Site, specifically a Freshwater Wetlands system with a Forested Mineral Soil Wetlands subsystem and a small Upland system with Barrens and Woodlands Subsystem (see Attachment 8.8, Natural Heritage Communities).

Proposed Conditions The Project would include the following elements: x Construct four (4) commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximately 2.15± million SF with the following breakdown for each building; o Building 1: approximately 229,632 SF o Building 2: approximately 477,880 SF o Building 3: approximately 1,225,120 SF o Building 4: approximately 215,280 SF x Construct parking areas that would support tenant requirements and include passenger (employee) vehicle parking totaling 1,999 spaces and additionally include approximately 400 loading berths and approximately 550 commercial trailer parking spaces; x Construct internal access roads and an additional access point (curb cut) off Arthur Kill Road at the southeastern region of the Site; x Relocate the existing ground-mouted solar array to top of proposed buildings;

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 7 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

x Perform several offsite road frontage improvements along Arthur Kill Road including widening the roadway, providing curb and gutter improvements, constructing sidewalks, and installing a new traffic signal; x Install new sanitary sewer, water, electrial, and gas infrastructure within the Site; x Preserve the existing developed, waterfront portion of the Site, including existing bulkhead and three of the five existing buildings4 with a total of approximately 30,333 SF that support waterfront uses, to be tenanted as a marine service yard with industrial use; and x Construct a series of catch basins and subsurface conveyance piping connecting to two proposed stormwater quality basins with vegetation that would ultimately discharge to the Arthur Kill through two new outfalls (one new outfall and one replacement outfall).

4 Existing Buildings A, H, and I to be preserved. See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 8 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Summary of Projects and Fill Materials Below is a summary table of the impacts resulting from the proposed work encompassed by this application. Summary of Disturbance in Jurisdictional Areas

Volume of Fill Description of Disturbance Area (SF) Area (acre) (CY)

MHW/MHHW/SHT

Disturbance Below Mean High Water Line 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY Disturbance Below Mean Higher High Water Linea 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY

TIDAL WETLANDS

Disturbance in NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY Disturbance in NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Adjacent Area (AA) 0 SF 0 acre 0 CY

FRESHWATER WETLANDS

Disturbance in USACE Freshwater Wetlands 990 SF 0.02 acre 735 CY Disturbance in NYSDEC/USACE Freshwater Wetlands 5,585 SF 0.13 acre 3,845 CY Disturbance in NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands AA 72,395 SF 1.66 acre 29,270 CY

Disturbance in Non-Jurisdictional Freshwater Wetlands 56,960 SF 1.31 acre 12,200 CY

Total Disturbance in Jurisdictional Freshwater Wetlands 6,575 SF 0.15 acre 4,580 CY Total Disturbance in Jurisdictional Freshwater Wetlands AA 72,395 SF 1.66 acre 29,270 CY

IMPERVIOUS/PERVIOUS SURFACESb

Total new impervious surfaces in Wetlands 43,790 SF 1.00 acre - Total new impervious surfaces in Wetlands AA 34,795 SF 0.79 acre - Total existing impervious surfaces in Wetlands 0 SF 0.00 acre - Total existing impervious surfaces in Wetlands AA 1,785 SF 0.04 acre - Note: a Based on conversations with the USACE, the Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) Line will suffice as equivalent to the Spring High Tide (SHT) Line for impact calculations and regulatory compliance b Wetlands under impervious/pervious surfaces section includes jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional

No dredging activity is proposed at or near the navigable waterway. Refer to Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further project design details.

Method of Work and Type of Equipment Upland work: x Activities: Excavation, grading, paving, and concrete placement

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 9 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York x Equipment to be used: Excavator, front-loaders, graders, pavement rollers, dump truck, concrete truck, and compacter x Use of a barge or similar type of floating platform would likely only be used to import fill material over the existing wharf for remedial/development cap construction. Stormwater outfalls work would be performed above the MHHW line and are not anticipated to require a barge or spud barge.

Planned Sequence of Activities The remediation will not impact any wetlands or adjacent areas. The site will be remediated in accordance with Consent Orders and the development will occur above the remedial cap. The planned sequence of activities for the Project includes: x Install erosion and sediment control measures including surface water protection, construction entrance stabilization, and perimeter sediment control x Clear existing trees and vegetation within footprint of development x Demolish existing buildings and tanks x Begin phased remediation of uplands per DEC consent order x Milling and paving of existing street asphalt within project limits to accommodate new utilities x Placement of clean fill material for remedial/development capping x Construction of upland utilities x Install drainage pipes and outfalls x Install retaining headwall structure at outfall x Upland construction concurrent with on-going phased remediation x Seeding/planting upland areas x Restoration of all disturbed areas

Pollution Control The Project is not anticipated to discharge any pollutants, toxic, solid waste or hazardous substances at concentrations above regulated levels into coastal waters. All best management practices (BMPs), including any general or special conditions as prescribed by the USACE or NYSDEC permits, shall be implemented to avoid discharge of pollutants into coastal waters. Further, the construction contractor would be required to develop a site-specific Health and Safety Plan, including Excess Materials Disposal Plan, and Spill Prevention Plan prior to implementing invasive site work. All spoils and associated liquids (such as contaminated groundwater) on-site would be excavated/collected, stored and transported in accordance with applicable local, State and Federal laws. Additionally, all contaminated soil and liquid waste generated by the proposed activities would be disposed of in appropriate facilities off-site. Construction activities associated with the Project are expected to generate waste common to construction (e.g., hydrocarbon-based fuels, lubricants, oils, paints, and cleaning solvents for the construction equipment). These materials would be handled and stored in accordance with applicable Federal, State, or local regulations, and a site-specific Health and Safety Plan, Excess Materials Disposal Plan, and Spill Prevention Plan developed for the Project. All necessary precautions would be taken to prevent any potential spills, leaching or emission of contaminated substances into the environment or

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 10 of 11 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

onto adjacent properties. In case of an unintentional release of petroleum, such as an accidental spill during refueling, any such discharge would be cleaned up and removed in accordance with the guidelines contained in the NYSDEC Spill Guidance Manual.

Erosion and Silt Control Potential temporary surface water impacts to the Arthur Kill tidal strait resulting from upland construction activities, such as increased turbidity or pollution from stormwater runoff, would be managed through the erosion and sediment control BMPs. As required, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed in accordance with the New York SPDES program, which includes erosion and sediment control measures that comply with the New York Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control. The SWPPP also includes measures to manage post-construction stormwater in accordance with the Stormwater Management Design Manual. Refer to Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for Erosion and Sediment Control Plans. Design plans and specifications would require that the contractor install appropriate sediment control measures (i.e., silt fences, catch basin and inlet protection, concrete truck wash areas, and stabilized construction entrances). The erosion and sediment control BMPs may include the following: x Precautions to minimize spillage and tracking of sand and silt on the road surfaces and prompt cleanup. x Utilizing silt fences, catch basin silt sack, straw bales, turbidity barrier, and stabilized construction entrances in accordance with the SWPPP. x Underlining and covering all stockpiles of erodible materials with poly sheeting to prevent sediment washout. x Placing mulch or other suitable ground cover on all slopes following grading. x Soil restoration through seeding slopes with plant materials approved by the appropriate local jurisdictions, including NYC Parks, as applicable. x Establishing timing/construction restrictions to avoid spawning periods and sensitive life stage timeframes for various aquatic species in the Arthur Kill tidal strait. x Contractor compliance with all requirements of the Project’s Remedial Action Plan.

Alternatives Considered to Avoid Regulated Areas Attachment 3.0, Alternatives Analysis, of this Joint Application for Permit package includes a detailed assessment of alternatives considered to avoid and minimize impacts to regulated areas.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative 11 of 11  NP Staten Island Industrial LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Below is a summary of the 2020 Fall Wildlife Survey Results, dates, and methodology prepared and provided by Princeton Hydro.

A three-season survey for avian, mammalian, reptilia, amphibia, lepidopterans, and odonata species is in progress within the Project Site. The surveys include species observed (presence/absence), nesting, breeding, and foraging behavior as well as migratory use with particular attention to the behavior of any species listed as threatened, endangered, special concern, or candidate species in New York.

Wildlife surveys occurred or are scheduled to occur on the following dates:

2020:

September: 9th, 21st, 25th October: 2nd and 8th.

2021:

April: 23rd and 30th May: 6th, 14th, 21st June: 4th and 11th August: 27th

Methodology

The methodology for the wildlife surveys was an intensive effort to catalog all species that occur within the Project Site (avian, mammalian, reptilia, amphibia, lepidopteran, odonata). While the Project Site totals ~243-acres, the majority is comprised of significantly anthropogenically manipulated lands comprised of a permanently closed tank farm and appurtenant features; significant built resources along the Arthur Kill; and extensive coverage comprised of impervious surfaces and existing buildings. As such, the entirety of the Project Site was surveyed on each survey date. Survey time was determined by weather conditions and the level of wildlife activity, however, a minimum of six to eight hours of direct survey effort occurred on each date. For example, areas with a high level of activity were the focus for this study on any given survey effort. Observations of nesting, foraging, and roosting behavior were documented to a specific species and associated habitat. Equipment used to perform these surveys were: binoculars (Swarovski, 10x42), butterfly nets, and field guides.

The goal of these ecological surveys was to quantify species utilization of the Project Site. In addition, the potential regional impacts to protected species known to use the area surrounding the Project Site, as applicable, were assessed by examining the size of available habitat in the defined region and the potential loss of Project Site habitat in connection with the proposed development of the Project Site.

Fall 2020 Survey Results Five wildlife surveys were conducted between September 9th and October 8th. The following species were observed during these efforts:

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.1, Princeton Hydro Wildlife Survey Summary - Fall 2020 1 of 3  NP Staten Island Industrial LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Table 1:

AVIAN AmericanBlackDuck ChippingSparrow GreenͲWingedTeal NashvilleWarbler RoseͲBreastedGrosbeak AmericanCrow CommonYellowthroat HairyWoodpecker NorthernCardinal RubyͲCrownedKinglet AmericanKestrel DoubleͲCrestedCormorant HerringGull NorthernFlicker SavannahSparrow AmericanRobin DownyWoodpecker HoodedMerganser NorthernMockingbird ScarletTanager AmericanWigeon EasternPhoebe HouseWren NorthernParula SolitarySandpiper BaldEagle EasternTowhee Killdeer Osprey SongSparrow BeltedKingfisher EasternWoodͲPeewee LaughingGull PalmWarbler SpottedSandpiper BlueJay EuropeanStarling LeastFlycatcher RedͲBelliedWoodpecker Swainson'sThrush BrownCreeper FishCrow Lincoln'sSparrow RedͲBreastedNuthatch SwampSparrow BlackͲThroatedGreenWarbler GlossyIbis MagnoliaWarbler RedͲEyedVireo TuftedTitmouse BlackandWhiteWarbler GrayCatbird Mallard RedͲTailedHawk TurkeyVulture CanadaGoose GreatBlackͲBackedGull Merlin RedͲWingedBlackbird YellowͲRumpedWarbler CarolinaWren GreatBlueHeron MourningDove RingͲBilledGull YellowWarbler Cedarwaxwing GreatEgret MuteSwan RockDove WhiteͲThroatedSparrow A total of seventy (70) avian species were observed within the Project Site. One New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) threatened species, bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and one NYSDEC special concern species, osprey (Pandion haliaetus) was observed during survey efforts. Both observations were of flyover birds, presumably, utilizing the Arthur Kill for foraging opportunities. No nests of either species were observed within the Project Site. The remainder of the sightings were comprised of both species that are common throughout the region year-round and nonresident migratory birds which utilize the Atlantic Flyway during both north (spring) and south (fall) bound migration events. Table 2: MAMMALS GreySquirrel Groundhog Raccoon WhiteͲTailedDeer The five (5) observed species of mammal are widespread throughout both Richmond County and the region. Table 3: AMPHIBIA GreenFrog Green frog is ubiquitous throughout both Richmond County and the region.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.1, Princeton Hydro Wildlife Survey Summary - Fall 2020 2 of 3  NP Staten Island Industrial LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Table 4: LEPIDOPTERAN BlackDash BlackSwallowtail CommonBuckeye EasternTailedBlue EasternTigerSwallowtail HobomokSkipper Monarch OrangeSulfur RedAdmiral SilverͲSpottedSkipper SmallCabbageWhite TawnyͲEdgedSkipper Viceroy YellowSulfur The fourteen (14) observed lepidopteran species are common to widespread throughout Richmond County and the region. Table 5: ODONATA CommonGreenDarner CommonSootywing CommonWhitetail SpotͲWingedGlider The four (4) observed odonata species are common to widespread throughout Richmond County and the region.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 2.1, Princeton Hydro Wildlife Survey Summary - Fall 2020 3 of 3 Attachment 3.0 Alternatives Analysis

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This document presents the Alternatives Analysis for NP Staten Island Industrial LLC (“the Applicant’s”) proposed development project (“Project”) at 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, NY (“Site”). It conforms with the US Army Corps of Engineer (USACE’s) guidance document “Information for Preparing an Alternatives Analysis Under Section 404” (June 2014), as well as New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Article 24 and Article 25 permit review requirements. Alternatives for the proposed Project that were evaluated by the Applicant include: Alternative Project Locations, Alternative Project Designs/Layouts and the No Action Alternative. Each of these alternatives is described below.

2.0 BACKGROUND

Over the last two decades, trends for consumer shopping have been increasingly shifting to online and major shifts in distribution and transportation networks have created a steadily increasing demand for modern logistical parks with new warehousing space designed specifically for e-commerce clients. This shift has recently been exacerbated due to the COVID-19 pandemic as in person shopping has been restricted and consumers seek to utilize online shopping options. Additionally, it is expected that this will in turn result in new purchase habits that will further increase the shift to online shopping and thus further increase the need for new warehousing facilities. Another expected result of the pandemic is that due to supply shortages experienced during the pandemic, suppliers will hold significantly more stock on-hand, which will also further increase the need for additional warehousing space.

The New York/New Jersey Metro-region is one of the largest consumer markets in the world, driving local demand for well-located e-commerce facilities. Currently, on a regional basis, warehousing vacancy is at a historic low of less than 2-percent and there is limited new construction currently in progress. In order to meet market demand and trending tenant requirements, new warehousing facilities have to provide the right balance between location and functionality. Operational effectiveness for multi-market distribution requires efficient transportation access to multiple consumption centers, as well as building- level features such as size, clearance height, layout, parking, and dock doors that dictate functionality for high-throughput distribution operations. As a result, current market demand focuses on new facilities designed specifically for e-commerce operational efficiencies which require larger, adaptable buildings located at key transportation hubs along the periphery of major urban areas where there is high level of labor availability within the local workforce.

3.0 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT SITES

Suitable locations for warehousing and distribution facilities within the NY/NJ Metro Region require meeting specific site-selection criteria that are essential for such facilities to operate in a technically and economically viable manner. These criteria include:

x Availability of land for sale and purchase cost x Adequate “buildable” land area for development x Appropriate zoning and compatibility of surrounding land uses x Building square footage yield relative to cost of construction and land x Adequate access to main arterial roadways x Adequate available workforce

1 | Page

Additionally, densely developed markets such as the NY/NJ Metro Region have the greatest challenges to on-time delivery due to several factors, such as high traffic congestion, which increases the importance of well-located facilities.

The Applicant sought potential sites situated within a roughly 20-mile radius of midtown Manhattan. Potential sites included locations within the five boroughs of New York City as well as adjacent counties in New Jersey. Due to the intensity of development within the NY/NJ Metro region there are relatively few sites currently available that meet required site-selection criteria. A total of five site locations in addition to the proposed location were evaluated and considered as alternate locations to develop the Project. A description of each of the five alternative site locations is provided below along with the rationale for not pursuing each location. Also included below is a detailed description of the Preferred Site Alternative location and rationale for site selection.

3.1 SITE ALTERNATIVE 1

Site Alternative 1 consists of a +/- 45 acres property located at 1900 South Avenue, Staten Island, which is situated within the City’s Working West Shore 2030 planning area and readily accessible to State Route 440. This location is zoned for industrial use and is partially occupied by three existing tenants with long-term leases: an asphalt plant, a clean fill operator and a rail transfer operator. Proposed development would need to be built around these existing uses which limits the potential developable area to +/- 25 acres. This available land area would limit potential total building square footage to less than 400,000 square feet (SF). While workforce availability and site accessibility are favorable at this location, the Applicant did not pursue this site due to the low building yield that is constrained by the existing property development and land uses.

3.2 SITE ALTERNATIVE 2

Site Alternative 2 consists of a +/- 50 acre property located at 278 South Avenue, Staten Island, which is also situated within the City’s Working West Shore 2030 planning area and readily accessible to State Route 440. The site is a former landfill that is zoned for industrial use and surrounded by residential, commercial and industrial development. The site contains +/- 500,000 cubic yards of waste within two large, mounded areas which cause geotechnical and environmental concerns in regards to building construction. The site is also constrained by the presence of extensive areas of wetlands that are located within the boundaries of the site as well as adjacent to the site. The site constraints for this location limit potential total building square footage to +/- 500,000 square feet (SF). While workforce availability and site accessibility are also favorable at this site, the Applicant did not pursue this location as the building yield is low relative to the cost to develop the property due to the environmental and geotechnical challenges along with and extensive wetland permitting requirements.

3.3 SITE ALTERNATIVE 3

Site Alternative 3 consists of a +/- 75 acre property consisting of +/- 60 acres of developable area located at Avenue A and West 1ST Street in the City of Bayonne, NJ. The site is readily accessible to State Route 440 however, workforce availability is limited. The site, which is zoned for industrial use, is the location of the former Texaco refinery which is a known contaminated site. The site is situated entirely within the 100 Year flood plain of Newark Bay. Development of the site would

2 | Page

require extensive amounts of fill to be imported in order to raise the site above the base flood elevation. Development would also require significant geotechnical improvements. Deep foundation pilings would be needed due to soil contamination and vapor mitigation systems would be necessary due to groundwater contamination. The site constraints for this location limit potential total building square footage to +/- 600,000 square feet (SF). The Applicant did not pursue this location due to the low building yield relative to the cost to develop the property as well as operational challenges associated with limited workforce availability.

3.4 SITE ALTERNATIVE 4

Site Alternative 4 consists of a +/- 70 acre property located at East 22nd Street and Avenue J in the City of Bayonne, NJ. The site is situated entirely within the 100 Year flood plain of New York Harbor. The site is not readily accessible to State Route 440 and workforce availability is limited. Development of the site would require extensive amounts of fill to be imported in order to raise the site above the base flood elevation and deep foundation pilings would be required due to geotechnical concerns. The property is also a known contaminated site with documented soil and groundwater contamination requiring a vapor intrusion system for health and human safety. Site constraints for this location limit potential available building square footage to +/- 700,000 square feet (SF). The Applicant did not pursue this location due to the low building yield relative to the cost to develop the property as a result of the geotechnical and environmental challenges along with the limited site accessibility and workforce availability.

3.5 SITE ALTERNATIVE 5

Site Alternative 5 consists of a +/- 50 acre property located at 135 Main Street in South Amboy, NJ. The site consists of an irregularly shaped parcel bisected by high voltage transmission lines. Additionally, the site is situated entirely within the 100 Year flood plain of the Raritan River and Sandy Hook Bay. The site is not readily accessible to State Route 440 and workforce availability is limited. The irregularity of the property dimensions limits development of larger scale warehousing facilities to a 16-acre portion of the interior of the property. In addition, site development would require relocation of the high voltage transmission lines and extensive amounts of fill to be imported in order to raise the site above the base flood elevation. Site constraints for this location limit potential available building square footage to +/- 350,000 square feet (SF). The Applicant did not pursue this location due to the low building yield relative to the cost to develop the property as well as limited site accessibility and workforce availability.

3.6 SELECTED SITE ALTERNATIVE

The selected site consists of a 242-acre property located at 4101 Arthur Kill Road which is situated within the City’s Working West Shore 2030 planning area. The site is the location of the former Port Mobil major oil storage facility (MOSF), which is a known contaminated site that is currently vacant and subject to on-going state and federally mandated remediation. The applicant selected the subject site based on property size, potential total building yield (> 2,000,000 GSF), zoning (Industrial Business Zone IBZ, Heavy Industrial M3), availability within the local work force and accessibility to State Route 440. In addition, the site includes existing marine port facilities along the Arthur Kill that provide critical waterborne access required for site remediation and

3 | Page

redevelopment activities and which contributes to the economic feasibility of the Project through the preservation and subsequent leasing of the marine port facilities.

The majority of the existing site development is situated within the central, interior portions of the site while primary site constraints (e.g. wetlands, tidal waters) are concentrated along the property perimeter. This arrangement offers the unique opportunity to generate a total buildable yield (2,150,000 GSF) that is large enough to enable both a technically and economically viable modern logistics park with minimal impacts to regulated natural features (e.g., freshwater wetlands, tidal wetlands/tidal waters and associated adjacent areas). Additionally, it should be noted that the impervious coverage associated with the site development (buildings, pavement, etc.) would also serves as a final remedy for remediation of the MOSF.

Local land use designations and planning efforts support the proposed use of the site as a modern logistics park. The Project Site is located entirely within the Rossville Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) and underlying heavy industrial (M3-1) zoning district. These zoning designations promote industrial and manufacturing uses such as those proposed. The site also lies within the Special South Richmond Development District (SSRD) which guides development and manages growth in a manner that is consistent with the topography and natural assets unique to the area. Based on review of SSRD requirements, it was determined that the proposed logistics park could be designed in a manner that could achieve SSRD plan certification.

Local workforce availability demographics and planning area goals presented within Working West Shore 2030 plan also favorable to and supportive of the proposed use of the site. The Applicant estimates that staffing of the proposed logistical center will require 1,952 individuals as part of regular operations. As such, availability within the local workforce is a significant consideration. Staten Island is proximate to a large, targeted demographic labor pool totaling approximately 52,000 individuals. Research indicates that there is a net targeted demographic labor pool supply/demand surplus of 9,435 individuals within a five-mile radius of the site with estimates that indicate the region can support up to 3,000 additional warehouse jobs. Currently, approximately 74% of Staten Island residents employed within the Trade, Transportation and Utilities industry sector commute to jobs outside the borough, which requires 2-½ times more commuting time than jobs located on Staten Island. The Project’s ability to provide borough residents on-island employment opportunities is consistent with the first of the four main objectives of the Working West Shore 2030 plan which is to create, quality local jobs for Staten Island residents and reduce the need for off-island commutes, which will also has the added benefit of reducing traffic congestion associated with off-island commuting.

As noted previously, dense markets such as the NY/NJ Metro Region present the warehousing and distribution industry with the greatest challenges to on-time delivery due to several factors, such as high congestion, which increases the importance of well-located facilities. One of the key features of the selected site location is its close proximity to SR 440. First planned by Robert Moses in 1930 as the "West Shore Parkway" in the Staten Island arterial development plan, SR 440 connects the Staten Island Expressway (I-278) with the Korean War Veterans Parkway and the Outerbridge Crossing approaches and provides the only north-south express route that extends the length of Staten Island. SR 440 provides convenient access to the regional highway network, major air and seaports in New York and New Jersey, as well as dense consumer delivery

4 | Page

destinations within each of New York City’s five boroughs and New Jersey. The level of accessibility provided by the site’ proximity to SR 440 enables the logistic park to access approximately 14.2 million people living within a 30-mile radius of the site and a total of population of approximately 23 million people within a 3-hour delivery range, which are important factors to future tenants.

While not a requirement of the alternative analysis process, it is important to note that the proposed Project is consistent with and furthers the goals and objectives of the Staten Island Working West Shore 2030 plan not only to create quality local jobs within the borough but also to promote and redevelop maritime infrastructure. The plan, which identifies the selected site for industrial use, targets growth opportunities to a limited number of areas within the West Shore that:

• Have concentrated amounts of developable and vacant/underutilized land; • Are accessible to current and future transit stops and highway exits; • Are near existing and future employment and commercial centers; and • Would support existing communities by their development.

The plan also promotes the establishment, improvement and expansion of economic development programs intended to help retain and to recruit industrial users and to support the redevelopment of maritime infrastructure and sites. The proposed Project meets these goals and objectives and does so in a manner that also preserves an extensive amount of the site’s undeveloped land areas.

4.0 Alternative Project Designs

Due to the nature of the warehousing and distribution market, level of fiscal investment, unique site features and lengthy processes associated with discretionary and non-discretionary approvals, in addition to meeting site specific regulatory and land use requirements, it is critical that the project design for the project also meet certain design thresholds and a wide range of industry specific design parameters to generate marketable space upon completion of construction. These site design parameters include total buildable yield, restoring maritime uses, building sizes and dimensions that meet industry specific standards and parking requirements that meet industry standards.

The costs associated with property acquisition and redevelopment of the site require certain critical design thresholds to be met in order for the project to be financially viable. These thresholds include a total buildable yield that is greater than two million square feet, construction of an anchor building that is greater than one million square feet and preservation of a waterfront area that is large enough to reactivate maritime usage. Additionally, in order for the project to be technically viable the site design and layout must meet requirements that are industry specific. These include buildings that are wide enough (620’ min.) to accommodate a two-bay layout that provides required operational space and office space as well as adaptability to provide a range occupancy square footage. The warehousing industry also has highly specific parking demands that need to be able to accommodate full time staff, multi-shift workers and a high number of distribution vehicles and trailers. Due to the various type of parking needs and the complexity of high level internal vehicular movement, the total number of available parking spaces, stall size and location as well as internal circulation require careful thought and planning to develop a design that prioritizes safety while also meeting tenant needs and local zoning requirements.

5 | Page

As part of the preliminary planning design process multiple design configurations were considered. Primary factors evaluated during the preliminary design process included total buildable yield, building designs (size, dimensions) that can meet tenant operational requirements, avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features and local land use requirements, including zoning requirements of the South Richmond Special Area. A total of four design alternatives were evaluated. A brief summary of each alternative is presented below along with the rationale for not pursuing the alternative design. Also included below is a detailed description of the Preferred Alternative Design and rationale for design.

4.1 Alternative Design #1

Figure 4-1 presents the site access design approach originally envisioned for the project which was intended to occur via Ellis Road; an existing single lane road along the Site’s southern boundary. This access approach was preferred by the applicant in that, in combination with the existing access from Arthur Kill Road, use of Ellis road would reduce the area of internal roadways required and would provide direct access to the waterfront. In accordance with local zoning requirements and NY Fire Department requirements, this Alternative would require widening Ellis Road to 34 feet. This design alternative meets project requirements for total buildable yield, building design and tenant operational requirements, however, the alternative does not meet the goal of avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features. As depicted Figure 4-1, Ellis Road bisects wetlands both on-site and offsite. As such, widening of the roadway would result in significant impacts to wetlands and adjacent areas that would not otherwise be affected by the proposed redevelopment.

This Alternative was excluded from advancement as it would not meet the goal of avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated features. Widening of Ellis Road would increase disturbance to wetlands by approximately 1.25 acres and increase disturbance to adjacent areas by 0.65 acres.

4.2 Alternative Design #2

Figure 4-2 presents the conceptual design for Alternative 2. This Alternative concept evaluated a revised site access approach with a single, large (±1,709,000 S.F.) building. Access to the site would be established via two entrances. One entrance would be through an existing curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road at the existing gated entrance to the site, adjacent to and east of the existing solar array facility and another entrance via a new curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road proximate to the easternmost corner of the Project Site. This single building approach identified complexities in providing code compliant and industry standard parking and circulation around a single large building and highly limited ability to incorporate adaptive design measure to accommodate tenant requirements.

This design alternative meets project requirements for providing an anchor building with required design dimensions while preserving the waterfront for maritime use. However, this alternative

6 | Page

does not meet project requirements for total buildable yield or goals for avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features. This alternative also creates difficulties in meeting local land use requirements due to less flexibility in shifting internal circulation. While this alternative primarily focuses the footprint of redevelopment over the existing MOSF, the single building approach results internal driveways and parking extending further into undeveloped portions of the site where regulated features exist. This Alternative, when compared to the effects of the Preferred Alternative, results in increased disturbance to regulated wetlands by 0.58 acres and increased adjacent area disturbance by 1.77 acres.

This Alternative was excluded from advancement due to the fact that it does not meet buildable yield requirements, likely conflicts with local zoning requirements for parking and circulation requirements and does not meet the goal of avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated features.

4.3 Alternative Design #3

Figure 4-3 presents the conceptual design for Alternative 3. This design provides a four building layout similar to that presented in the Preferred Alternative, below. This Alternative concept evaluated a layout that could meet the total buildable yield, building designs (size, dimensions) that can meet tenant operational requirements and local land use requirements while also preserving the waterfront for maritime use. This conceptual design approach also focuses redevelopment over the existing MOSF and reduced impacts to regulated wetlands and adjacent areas when compared to Alternatives Design 1 and 2, however, upon examination it was noted that impacts to regulated areas could likely be further reduced. This Alternative, when compared to the effects of the Preferred Alternative, results in increased disturbance to regulated wetlands by 0.36 acres and increased adjacent area disturbance by 1.15 acres. This Alternative was subsequently advanced to further avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and adjacent areas through the use of multiple design measures which eventually produced the Preferred Design Alternative presented below.

4.4 Alternative Design #4

Figure 4-4 presents the conceptual design for Alternative 4. This design provides a four building layout similar to that presented in Alternative Design 3 and the Preferred Alternative, however, in an effort to avoid impacting wetlands situated within the southwestern portion of the property, Building 3 and associated support facilities were rotated to the north away from the wetland complex, thereby shifting the western corner of the development closer to the Arthur Kill waterfront.

This design alternative meets project requirements for total buildable yield and building design, however, the alternative does not meet operational requirements of preserving maritime use along the waterfront; does not meet goals for avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated features; and, conflicts with local land use guidance for preserving maritime use. As depicted in Figure 4-4, this design alternative highly conflicts with the ability to preserve operational uses of the waterfront facilities that are to be re-tenanted by a maritime user. The rotation results in an encroachment of the building envelope associated with Building 3 facilities within areas critical to

7 | Page

port operations significantly hindering the ability to preserve viable maritime usage. Inclusion of maritime usage is instrumental to the redevelopment of the site from both a fiscal perspective and is highly encouraged by various City agencies and policies. Additionally, while meeting the goal of reducing impacts to wetlands along the southwestern portion of the site by 3,929 SF, the rotation causes an increased impact to wetlands located in the northern portion of the site adjacent to the Arthur Kill by 4,179 SF resulting in a total net increase of project related wetland impacts of 250 SF. Additionally, guidance provided by the Department of City Planning (DCP) was to develop a site plan with an orderly building layout and circulation plan. Rotation of the western development area in a non-linear manner is inconsistent with this guidance and would be highly discouraged by DCP.

Based upon the above, this Alternative was not further considered due conflicts with preservation of the maritime usage, increased impacts to wetlands and inconsistency with DCP design guidance.

5.0 Preferred Alternative

The site engineering plans submitted with the Joint Permit Application present the detailed design approach for the Preferred Alternative. This design provides a four building layout developed to meet the required design parameters as well as avoid and minimize impacts to regulated wetlands and associated adjacent areas to the greatest extent practicable. As previously noted, the majority of the existing site development is situated within the central, interior portions of the site while regulated wetlands and adjacent areas are concentrated along the property perimeter. This arrangement enable the applicant with a unique opportunity to develop a Preferred Alternative Design that meets all necessary design requirements with minimal impacts to regulated features. Additionally, it should be noted that the impervious coverage associated with the site redevelopment (buildings, pavement, etc.) also serves as a final remedy for remediation of the MOSF.

The Preferred Alternative would redevelop the subject property in a manner that provides a total of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet (GSF), comprised of four one-story, 55-foot tall buildings of the following sizes and uses: (1) Building 1, a 229,632 GSF commercial warehouse building; (2) Building 2, a 477,880 GSF commercial warehouse building; (3) Building 3, a 1,225,120 GSF commercial warehouse building; and (4) Building 4, a 215,280 GSF commercial warehouse building. It is anticipated that the three commercial warehouse buildings would be tenanted by online fulfillment firms and conventional storage companies for storage, distribution, and logistics purposes. The light manufacturing and light assembly building is anticipated to operate as an enterprise manufacturer working with building materials (wood, metal, paint, adhesives, and / or plaster). Further, the existing ground-mounted solar array would be relocated to the rooftop of Building 3 and potentially expanded to the rooftops of other buildings to increase the solar energy generated.

Primary access to the Project Site would be established via two entrances along Arthur Kill Road. One entrance would be through an existing curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road at the existing gated entrance to the site, adjacent to and east of the existing solar array facility and another entrance via a new curb cut on the north side of Arthur Kill Road proximate to the easternmost corner of the Project

8 | Page

Site. Internal access roads and paved parking areas would be accessible via both entrances and sidewalks would be provided throughout the site for use by tenants/employees of the Proposed Project.

The proposed stormwater management system would include a series of catch basins and manholes directed via subsurface conveyance piping to two proposed stormwater quality basins to the north of Buildings 2 and 3, respectively, each ultimately discharging treated stormwater into the Arthur Kill waterway via two proposed outfalls. The proposed stormwater quality basins would be designed to incorporate landscaping vegetation.

A portion of the site’s waterfront is already developed, including five existing warehouses (totaling approximately 36,661 GSF), 40 accessory off-street parking spaces, and a 1,500-foot bulkhead, which would be preserved and re-tenanted by a maritime user. It is anticipated that the selected maritime tenant would utilize the existing waterfront area including the bulkhead as a marine service yard or for similar operations (e.g., storage, mobilization, or repair of marine equipment). Access to the existing bulkhead, upon reactivation, would be provided via internal access drive that has been incorporated into the overall site design and circulation plan.

5.1 Avoidance and Minimization Measures

The Preferred Alternative Design was advanced with the specific goal of avoiding and minimizing impacts to regulated wetlands and adjacent areas to the greatest extent practicable. This has been accomplished through several design measures that include:

x Focusing development over existing MOSF x Developing an internal circulation and parking design that minimizes encroachments into regulated features to greatest extent practicable x Modification to the size and dimensions of Building 2 x Extensive use of retaining walls to limit disturbance to wetlands and adjacent areas x Development of a stormwater management design that incorporates outfall placement in a manner that avoids impacts to wetlands, adjacent areas and tidal waters

These design measures, when combined, provide for the least impactive design approach that is also technically and economically viable.

6.0 No Action Alternative

Under the No-Action Alternative, remediation of the site would be completed pursuant to the Consent Order, however, no additional development on top of the former MOSF would occur. Specifically, in accordance with the Consent Order and DEC Remediation Plan, the 38 former oil storage tanks and associated infrastructure would be decommissioned and demolished, and a remedial cap comprised of a minimum one-foot clean topsoil would be layered across the site, and then seeded with native grasses. The remedial cover design is currently being finalized with DEC. It is deemed likely that a limited amount of ground disturbance beyond the MOSF area may be required to construct sedimentation basins to manage stormwater and erosion from the remedial cover in accordance with the NYSDEC Stormwater Manual and Blue Book.

9 | Page

This alternative would meet the goal of avoiding all impacts to wetlands and adjacent areas and would be consistent with local zoning requirements, however, as no development would occur this alternative would not meet Applicant’s project objectives for developing a commerce center with a viable buildable yield with building designs that can meet tenant market demand and operational requirements. Further, it should be noted that the No Action Alternative would also be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Staten Island Working West Shore 2030 plan, which specifically promotes industrial use of the site in a manner that will not only to create quality local jobs within the borough but also to promote and redevelop maritime infrastructure.

7.0 Conclusion

The preferred alternative was selected as it is the one alternative that could meet each of the primary consideration factors: total buildable yield, building designs that can meet tenant operational requirements, avoidance and minimization of impacts to regulated features and local land use requirements. It is important to note that this alternative is also the alternative that results in the least amount of impacts to regulated features.

10 | Page

FIGURE 4-1 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #1

FIGURE 4-2 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #2 FIGURE 4-3 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #3

FIGURE 4-4 ALTERNATIVE DESIGN #4

Attachment 4.0 Site Location Maps

Attachment 4.1 USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map Attachment 4.2 Vicinity Map Attachment 4.3 Aerial Map p

Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

LEGEND Project Site

NOTES: 1. The Project Site is located in the southwest quadrant of the Arthur Kill Quadrangle, NY-NJ. 2. Approximate Project Site Coordinates: N40° 32' 43.862", W74° 14' 20.509"

0500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

SCALE IN FEET

Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .1 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 2,000 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att Map 2.1 021121.mxd - USGSTopographic LEGEND Project Site

0250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 SCALE IN FEET p

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT VICINITY MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .2 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 1,250 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 2.2 - Vicinity Map 021121.mxd LEGEND Project Site

0250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 SCALE IN FEET p

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT AERIAL MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .3 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 1,250 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\AttAerial 2.3 Map - 021121.mxd Attachment 5.0

Photo Key Map and Site Photographs

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 1 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 1. Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at dilapidated MOSF infrastructure and fuel storage tanks (part of Structure 1, to be demolished under Consent Orders) in the background.

Photograph 2: Southern portion of the project site atop a berm looking northeast down a corridor lined with fuel storage tanks (Structure 1).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 2 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 3: Northwestern portion of the project site looking southeast at an existing stormwater quality basin and fuel storage tanks (Structure 1).

Photograph 4: Eastern portion of the project site atop a berm looking southwest down roadway lined with storage tanks (Structure 1).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 3 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 5:Eastern portion of project site looking northwest down perimeter roadway and naturally vegetated areas.

Photograph 6:Eastern portion of project site looking southeast down perimeter roadway at forested areas. Fuel storage tank berm shown in foreground (right).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 4 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 7: Southern portion of the project site looking west at the solar array (foreground) with several fuel storage tanks visible in the background.

Photograph 8: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at Structure G.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 5 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 9: Southwestern portion of the project site looking north at the front of Structure G.

Photograph 10: Southwestern portion of the project site looking northwest at Structure G front and side.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 6 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 11: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at Structure H (left) and Structure G (right), Arthur Kill tidal strait in background.

Photograph 12: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at the front of Structure H, to be retained under the proposed project.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 7 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 13: Southwestern portion of the project site looking southeast at the front and side of Structure H.

Photograph 14: Southwestern portion of the project site looking east at MOSF infrastructure (background) and Structure I (right, background).

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 8 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 15: Southwest portion of the project site looking north at the front of Structure I.

Photograph 16: Southwestern portion of the project site looking northeast at Structure I front and side.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 9 of 10

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Photographs acquired March 10, 2021

Photograph 17: Northwestern portion of the project site looking southwest along the existing bulkhead and Arthur Kill tidal strait.

Photograph 18: Northwestern portion of the project site looking east at tidal wetlands along the Arthur Kill and forested areas.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs 10 of 10 Attachment 6.0 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Questionnaire NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

This document serves to address the requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) New York District Environmental Questionnaire and supplement the Joint Application for Permit used in the State of New York.

GENERAL - APPLICABLE TO ALL PROJECTS

1. Explain the need for, and purpose of, the proposed work.

The Project would serve to redevelop the currently unutilized Site and fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse building space in Staten Island, and New York City as a whole. The Project is on a brownfield that is one of the largest, unutilized sites in the area. Site selection included consideration of a few slightly smaller sites on Staten Island, but these sites have more restrictive environmental constraints, mainly relating to presence of tidal and freshwater wetlands. The Site was selected for multiple reasons including its historic use as a significant industrial development and its existing developed and disturbed nature that minimizes encroachments into previously undisturbed environments when compared to the aforementioned sites. Development on this Site has several constraints due to the redevelopment occurring above a remedial cap for the former Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF); adjacency to the Arthur Kill River; and the presence of natural areas adjacent to the existing developed and disturbed footprint of the MOSF. These unique Site conditions necessitate a project of sufficient size to off-set costs for a complex, large-scale development.

The Applicant has performed extensive market analyses in selecting both the location for the Project and the proposed redevelopment design. Specifically, market analyses performed for the Project indicate a continued trend toward online shopping that has resulted in a deficit of warehouse space available to serve Long Island and the 5 boroughs of NYC, and indicates this location would address the market demand to serve at least 14 million people, and up to 23 million people, in a 30 mile radius. The redevelopment has been designed to provide the 2.15 million square feet of space required for the client to see a return on their investment. The building sizes and layouts identified in the project plans have been selected specifically to meet the target markets identified for this location; one anchor logistics tenant with supporting warehouse buildings specifically sized to meet the requirements of the anticipated tenant needs. In order to meet very specific storage and loading requirements, the largest proposed building design includes interior spaces for racking and movement of equipment and exterior loading/offloading areas on both sides of the building. Without the building depth identified on the plans, the building would not be marketable to a logistics tenant that is intended as the anchor for this entire redevelopment. Additionally, due to the remedial cap, the former MOSF area will be elevated to a grade that limits extending or changing orientation of the development further toward the waterfront area as it would encroach into the area necessary to attract the future marine service operator.

The formerly operating MOSF within the Site was decommissioned in 2019 and the Site is undergoing

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 1 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

remediation pursuant to two consent orders.1 Although the proposed redevelopment is expediting Site remediation and being carried out by the Applicant, it is not subject to discretionary approvals and is not part of the proposed Project discussed herein.

The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned Site into a warehouse complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehouse space, reactivating a working waterfront use (marine service yard industrial use) utilizing existing bulkhead and existing buildings along the waterfront, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, while preserving valuable natural resources within the Site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goals of the comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses.

The Project would meet the increasing market demand for warehousing space through construction of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet (SF), dedicated to warehousing and logistics uses, and would activate a marine service yard industrial use along the waterfront. The waterfront use would not require any additional development or upgrades to existing waterfront infrastructure and would utilize existing bulkhead, the existing paved platform, and existing buildings along the waterfront.2 The proposed warehouse and marine service yard industrial uses are consistent with the underlying M3-1 zoning district that the Site is within and would be reactivating a former industrial area which had closed in 2019, consistent with IBZ intents. The scale of the Project is critical to support future success of the development at the Site and to meet the needs of potential local and national retail distribution networks. Other logistics parks on Staten Island – including the 200-acre Matrix Global Logistics Park in the Bloomfield neighborhood to the north, which houses Amazon and Ikea facilities – have documented the creation of a significant number of full-time equivalent jobs and temporary construction positions. Along with job creation, fulfilling market demand for commercial warehousing, and creating industrial uses in the IBZ, the Project would preserve natural features in the perimeter of the Site to the maximum extent practicable through avoiding and minimizing encroachment on natural features.

2. Provide the names and addresses of property owners adjacent to your work site (if not shown on the application form or project drawings).

List of Adjacent Property Owners

Block Lot Zip Code Address Owner Name NYS DEPARTMENT OF 7132 100 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION

1 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12-1111-A-SBC. 2 Existing Buildings A, H, and I to be preserved. See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 2 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Block Lot Zip Code Address Owner Name 7144 463 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD NYS DEPT OF ENVIR CONSV 7144 490 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD UNAVAILABLE OWNER 7144 500 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD NYS DEPT OF ENVIR CONSV 7144 510 10309 3120 ARTHUR KILL ROAD THOMAS TIRRO 7144 523 10309 3090 ARTHUR KILL ROAD CLAY, MICHAEL 7144 528 10309 3080 ARTHUR KILL ROAD DOUBLE T LLC 7144 538 10309 3044 ARTHUR KILL ROAD NYS DEPT OF ENVIR CONSV 7207 280 10309 JOHNSON STREET 11 JOHNSON ST LLC 7207 283 10309 JOHNSON STREET BLUEPRINT METALS INC 7207 293 10309 135 JOHNSON STREET EGBERT SQUARE RELATY LLC 7207 300 10309 115 JOHNSON STREET 115 JOHNSTON STREET INC 7207 305 10309 101 MILA WAY BLOCK 7207 REALTY LLC 7207 55 10309 3015 ARTHUR KILL ROAD PULIAFICO, THOMAS A 7207 57 10309 3011 ARTHUR KILL ROAD UNAVAILABLE OWNER 7207 140 0 JOHNSON AVENUE COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. 7207 150 10309 JOHNSON AVENUE COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. 7207 239 10309 50 JOHNSON STREET JOHNSON ST VENTURES, LLC 7207 241 10309 30 JOHNSON STREET JOHN P PRIMIRONO 7207 243 10309 26 JOHNSON STREET JOHNSON STREET ENTERPRISES, LLC 7207 253 10309 18 JOHNSON STREET 16-18 JOHNSON STREE, LLC 7207 255 10309 151 JOHNSON STREET COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. 7207 260 10309 JOHNSON STREET 16-18 JOHNSON STREE, LLC 7207 35 10309 27 JOHNSON STREET BLOCK 7207 REALTY LLC 7293 20 10309 CLAY PIT ROAD NYS OFFICE OF GENERAL SERVICES 7293 250 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD UNAVAILABLE OWNER 7385 28 10309 ARTHUR KILL ROAD DYSTON LLC 7385 45 10309 4167 ARTHUR KILL ROAD RAYMOND W ROE 7385 300 10309 ELLIS ROAD DYSTON LLC 7385 275 10309 ELLIS ROAD DYSTON LLC

Attachment 7.0, Tax Map, shows the tax block and lot information graphically in relation to the Site.

3. Photographs of the project site should be submitted. For projects in tidal areas, photographs of the waterway vicinity should be taken at low tide. Using a separate copy of your plan view, indicate the

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 3 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

location and direction of each photograph as well as the date and time at which the photograph was taken. Provide a sufficient number of photographs so as to provide a clear understanding of conditions on and proximate to your project site.

See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs.

4. Provide a copy of any environmental impact statement, or any other environmental report which was prepared for your project.

The Project is required to undergo New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is under preparation. As the EIS is in progress and a draft has not been officially accepted by the lead agency, the New York City Department of City Planning (NYCDCP), the NYSDEC State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Full Environmental Assessment Form has been prepared to supplement this Joint Application for Permit. See Attachment 10.0, NYSDEC Full Environmental Assessment Form.

5. Provide a thorough discussion of alternatives to your proposal. This discussion should include, but not necessarily be limited to, the "no action" alternative and alternative(s) resulting in less disturbance to waters of the United States. For filling projects in waters of the United States, including wetlands, your alternatives discussion should demonstrate that there are no practicable alternatives to your proposed filling and that your project meets with current mitigation policy (i.e. avoidance, minimization and compensation).

See Attachment 3.0, Alternatives Analysis, for detailed alternatives analysis.

DREDGING PROJECTS

Not applicabe. No dredging is proposed.

MOORING FACILITIES

Not applicable. No construction or rehabilitation of recreational mooring facilities is proposed.

BULKHEADING/ BANK STABILIZATION/ FILLING ACTIVITIES

1. Indicate the total volume of fill (including backfill behind a structure such as a bulkhead) as well as the volume of fill to be placed into waters of the United States. The amount of fill in waters of the United States can be determined by calculating the amount of fill to be placed below the plane of spring high tide in tidal areas and below ordinary high water in non-tidal areas.

Approximately 4,580 CY of fill would be placed into waters of the United States.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 4 of 5 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

2. Indicate the source(s) and type(s) of fill material.

Fill material will consist of clean soil and/or rock.

3. Indicate the method of fill placement (i.e. by hand, bulldozer, crane, etc.). Would any temporary fills be required in waterways or wetlands to provide access for construction equipment? If so, please indicate the area of such waters and/or wetlands to be filled and show on the plan and sectional views.

Fill would be placed with bull dozers and backhoes. No temporary fills in wetlands would be required. For further project details, refer to Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 6.0, USACE Environmental Questionnaire 5 of 5 Attachment 7.0 Tax Map

LEGEND Project Site Tax Lots Tax Blocks p 0200 400 800 1,200 Lot 140 SCALE IN FEET Lot 255 Lot 150

Block 7207 Lot 280 Block Lot 60 Lot 283 7207 Lot 293

Lot 300

Lot 305

Lot 35 Lot 239 Lot 241 Lot 243 Lot 253 Block 7247 Lot 260 Lot 1 Lot 55

Block

Lot 538 7132 Lot 523 Lot 528 Lot 100 Lot 510

Lot 490 Lot 500

Lot 463 Block 7144

Lot 275 Lot 250 Lot 20 Lot 28 Lot 45 Block Block 7385 7293 Lot 300

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT TAX MAP NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383  RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-11-2021 02-11-2021 1 " = 667 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs Map - Permitting\Att021121.mxd 8 - Tax Attachment 8.0

Resource Maps

Attachment 8.1 NYSDEC 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map Attachment 8.2 NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map Attachment 8.3 USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map Attachment 8.4 NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper Results Attachment 8.5 FEMA Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map Attachment 8.6 New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Map Attachment 8.7 New York Cultural Resources Information System Map Attachment 8.8 Natural Heritage Communities Map LEGEND

Project Site I IM State Boundary NYSDEC 1974 Tidal Wetlands SM Adjacent Area (AA) High Marsh (HM) Intertidal Marsh (IM) New Jersey Littoral Zone (LZ) New York Coastal Shoals, Bars, and Mudflats (SM) LZ

0200 400 800 1,200 Johnson Street SCALE IN FEET SM

Arthur Kill

SM

AA

Arthur Kill Road SM Ellis Road

HM Sharrotts Road

SM Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, SM USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT NYSDEC 1974 Tidal NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Wetlands Map BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .1 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-23-2021 02-23-2021 1 " = 750 ' F:\2020\20-383KinderMorgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs Wetlands MapPermitting\AttNYSDEC 022321.mxd9.1 - - Tidal 1974 LEGEND Project Site I State Boundary NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Checkzones

0200 400 800 1,200 New Jersey SCALE IN FEET New York

Johnson Street

Arthur Kill

ID = AR-7 Class = 1

ID = AR-7 Class = 1

ID = AR-7 Class = 1

ID = AR-7 Arthur Kill Road Class = 1 ID = AR-7 Class = 1 Ellis Road

ID = AR-7 ID = AR-7 Class = 1 Class = 1 ID = AR-7 Class = 1

Sharrotts Road

ID = AR-39 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, Class = 2 USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT NYSDEC Freshwater NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Wetlands Map BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .2 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-23-2021 02-23-2021 1 " = 750 ' F:\2020\20-383KinderMorgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDsPermitting\AttNYSDEC9.2 - - Freshwater Wetlands Map 022321.mxd LEGEND Project Site E2USN, Estuarine and Marine Wetland PUBF, Freshwater Pond State Boundary PEM5E, Freshwater Emergent Wetland PUBFh, Freshwater Pond ATTRIBUTE, WETLAND_TY PFO1/EM5E, Freshwater Forested/Shrub PUBH, Freshwater Pond E1UBL, Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Wetland PUBHh, Freshwater Pond E2EM5P, Estuarine and Marine Wetland PFO1C, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland PUBHx, Freshwater Pond E2SS1P, Estuarine and Marine Wetland PFO1E, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland R3UBH, RiverineE2USN E2US2P, Estuarine and Marine Wetland PSS1E, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland R3UBHx, Riverine

0200 400 800 1,200 E2SS1P SCALE IN FEET E2SS1P

New Jersey E2US2P New York

E1UBL E2US2P Arthur Kill

Johnson Street

E1UBL E2EM5P

PFO1E

E2EM5P E2US2P PUBFh E2USN

PUBHh R3UBHx PUBHx

PUBHx

R3UBHx

PSS1E

PUBF PUBHh

PUBF PFO1E Arthur KillPUBFh Road R3UBH Ellis RoadPUBHh PUBF PUBF R3UBH PUBHh PEM5E PFO1E E2EM5P PFO1EPEM5E

PFO1C PFO1E E2US2P PEM5E PUBH R3UBHPEM5E E2EM5P

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, I USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community E2US2P

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT USFWS National Wetlands NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Inventory (NWI) Map BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .3 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-23-2021 02-23-2021 1 " = 750 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 9.3 - USFWS National Wetlands Inventory 022321.mxd LEGEND Project Site I State Boundary Rare Plants or Animals Significant Natural Communities Buffers Significant Natural Communities Freshwater Nontidal Wetlands Uplands

0200 400 800 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

New Jersey New York

Johnson Street Arthur Kill

Arthur Kill Road

Post oak-blackjack oak barrens

Ellis Road

Red maple-sweetgum swamp

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT NYSDEC Environmental NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Resource Mapper BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 8.4 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 04-22-2021 04-22-2021 1 " = 750 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 8.4 - NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper 042221.mxd LEGEND Project Site I State Boundary Preliminary FIRM Flood Zones AE 0.2% Annual Chance Flood VE Hazard (500-year Floodplain) AE 0.2% A - 1% Annual Chance Flood 0.2% Hazard (100-year Floodplain) with New Jersey no Base Flood Elevations New York AE - 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard (100-year Floodplain) AE VE - 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard (100-year Floodplain) with AE Velocity Hazard (Wave Action) 0.2% 0200 400 800 1,200 OPEN WATER SCALE IN FEET Johnson Street

0.2%

Arthur Kill

AE 0.2%

0.2%

0.2%

AE 1.mxd

Arthur Kill Road Ellis Road 0.2% AE AE 0.2%

A

Sharrotts Road

AE

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, VE USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT FEMA Preliminary Flood NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .5 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-24-2021 02-24-2021 1 " = 750 ' F:\2020\20-383MorganKinder Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs Preliminary Flood InsuranceFEMA Permitting\Att022329.5 Rate - - Map LEGEND Project Site I State Boundary NYC WRP Coastal Zone Boundary (CZB) Recognized Ecological Complexes (REC) Priority Marine Activity Zones New Jersey (PMAZ) New York Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas (SMIA)

0200 400 800 1,200 Johnson Street SCALE IN FEET

Arthur Kill

Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands Map 021821.mxd

Arthur Kill Road

Ellis Road

Sharrotts Road

Sharrotts Road Shorelands

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT New York City Waterfront NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Revitalization Program Map BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .6 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-18-2021 02-18-2021 1 " = 750 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att City 9.6Waterfront Revitalization Program- New York LEGEND Project Site I Study Area (400') State/National Register of Historic Listed/Eligible Structures LPC Individual Landmark NOTE: 1. There are no State Register/ National Register of Historic Places Listed or Arthur Kill Eligible buildings or structures within the vicinity of the Project Site.

0200 400 800 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

Johnson Street Map 021821.mxd

Arthur Kill Road

Ellis Road 400'

Westfield Township District School No. 7 4212 Arthur Kill Roa

Sharrotts Road

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT New York Cultural Resources NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Information System Map BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 .7 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 02-24-2021 02-24-2021 1 " = 708 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att Cultural 9.7 Resources - NewInformation York System LEGEND Project Site Significant Natural Communities I Freshwater Nontidal Wetlands Uplands

04008001,200200

SCALE IN FEET

Post oak-blackjack oak barrens

Red maple-sweetgum swamp

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community

ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT Natural Heritage Communities NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 8.8 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 04-22-2021 04-22-2021 1 " = 708 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 8.8 - Natural Heritage Communities 042221.mxd Attachment 9.0

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Water Quality Certification Supplement WQC-1

$33/,&$7,21)253(50,7 )256(&7,2167$7(:$7(548$/,7<&(57,),&$7,21

6XSSOHPHQW:4&

'(&,' LINQRZQ  Applicant Information 1DPHRI$SSOLFDQW IURP-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUP  NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard

(PDLO [email protected] 3KRQH 816-541-2881

0DLOLQJ$GGUHVV6WUHHW4825 NW 41st St., Suite 500 &LW\ Riverside 6WDWH  =LS 64150

3URMHFW/RFDWLRQ IURP-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUP  From NYC Tax Map: Block 7247, Lot 1 and Block 7207, Lot 60

7RZQ ZKHUHSURSHUW\ WD[HVSDLG  Borough of Staten Island &RXQW\ Richmond

6WUHHW $GGUHVV 4101 Arthur Kill Road&LW\ New York City6WDWH1< =LS 10309

7RFRPSO\ZLWKIHGHUDOUHTXLUHPHQWVDW&)5† E IRU1HZ

 %\VLJQLQJWKLVIRUPWKHDSSOLFDQWDIILUPVWKDWWKHSURMHFWSURSRQHQW V DQGDSRLQWRI FRQWDFWZHUH DFFXUDWHO\LGHQWLILHGLQWKH-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQIRU3HUPLWSURYLGHGZLWKWKLVVXSSOHPHQW

 %\VLJQLQJWKLVIRUPWKHDSSOLFDQWDIILUPVWKDWWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLVDFFXUDWHO\DQGFRPSOHWHO\ LGHQWLILHGLQWKH-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQIRU3HUPLWSURYLGHGZLWKWKLVVXSSOHPHQWDQGLQDQ\VXSSRUWLQJSODQV SKRWRVUHSRUWVRURWKHUSURMHFWLQIRUPDWLRQ

 ,GHQWLI\KHUHWKHDSSOLFDEOHIHGHUDOOLFHQVHRUSHUPLWIRUWKLVUHTXHVW US Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Clean Water Act ,IWKLVUHTXHVWUHODWHVWRD6HFWLRQ1DWLRQZLGH3HUPLWDGPLQLVWHUHGE\WKH86$UP\&RUSVRI (QJLQHHUVSOHDVHLGHQWLI\WKHDSSURSULDWH1DWLRQZLGH3HUPLWQXPEHU V 

 3OHDVHLGHQWLI\WKHORFDWLRQDQGQDWXUHRIDQ\SRWHQWLDOGLVFKDUJHWKDWPD\UHVXOWIURPWKHSURSRVHG SURMHFWDQGWKHORFDWLRQRIUHFHLYLQJZDWHUV DWWDFKHGDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQDVQHHGHG  Two stormwater quality basins with outfalls discharging to the Arthur Kill are proposed in the north and northwestern portions of the Site (one new outfall and one replacement outfall). See Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further details.

 3OHDVHSURYLGHDGHVFULSWLRQRIDQ\PHWKRGVDQGPHDQVSURSRVHGWRPRQLWRUWKHGLVFKDUJHDQGWKH HTXLSPHQWRUPHDVXUHVSODQQHGWRWUHDWFRQWURORUPDQDJHWKHGLVFKDUJH DWWDFKDGGLWLRQDO LQIRUPDWLRQDVQHHGHG  A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared for the Project as part of the State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permit. See Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, for further details on stormwater quality basin and outfall design.

3DJHRI -RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQ6XSSOHPHQW:4&  3OHDVHSURYLGHDOLVWRIDOORWKHUIHGHUDOLQWHUVWDWHWULEDOVWDWHWHUULWRULDORUORFDODJHQF\DXWKRUL]DWLRQV UHTXLUHGIRUWKHSURSRVHGSURMHFWLQFOXGLQJDOODSSURYDOVRUGHQLDOVDOUHDG\UHFHLYHG NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment; Zoning Authorizations pursuant to the NYC Zoning Resolution sections 107-64, 107-65, and 107-68; Zoning Certification pursuant to ZP 36-592; New York City CEQR; NYC Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Construction Permit NYSDEC 401 Water Quality Certification; NYSDEC Tidal Wetlands Permit; NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Permit; NYSDEC SPDES General Industrial Permit; NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Construction Activities; and 6 NYCRR Part 360.17 Permit.

 3OHDVHLQGLFDWHWKHGDWHD6HFWLRQ:DWHU4XDOLW\&HUWLILFDWLRQSUHILOLQJPHHWLQJUHTXHVWZDV VXEPLWWHGWR'(&DQGDWWDFKDFRS\RIWKHUHTXHVWWRWKLVIRUP7KHSUHILOLQJPHHWLQJUHTXHVWPXVW KDYHEHHQPDGHDWOHDVWGD\VSULRUWRVXEPLWWLQJDSSOLFDWLRQIRU6HFWLRQ:DWHU4XDOLW\ &HUWLILFDWLRQ A pre-application meeting was held with NYSDEC on December 7, 2020.

 %\VLJQLQJEHORZWKHDSSOLFDQWLVSURYLGLQJWKHIROORZLQJVWDWHPHQW³The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief´

 %\VLJQLQJEHORZWKHDSSOLFDQWLVSURYLGLQJWKHIROORZLQJVWDWHPHQW³The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.”

Certification: ,QDGGLWLRQWRWKH-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUPSURYLGHGZLWKWKLVVXSSOHPHQW,KHUHE\VXEPLWWKLVIRUPDQGWKH DWWDFKPHQWVLQGLFDWHGWRUHTXHVWD6HFWLRQ:DWHU4XDOLW\&HUWLILFDWLRQIURP'(&7KHSURMHFW SURSRQHQW KHUHE\FHUWLILHVWKDWDOOLQIRUPDWLRQFRQWDLQHGKHUHLQLVWUXHDFFXUDWHDQGFRPSOHWHWRWKHEHVWRIP\NQRZOHGJH DQGEHOLHI 7KHSURMHFWSURSRQHQWKHUHE\UHTXHVWVWKDWWKHFHUWLI\LQJDXWKRULW\UHYLHZDQGWDNHDFWLRQRQWKLV &:$FHUWLILFDWLRQUHTXHVWZLWKLQWKHDSSOLFDEOHUHDVRQDEOHFHF UWLILFDWLRQUHT SHULRGRIWLPH

5/11/2021 3URMHFW$SSOLFDQW3URSRQHQW6LJQDWXUH3URMHFW $S$ SOLFDQW3 'DWH

3DJHRI -RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQ6XSSOHPHQW:4& Attachment 10.0

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Full Environmental Assessment Form Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 - Project and Setting

Instructions for Completing Part 1

Part 1 is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification.

Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information; indicate whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor; and, when possible, generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully develop that information.

Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A & B. In Sections C, D & E, most items contain an initial question that must be answered either “Yes” or “No”. If the answer to the initial question is “Yes”, complete the sub-questions that follow. If the answer to the initial question is “No”, proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the DSSOLFDQWRUproject sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part 1is accurate and complete.

A. Project and $SSOLFDQWSponsor Information. Name of Action or Project: Port Mobil Redevelopment Project Location (describe, and attach a general location map): 4101 Arthur Kill Road in the Borough of Staten Island, New York (Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1 in Community District 3) Brief Description of Proposed Action (include purpose or need): NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC, proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island with a commercial warehousing complex. The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, 10309. The Proposed Project would facilitate the construction of four one-story commercial warehousing buildings with a net total floor area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet. Previously developed waterfront portions of the Project Site would be retained for marine service yard industrial use. The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned site into a commercial warehousing complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehousing space, reactivating a working waterfront use utilizing existing infrastructure, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, all while preserving valuable natural resources within the site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goalsofthe comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses (through reactivation of the waterfront as a marine service yard industrial use). See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details.

Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone: (816) 541-2881 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC (ATTN: David Rickard) E-Mail: [email protected] Address: 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 City/PO: State: Zip Code: Riverside MO 64150

Project Contact (if not same as sponsor; give name and title/role): Telephone: 973-845-7505 Matrix New World Engineering (ATTN: Robert Fiorile) E-Mail: [email protected] Address: 26 Columbia Turnpike, 2nd Floor City/PO: State: Zip Code: Florham Park NJ 07932 Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone: Same as Applicant/Sponsor E-Mail: Address:

City/PO: State: Zip Code:

Page 1 of 13

FEAF 2019 B. Government Approvals B. Government Approvals Funding, or Sponsorship. (“Funding” includes grants, loans, tax relief, and any other forms of financial assistance.) Government Entity If Yes: Identify Agency and Approval(s) Application Date Required (Actual or projected) a. City&RXQVHOTown%RDUG,  Yes✔ No or Village Board of Trustees b. City, Town or Village ✔ Yes  No See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative Planning Board or Commission c. City Town or  Yes ✔ No Village Zoning Board of Appeals d. Other local agencies ✔ Yes  No See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative e. County agencies  Yes ✔ No f. Regional agencies ✔ Yes  No See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative g. State agencies ✔ Yes  No See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative h. Federal agencies ✔ Yes  No See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative i. Coastal Resources. L. Is the project site within a Coastal Area, or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? ✔ Yes  No

LL. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? ✔ Yes  No LLL. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area?  Yes ✔ No

C. Planning and Zoning

C.1. Planning and zoning actions. Will administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan, local law, ordinance, rule or regulation be the  Yes ✔ No only approval(s) which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed? x If Yes, complete sections C, F and G. x If No, proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1 C.2. Adopted land use plans. a. Do any municipally- adopted (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plan(s) include the site ✔ Yes  No where the proposed action would be located? If Yes, does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action ✔ Yes  No would be located? b. Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway ✔ Yes  No Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; or other?) If Yes, identify the plan(s): New______York City Economic Development Corporation Industrial Business Zone (IBZ); New York City Waterfront Zone (Article VI, Chapter 2 of the ZR) ______ c. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan,  Yes ✔ No or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? If Yes, identify the plan(s): ______

Page 2 of 13 C.3. Zoning a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. ✔ Yes  No If Yes, what is the zoning classification(s) including any applicable overlay district? M3-1______District and Special South Richmond Development District (SSRD) ______b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? ✔ Yes  No c. Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action?  Yes ✔ No If Yes, L What is the proposed new zoning for the site? ______

C.4. Existing community services. a. In what school district is the project site located? New______York City School District #31 b. What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? ______New York City Police Department - 123 Precinct c. Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project site? ______FDNY Firehouse Engine 168 and EMS Battalion 23 provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the Project Site. d. What parks serve the project site? ______NYSDEC Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve (CPPSPP) is adjacent to the Project Site ______

D. Project Details

D.1. Proposed and Potential Development a. What is the general nature of the proposed action (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial, recreational; if mixed, include all components)? Redevelopment of the Project Site with a commercial warehousing complex and reactivating a working waterfront use. ______See Attachment 2.0 Project Narrative for further details. b. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? ______242± acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? ______135± acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? ______242± acres c. Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use?  Yes ✔ No L If Yes, what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units (e.g., acres, miles, housing units, square feet)? % ______Units: ______d. Is the proposed action a subdivision, or does it include a subdivision? ✔ Yes  No If Yes, L Purpose or type of subdivision? (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial; if mixed, specify types) ______The Project Site (Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1) would be merged, then subdivided into five individual lots. LL Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed?  Yes ✔ No LLL Number of lots proposed? ______5 LY Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum ______14.2 Maximum ______90.0 H Will WKHproposed action be constructed in multiple phases?  Yes ✔ No L If No, anticipated period of construction: _____24 months LL If Yes: x Total number of phases anticipated _____ x Anticipated commencement date of phase 1 (including demolition) _____ month _____ year x Anticipated completion date of final phase _____ month _____year x Generally describe connections or relationships among phases, including any contingencies where progress of one phase may determine timing or duration of future phases: ______See______below* ______

7KH$SSOLFDQWVHHNVWRIXOILOOUHPHGLDOREOLJDWLRQVSXUVXDQWWRWZRFRQVHQWRUGHUV QRWLQFOXGHGDVSDUWRIWKH3URSRVHG3URMHFWVHH$WWDFKPHQW 3URMHFW1DUUDWLYHIRUIXUWKHUGHWDLOV DQGUHGHYHORSWKH3URMHFW6LWHVLPXOWDQHRXVO\7KHFRPSOHWLRQRIUHPHGLDWLRQDQGFRPPHQFHPHQWRI UHGHYHORSPHQWDUHDQWLFLSDWHGWRRYHUODS

Page 3 of 13 f. Does the project include new residential uses?  Yes✔ No If Yes, show numbers of units proposed. One Family Two Family Three Family Multiple Family (four or more) Initial Phase ______At completion of all phases ______

g. Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction (including expansions)? ✔ Yes  No If Yes, L. Total number of structures ______4 LL Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: ______height;55' ______width;1,976' and ______620' length 5HIHUVWR%XLOGLQJ LLL Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: ______2,15± million gross square feet h. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any ✔ Yes  No liquids, such as creation of a water supply, reservoir, pond, lake, waste lagoon or other storage? If Yes, L Purpose of the impoundment: To ______improve existing drainage patterns on-site and to direct surface water away from run-off directly to the Arthur Kill. LL If a water impoundment, the principal source of the water:  Ground water  Surface water streams ✔ Other specify: Sheetflow______of surface water via a series of subsurface catch basins and manholes to the two proposed stormwater quality basins. LLL If other than water, identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source. N/A______LY Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. Volume: ______4.7 million gallons; surface area: ______4.1 acres Y Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: ______N/A height; ______N/A length YL Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure (e.g., earth fill, rock, wood, concrete): See Attachment______15.0, Project Permit Plans, for dimensions and construction materials.

D.2. Project Operations a. Does the proposed action include any excavation, mining, or dredging, during construction, operations, or both?  Yes ✔ No (Not including general site preparation, grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated materials will remain onsite) If Yes: LWhat is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? ______LL How much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site? x Volume (specify tons or cubic yards): ______x Over what duration of time? ______LLL Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use, manage or dispose of them. ______iY Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials?  Yes  No If yes, describe. ______Y What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? ______acres YL What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? ______acres YLL What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? ______feet YLLL Will the excavation require blasting?  Yes  No L[ Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: ______The Project______Site is a former MOSF currently undergoing environmental remediation and closure in support of developing 4 state of the art commercial warehouses ______along with reactivating a working waterfront for a maritime service yard industrial use.

b. Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of, increase or decrease in size of, or encroachment ✔ Yes  No into any existing wetland, waterbody, shoreline, beach or adjacent area? If Yes: L Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected (by name, water index number, wetland map number or geographic description): The ______Project would result in impacts to freshwater wetlands. No encroachment into the Arthur Kill tidal strait. All outfall work would occur BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBabove MHHW. See Attachment 15.0, Project Permit Plans, which shows impactsBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB to wetlands to occur under the Proposed Project and are further discussed in Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative.

Page 4 of 13 LL Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland, e.g. excavation, fill, placement of structures, or alteration of channels, banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities, alterations and additions in square feet or acres: The proposed______action would result in placement of fill in freshwater wetlands. See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, and Attachment 15.0, Project______Permit Plans, for details and impact quantities.  ______ ______ LLLWill WKHproposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? Yes ✔ No If Yes, describe: ______All outfall construction would occur above MHW (see Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details). LY Will WKHproposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation?  Yes✔ No If Yes: x aFUHV of DTXDWLFvegetation proposed to be removed ______x H[SHFWHG acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion______x purpose of proposed removal (e.g. beach clearing, invasive species control, boat access): ______x proposed method of plant removal: ______x if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify product(s): ______Y Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: ______c. Will the proposed action use, or create a new demand for water? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: L Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: ______595,708 gallons/day LL Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: x Name of district or service area: New______York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYC DEP) x Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? ✔ Yes  No x Is the project site in the existing district? ✔ Yes  No x Is expansion of the district needed?  Yes ✔ No x Do existing lines serve the project site?  Yes ✔ No LLL Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: x Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: ______Water service would be provided by via a connection to the existing watermain in Arthur Kill Road. x Source(s) of supply for the district: ______NYC supplies water from the Croton watershed, and the combined Catskill and Delaware watershed. LY Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site?  Yes ✔ No If, Yes: x Applicant/sponsor for new district: ______x Date application submitted or anticipated: ______x Proposed source(s) of supply for new district: ______Y If a public water supply will not be used, describe plans to provide water supply for the project: ______YL. If water supply will be from wells (public or private), ZKDWLVWKHmaximum pumping capacity: ______gallons/minute. d. Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? ✔ Yes  No If Yes:

L Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: ______220,633____ gallons/day LL Nature of liquid wastes to be generated (e.g., sanitary wastewater, industrial; if combination, describe all components and approximate volumes or proportions of each): ______Sanitary wastewater ______LLL Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: x Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: ______Oakwood Beach Wastewater Treatment Plant x Name of district: NYC______DEP x Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? ✔ Yes  No x Is the project site in the existing district? ✔ Yes  No x Is expansion of the district needed?  Yes ✔ No

:DWHUOLTXLGZDVWHFDOFXODWLRQVDUHEDVHGXSRQDLUFRQGLWLRQLQJDQGGRPHVWLFFRQVXPSWLRQUDWHVIRUFRPPHUFLDORIILFHXVHSHUWKH&(457HFKQLFDO 0DQXDO  7DEOHIRUVTXDUHIHHWRIQHZFRPPHUFLDOZDUHKRXVLQJDQGVTXDUHIHHWRIH[LVWLQJUHWHQDQWHGPDULWLPHUHODWHG LQGXVWULDOXVHV:DWHUOLTXLGZDVWHJHQHUDWLRQUDWHVDUHDSSUR[LPDWHDQGPD\YDU\EDVHGRQIXWXUHWHQDQWLQJQHHGV:DWHUOLTXLGZDVWHJHQHUDWLRQ LPSDFWVZLOOEHIXOO\HYDOXDWHGDVSDUWRIWKH'UDIW(,6SURFHVV Page 5 of 13 x Do existing sewer lines serve the project site?  Yes ✔ No x Will Dline extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: x Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: ______New on-site wastewater infrastructure would connect to existing NYC DEP sewer infrastructure along Arthur Kill Road. ______LY Will a new wastewater (sewage) treatment district be formed to serve the project site?  Yes ✔ No If Yes: x Applicant/sponsor for new district: ______x Date application submitted or anticipated: ______x What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? ______Y If public facilities will not be used, describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project, including specifying proposed receiving water (name and classification if surface discharge or describe subsurface disposal plans): ______YL Describe any plans or designs to capture, recycle or reuse liquid waste: ______N/A______

e. Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff, either from new point ✔ Yes  No sources (i.e. ditches, pipes, swales, curbs, gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater) or non-point source (i.e. sheet flow) during construction or post construction? If Yes: L How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel? _____ Square feet or _____89.0 acres (impervious surface) _____ Square feet or _____242 acres (parcel size) LL Describe types of new point sources.One ______new outfall and one replacement outfall discharging stormwater runoff collected in two proposed ______stormwater quality basins into the Arthur Kill waterway. LLL Where will the stormwater runoff be directed (i.e. on-site stormwater management facility/structures, adjacent properties, groundwater, on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)? Stormwater______runoff would be collected via a series of subsurface conveyance piping at proposed catch basins and manholes, and would be directed to two proposed______stormwater quality basins to the north of Buildings 2 and 3, respectively. x If to surface waters, identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: ______Stormwater______would ultimately discharge to the Arthur Kill waterway via two outfalls at the two proposed stormwater quality basins. ______x Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties?  Yes ✔ No LY Does WKHproposed plan minimize impervious surfaces, use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater?  Yes ✔ No f. Does the proposed action include, or will it use on-site, one or more sources of air emissions, including fuel ✔ Yes  No combustion, waste incineration, or other processes or operations? If Yes, identify: L. Mobile sources during project operations (e.g., heavy equipment, fleet or delivery vehicles) ______Fleet and delivery vehicles to be determined based on future tenants of the proposed warehouse and light manufacturing and assembly buildings. LL Stationary sources during construction (e.g., power generation, structural heating, batch plant, crushers) Portable______generators and heaters, and other construction equipment to be used on a temporary basis. __ LLL Stationary sources during operations (e.g., process emissions, large boilers, electric generation) HVAC______makeup air system for buildings g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f (above), require a NY State Air Registration, Air Facility Permit,  Yes ✔ No or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit? If Yes: L Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet ✔ Yes  No ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year) LL In addition to emissions as calculated in the application, the project will generate: x ______Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) x ______Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Nitrous Oxide (N22) x ______Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) x ______Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) x ______Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of HydrofloXrocarbons (H)&V) x ______Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)

,PSHUYLRXVVXUIDFHVFDOFXODWHGLQUHODWLRQWRWKHSRVWUHPHGLDWHGVLWH UHPRYDORIWDQNV026)LQIUDVWUXFWXUHSODFHPHQWRIILOO HWF  $LUTXDOLW\LPSDFWVZLOOEHIXOO\DQDO\]HGLQWKH'UDIW(,6SURFHVV Page 6 of 13 h. Will the proposed action generate or emit methane (including, but not limited to, sewage treatment plants,  Yes ✔ No landfills, composting facilities)? If Yes: L Estimate methane generation in tons/year (metric): ______LL. Describe any methane capture, control or elimination measures included in project design (e.g., combustion to generate heat or electricity, flaring): ______i. Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as  Yes ✔ No quarry or landfill operations? If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions (e.g., diesel exhaust, rock particulates/dust): ______j. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial ✔ Yes  No new demand for transportation facilities or services? $7UDIILF,PSDFW6WXG\LVEHLQJSUHSDUHGDVSDUWRIWKH'UDIW(,6SURFHVVWR If Yes: GHWHUPLQHWKHSRWHQWLDOIRUWUDIILFUHODWHGLPSDFWV L When is the peak traffic expected (Check all that apply): † Morning † Evening †Weekend † Randomly between hours of ______to ______. LL For commercial activities only, projected number of truck trips/dayDQGW\SH HJVHPLWUDLOHUVDQGGXPSWUXFNV BBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBSee below* BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB LLL Parking spaces: Existing ______40 BBBBBBProposed ______1,999** Net increase/decrease ______+1,959BBBBBBBB LY 'RHVWKHSURSRVHGDFWLRQLQFOXGHDQ\VKDUHGXVHSDUNLQJ"

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

p. Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum (FRPELQHGFDSDFLW\RIover 1,100 gallons)  Yes ✔ No or chemical productsJDOORQVLQDERYHJURXQGVWRUDJHRUDQ\DPRXQWLQXQGHUJURXQGVWRUDJH? If Yes: L Product(s) to be stored ______LL Volume(s) ______per unit time ______(e.g., month, year) LLL Generally describe WKHproposed storage facilities______q. Will the proposed action (commercial, industrial and recreational projects only) use pesticides (i.e., herbicides, ✔ Yes  No insecticides) during construction or operation? If Yes: L Describe proposed treatment(s): ______Routine use of landscaping maintenance projects would be used in accordance with applicable regulations. ______LL Will the proposed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices?  Yes ✔ No r. Will the proposed action (commercial or industrial projects only) involve or require the management or disposal ✔ Yes  No of solid waste (excluding hazardous materials)? If Yes: L Describe any solid waste(s) to be generated during construction or operation of the facility: x Construction: ______1.5 tons per ______week (unit of time) x Operation : ______64.4* tons per ______week (unit of time) LL Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste: x Construction: Recyclables ______would be collected and disposed in accordance with prevailing City of New York regulations. ______x Operation: ______Recyclables would be collected and disposed in accordance with prevailing City of New York regulations. ______LLL Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site: x Construction: Disposal______by private carter at a licensed facility (to be determined). ______x Operation: ______Disposal by private carter at a licensed facility (to be determined). ______

6ROLGZDVWHJHQHUDWLRQGXULQJRSHUDWLRQRIWKH3URSRVHG'HYHORSPHQWLVEDVHGRQDIDFWRURIOEVHPSOR\HHZHHN FRPPHUFLDOZKROHVDOH IRU DQHVWLPDWHGHPSOR\HHVRIWKHSURSRVHGFRPPHUFLDOZDUHKRXVLQJEXLOGLQJVDQGOEVHPSOR\HHZHHN LQGXVWULDODSSDUHODQGWH[WLOH PDQXIDFWXULQJ IRUDQHVWLPDWHGHPSOR\HHVRIWKHH[LVWLQJUHWHQDQWHGPDULWLPHUHODWHGXVHVSHUWKH&(457HFKQLFDO0DQXDO  7DEOH

Page  of 13 s. Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility?  Yes ✔ No If Yes: L Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site (e.g., recycling or transfer station, composting, landfill, or other disposal activities): ______LL Anticipated rate of disposal/processing: x ______Tons/month, if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment, or x ______Tons/hour, if combustion or thermal treatment LLL If landfill, anticipated site life: ______years t. Will WKHproposed action at the site involve the commercial generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous  Yes ✔ No waste? If Yes: L Name(s) of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated, handled or managed at facility: ______LL Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: ______LLL. Specify amount to be handled or generated _____ tons/month LY Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: ______Y Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility?  Yes  No If Yes: provide name and location of facility: ______If No: describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility: ______

E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action

E.1. Land uses on and surrounding the project site a. Existing land uses. L Check all uses that occur on, adjoining and near the project site.  Urban ✔ Industrial ✔ Commercial ✔ Residential (suburban)  Rural (non-farm) ✔ Forest  Agriculture ✔ Aquatic  Other (specify): ______LL If mix of uses, generally describe: The______Project Site is a former MOSF currently undergoing environmental remediation and closure, with forested lands and wetland areas to the northeast and ______south. The Arthur Kill waterway is adjacent to the north and west, and commercial and industrial uses are located to the northeast and further south. b. Land uses and covertypes on the project site. Land use or Current Acreage After Change Covertype Acreage Project Completion (Acres +/-) x Roads, buildings, and other paved or impervious surfaces 17± 117± +100 x Forested 94± 79± -15 x Meadows, grasslands or brushlands (non- 0 agricultural, including abandoned agricultural) 00 x Agricultural 000 (includes active orchards, field, greenhouse etc.) x Surface water features 000 (lakes, ponds, streams, rivers, etc.) x Wetlands (freshwater or tidal) 20± 18± -2 x Non-vegetated (bare rock, earth or fill) 78± 0 -78 x Other Describe: ______([LVWLQJSURSRVHGODQGXVHVDQGFRYHUW\SHVZLOOEHIXOO\HQXPHUDWHGDQGDQDO\]HGLQWKH'UDIW(,6

Page 9 of 13 c. Is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation?  Yes ✔ No L If Yes: explain: ______d. Are there any facilities serving children, the elderly, people with disabilities (e.g., schools, hospitals, licensed ✔ Yes  No day care centers, or group homes) within 1500 feet of the project site? If Yes, L Identify Facilities: ______Intermediate School 25 is located approximately 550 feet south of the Project Site. ______e. Does the project site contain an existing dam?  Yes ✔ No If Yes: L Dimensions of the dam and impoundment: x Dam height: ______feet x Dam length: ______feet x Surface area: ______acres x Volume impounded: ______gallons OR acre-feet LL Dam=s existing hazard classification: ______LLL Provide date and summarize results of last inspection: ______f. Has the project site ever been used as a municipal, commercial or industrial solid waste management facility,  Yes ✔ No or does the project site adjoin property which is now, or was at one time, used as a solid waste management facility? If Yes: L Has the facility been formally closed?  Yes  No x If yes, cite sources/documentation: ______LL Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility: ______LLL Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: ______g. Have hazardous wastes been generated, treated and/or disposed of at the site, or does the project site adjoin ✔ Yes  No property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste? If Yes: L Describe waste(s) handled and waste management activities, including approximate time when activities occurred: The Project______Site was formerly operated as a MOSF where chemicals and petroleum products where handled. The Applicant is proceeding with consent order remediation______of the site (USEPA AOC Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12-1111-A-SBC). h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site, or have any ✔ Yes  No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site? If Yes: L Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site ✔ Yes  No Remediation database? Check all that apply: ✔ Yes – Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): ______See Attachment. ______✔ Yes – Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ______243016*  Neither database LL If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities, describe control measures:______* ______LLL Is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? ✔ Yes  No If yes, provide DEC ID number(s): 243039 ______LY If yes to (i), (ii) or (iii) above, describe current status of site(s):

Site Code______243039 - Remedial actions associated with the Arthur Kill Correctional Facility Firing Ranges State Superfund Program (Classification Code C) north of______the Project Site have been completed and measures have been implemented to control the potential for coming in contact with residual contamination remaining at the facility. 6LWH&RGH7KURXJK86(3$$2&D)LQDO5&5$)DFLOLW\$VVHVVPHQW 5)$ 5HSRUWZDVLVVXHGLQ-XO\6LQFHWKH5)$5HSRUWZDV LVVXHGD5&5$)DFLOLW\,QYHVWLJDWLRQ  &RUUHFWLYH0HDVXUHV6WXGLHV  D&0,:RUNSODQ  &0,:RUNSODQDGGHQGDIRUVHOHFW 5HPHGLDWLRQ$UHDV  DQGDQXSGDWHG&0,:RUNSODQ  KDYHEHHQFRPSOHWHGDQGWKHVHUHSRUWVDSSURYHGE\WKH86(3$7KH $SSOLFDQWDOVRHQWHUHGLQWRDFRQVHQWRUGHUZLWKWKH1<6'(&LQ6HSWHPEHU7KH026)FORVXUHLVRQJRLQJZKLOHUHPHGLDODFWLYLWLHVDUHEHLQJ SHUIRUPHG

Page 10 of 13 Y Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? ✔ Yes  No x If yes, DEC site ID number: ______243016 x Describe the type of institutional control (e.g., deed restriction or easement): Environmental ______Easement ______x Describe any use limitations: ______only commercial and industrial use, groundwater use prohibited x Describe any engineering controls: ______in-situ stabilization; remedial cap; groundwater monitoring; stormwater system x Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? ✔ Yes  No x Explain: ______Proposed Development features will be a component of the engineering controls. Development would create impervious surfaces on top of the______remedial cap and stormwater system.

E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Site a. What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? ______300± feet EHORZJUDGHVXUIDFH EJV b. Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site?  Yes ✔ No If Yes, what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? ______% c. Predominant soil type(s) present on project site: ______(WWB) Windsor complex ______%20.9 $SSUR[LPDWHO\DFUHVRIWKHDFUH6LWHDUHFXUUHQWO\ ______(HHA) Haledon-Hasbrouck complex ______%5.8 XQGHUJRLQJUHPHGLDWLRQDQGWKXVDFFXUDWHVRLOGDWDLQ ______(VzA) Verrazano sandy loam ______%4.5 WKHVHDUHDLVQRWFXUUHQWO\DYDLODEOH d. What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: ____2.5_____ - 40 feet EJV e. Drainage status of project site soils: ✔ Well Drained: _____%25.5 of Vite 86'$6RLOV'UDLQDJH&ODVVGDWDZDVQRWDYDLODEOHIRU ✔ Moderately Well Drained: _____%4.7 of site DSSUR[LPDWHO\RIWKHDSSUR[LPDWHO\DFUH 3URMHFW6LWHPDLQO\FRLQFLGLQJZLWKIRUPHU026) ✔ 3.5  Poorly Drained _____% of Vite LQIUDVWUXFWXUHWREHUHPRYHGDQGUHPHGLDWHG f. Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes: ✔ 0-10%: _____%89 of site ✔ 10-15%: _____%1 of site ✔ 15% or greater: _____%10 of site g. Are there any unique geologic features on the project site?  Yes ✔ No If Yes, describe: ______h. Surface water features. L Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies (including streams, rivers, ✔ Yes  No ponds or lakes)? LL Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? ✔ Yes  No If Yes to either L or LL, continue. If No, skip to E.2.i. LLL Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, ✔ Yes  No state or local agency? LY For each identified UHJXODWHGwetland and waterbody on the project site, provide the following information x Streams: Name ______Classification ______‡ Lakes or Ponds: Name ______Classification ______t Wetlands: Name ______See below* Approximate Size ______See below* ‡ Wetland No. (if regulated by DEC) ______See below* Y Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired  Yes ✔ No waterbodies? If yes, name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: ______i. Is the project site in a designatedFloodway?  Yes ✔ No j. Is the project site in the 100year Floodplain? ✔ Yes  No k. Is the project site in the 500year Floodplain? ✔ Yes  No l. Is the project site located over, or immediately adjoining, a primary, principal or sole source aquifer?  Yes ✔ No If Yes: L Name of aquifer: ______

7KH3URMHFW6LWHLQFOXGHVIUHVKZDWHUDQGWLGDOZHWODQGVXQGHU86$&(1<6'(&MXULVGLFWLRQDVZHOODVQRQMXULVGLFWLRQDOZHWODQGV$ZHWODQG GHOLQHDWLRQZDVSHUIRUPHGIRUWKH3URMHFW6LWH6HH$WWDFKPHQW3URMHFW1DUUDWLYHDQG$WWDFKPHQW3HUPLW3ODQVIRUGHWDLOVRQH[LVWLQJ ZHWODQGVDQGLPSDFWVWRZHWODQGV Page 11 of 13 m. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: ______See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative ______Groundhog ______Raccoon ______Grey Squirrel ______White-tailed deer ______Green frog Water fowl Migratory birds n. Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: i. Describe the habitat/community (composition, function, and basis for designation): ______Post______Oak-Blackjack Oak Barrens and Red Maple-Sweetgum Swamp have been identified in the vicinity of the site within CPPSPP to the east. ii. Source(s) of description or evaluation: ______NYSDEC Environmental Resource Mapper (ERM) iii. Extent of community/habitat: x Currently: ______TBD acres &RQVXOWDWLRQZLWKWKH1<1+3KDVEHHQLQLWLDWHG DQGSRWHQWLDOLPSDFWVWRGHVLJQHGVLJQLILFDQWQDWXUDO x Following completion of project as proposed: ______TBD acres FRPPXQLWLHVZLOOEHIXOO\DQDO\]HGLQWKH'UDIW x Gain or loss (indicate + or -): ______TBD acres (,6 o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as ✔  Yes  No endangered or threatened, or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species? ,I

See Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, and Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence. Coordination with agencies is ongoing.BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB Impacts to species will be fully analyzed in the Draft EIS process. p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare, or as a species of ✔ Yes  No special concern? ,I

E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Site a. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to  Yes ✔ No Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? If Yes, provide county plus district name/number: ______b. Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present?  Yes ✔ No i. If Yes: acreage(s) on project site? ______ii. Source(s) of soil rating(s): ______c. Does the project site contain all or part of, or is it substantially contiguous to, a registered National  Yes ✔ No Natural Landmark? If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark:  Biological Community  Geological Feature ii. Provide brief description of landmark, including values behind designation and approximate size/extent: ______d. Is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area?  Yes ✔ No If Yes: i. CEA name: ______ii. Basis for designation: ______iii. Designating agency and date: ______

Page 12 of 13 e. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district  Yes ✔ No which is listed onWKH1DWLRQDORU6WDWH5HJLVWHUof Historic PODFHVRUWKDWKDVEHHQ GHWHUPLQHGE\WKH&RPPLVVLRQHURIWKH1<6 2IILFHRI3DUNV5HFUHDWLRQDQG+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQWREHHOLJLEOHIRUOLVWLQJRQWKH6WDWH5HJLVWHU of Historic Places? If Yes: i. Nature of historic/archaeological resource:  Archaeological Site  Historic Building or District ii. Name: ______iii. Brief description of attributes on which listing is based: ______f. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for ✔ Yes  No archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory? g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s) or resources been identified on the project site? ✔ Yes  No If Yes: i. Describe possible resource(s): See ______below** ii. Basis for identification: BioGas ______Corp Proposed Anaerobic Digester Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study, May 2018. h. ,Vthe project site ZLWKLQILYHVPLOHVRI any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state, or local ✔ Yes  No scenic or aesthetic resource? If Yes: i. Identify resource: ______Clay Pit Ponds State Park Preserve (CPPSPP) ii. Nature of, or basis for, designation (e.g., established highway overlook, state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway, etc.): State______Park, Nature Preserve and Bird Conservation Area iii. Distance between project and resource: ______less than 1 miles. i. Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers  Yes ✔ No Program 6 NYCRR 666? If Yes: i. Identify the name of the river and its designation: ______ii. Is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666?  Yes  No

F. Additional Information Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project.

If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal, please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them.

G. Verification I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge.

Applicant/Sponsor Name ______David Rickard Date______5/11/2021

Signature______Title______Development Manager

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

PRINT FORM Page 13 of 13 Attachment 11.0

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Structural Archaeological Assessment Form

Attachment 11.1 NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative Attachment 11.2 SAAF - Locations of Existing Structures Over 50 Years Old STRUCTURAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FORM (SAAF) 6XSSOHPHQWWRWKH-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUP

PART 1 – APPLICANT COMPLETES

APPLICANT INFORMATION

1. Applicant Name: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Attn: David Rickard

2. Applicant Address: 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500, Riverside, MO 64150

PROJECT INFORMATION

3. Project/Facility Name: Port Mobil Redevelopment

4. Project/Facility Location: 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York 10309

5. Is the proposed project adjacent to, or does it contain a building or structure listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places? Yes ■ No

6. Are there any buildings or structures 50 years old or older adjacent to or within the proposed project area? ■ Yes No

If the answer to question 5 and /or 6 is yes, provide the following information for each building and structure (use attachments if necessary):

a. Name of structure: See Attachment 11.1, NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative

b. Location: See Attachment 11.2, SAAF Locations of Existing Structures Over 50 Years Old

c. Type of structure (ex. house, outbuilding, barn, bridge, dam, ruins):

d. Approximate age or date of construction:

7. Might the proposed project have any impact (physical/visual) upon any buildings or structures listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places or 50 years old or older?■ Yes No

If yes, describe briefly (use attachments if necessary):

See Attachment 11.1, NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative

WW>/Ed^d/KEKEd/Eh^KEZsZ^^/ UHY ^& 8. Provide photographs of every building and structure that may be impacted by the project as described in number 7, on the opposite side of this page. The following standards are recommended: x Minimum of 2 photographs x Photographs must be 3.5” x 5” in size or larger x Photos must be clear and focused x Digital photographs must be printed on photo paper and be produced at a printer setting of a minimum of 600 dpi x Clearly label photos so it is obvious what is being illustrated; key photos to map or plan, if possible x Photo 1: show both the entire front and side of the structure in a single shot from as close to the building as possible. Be sure the structure is not partially or fully blocked by trees or other obstructions x Photo 2: show relationship of building or structure to roadway or surroundings

9. Has the land within the proposed project area been previously disturbed or altered (excavated, landscaped, filled, utilities installed)? ■ Yes No

If yes, describe briefly, including depth of disturbance (use attachments if necessary):

See Attachment 11.1, NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative

10. Approximate percentage of proposed project area with slopes: x 0-10% ____89 %

1 x 10-15% ____%

10 x 15% or greater ____%

11. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with the following drainage characteristics:

25.5 x Well drained ____%

4.7 x Moderately well drained ____%

3.5 x Poorly drained ____%

Prepared By (Print or type name): Rejina Sharma

Signature: Date: 5/11/21

RESET PART 1 ^&

PART 2 – DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC) COMPLETES APPLICANT/PROJECT INFORMATION

1.Applicant Name:

2. Project/Facility Name:

3. DEC Number:

BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES

4. Might the proposed project have any impact (physical/visual) upon any buildings or structures listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places or 50 years old or older? Yes No

If yes, DEC must consult with the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP). DEC must request a determination of eligibility for the State Register of Historic Places and/or comments regarding project impact. Include information supplied by the applicant in response to questions 5, 6, 7 and 8 of WĂƌƚϭ of this form.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES

5. Does the proposed project area coincide with a circle, square or stippled area on OPRHP’s Statewide Archaeological Inventory Map? Yes No

6. Is the proposed project area outside of a circle or square, but one for which information has been provided (ex: documented reports of known sites) that suggests the area is archaeologically sensitive? Yes No

If yes, what is the nature and source of information?

7. Is the proposed project area apparently undisturbed? Yes No

8. Will the proposed action include a physical disturbance of the project area? Yes No

9. Is the slope in the area characteristically less than 15% (unless on limestone/flint escarpments)? Yes No

^d/KEKEd/Eh^KEZsZ^^/ ^&

10. Is the proposed project area characteristically moderately well or well drained? Yes No

If the answers to 5, 7-10 are yes, an archeological survey should be performed by the applicant. Provide the applicant with a copy of or the link to the State Historic Preservation Office Phase 1 Archaeological Report Format Requirements (08/05).

If the answer to 5 is no, but answers to 6-10 are yes, DEC must consult with OPRHP before requiring that the applicant perform an archaeological survey.

RESULTS OF EVALUATION

SHPA-1 No buildings, structures or archaeological sites identified at the project location.

SHPA-2 Buildings, structures or archaeological sites identified, but no impacts will occur, no survey required. No further cultural resources review required.

Consultation by DEC with OPRHP required. Structures

Archaeology

Archaeological survey required.

Prepared by: Date:

RESET PART 2

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York  This document supplements questions on the NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form (SAAF).

6. Are there any buildings or structures 50 years or older adjacent to or within the proposed project area? The Site is composed of a former Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF) located on approximately 120 acres of the greater 242-acre subject property that was constructed in 1934 and decommissioned in 2019 (see Attachment 2.0, Project Narrative, for further details on existing Site conditions). The former MOSF is a structure within the site greater than 50 years old currently undergoing remediation pursuant to two Consent Orders.1 The waterfront portion of the Site consists of 3 existing one-to-two story buildings (or “structures”) that are 50 years old or older (see table below for approximate ages) and were associated with former industrial operations. Locations of these buildings and the MOSF infrastructure are shown in Attachment 11.2, SAAF Locations of Existing Structures Over 50 Years Old. There are no existing buildings or structures within or adjacent to the Site listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places. Existing Buildings/Structures within the Site:

Approximate age/ Potential impacts to buildings or structures Structure1 Type of Structure date of construction 2 50+ years old MOSF and Not Applicable - Demolition and Structure associated 1934 remediation is ongoing pursuant to 1 infrastructure Consent Orders and not part of the Project Building One to two story 1934 3 To be demolished G metal building To be retained under the Project - Building One story metal 1955 4 H building Minor visual changes, no significant adverse impacts To be retained under the Project - Building One story brick 1934 3 I building Minor visual changes, no significant adverse impacts Notes: 1 See Attachment 11.2, SAAF Locations of Existing Structures Over 50 Years Old, to reference structure locations. 2 Approximate age of construction estimated from review of historic aerials at historicaerials.com. 3 Structure G and I were likely constructed concurrent with MOSF infrastructure in 1934. 4 Structure H construction began as early as 1954 and was completed as late as 1963.

7. Might the proposed project have any impact (physical/visual) upon any buildings or structures listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places or 50 years old or older? Demolition and remediation of the MOSF and associated infrastructure is ongoing pursuant to Consent Orders and will be completed prior to construction of the Project. Site remediation is not part of the Project. Therefore, the Project will have no impact on Structure 1, MOSF and associated infrastructure.

 1USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12- 1111-A-SBC.  Joint Application for Permit Attachment 11.1, NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative 1 of 3

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York 

Buildings G, H, and I are more than 50 years old. Existing buildings H and I as well as the existing bulkhead and pavement platforms that surround them would be retained as part of the Project to support a planned future marine service yard use. The existing waterfront bulkhead area is anticipated to retain its current visual character as a working waterfront. While redevelopment of the Site has the potential to result in visual impacts on the existing structures more than 50 years old that are being retained as part of the Project, the proposed development – four commercial warehouse buildings – would be less intense as compared to previous heavy industrial operations at the former MOSF. Any potential visual impacts on buildings H and I that are more than 50 years old would, therefore, be minimal and beneficial.

As mentioned in the table above, structure/building G is proposed for demolition under the Project. Although this building is older than 50 years, it does not contain any known historical value to the Site or surrounding areas and therefore, its demolition would not be considered to result in significant impacts to historical resources. Coordination with the OPRHP is ongoing regarding the potential for impacts to historical resources within the Site. In a letter from the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) dated 4/28/2021, LPC confirmed there are no properties with Architectural significance within the Site (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for a copy of the LPC letter).

8. Provide photographs of every building and structure that may be impacted by the project as described in number 7, on the opposite side of this page.

See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs, for photos of Buildings G, H, and I.

9. Has the land within the proposed project area been previously disturbed or altered (excavated, landscaped, filled, utilities installed)?

Construction of the former MOSF in the 1930’s resulted in the substantial alteration of approximately 120 acres of the Site’s natural topography for heavy industrial uses. While historic depth of disturbance in this area is currently being identified, substantial excavation and associated earthwork is likely to have occurred for the placement of the 38 existing aboveground petroleum storage tanks (and associated below-grade utilities); each tank is also enclosed with earthen secondary containment berms between 10 to 12 feet in elevation. As previously introduced, the former MOSF closed in 2019 and, pursuant to the Consent Orders, is currently undergoing on-site soil and groundwater remediation involving the importation of fill material and placement of a clean cap. Additional disturbance on the waterfront portion of the Site is attributed to the existing 3,100 linear feet of waterfront bulkhead previously used for the import and export of petroleum products.

The Site also contains a 15.4-acre ground-mounted solar array field adjacent to the southeast of the former MOSF that required the net removal of 10,000± cubic yards of material for the placement of solar arrays and installation of associated below-grade utilities in 2016.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 11.1, NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative 2 of 3

NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York 

11. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with the following drainage characteristics:

USDA Soils Drainage Class data created by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) was obtained for the Site to determine drainage characteristics. The NRCS data was not available for approximately 66.3% of the approximately 242-acre Site, mainly coinciding with the MOSF infrastructure to be removed and remediated.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 11.1, NYSDEC Structural Archaeological Assessment Form Narrative 3 of 3 LEGEND Project Site Buildings Over 50 Years Old I Approximate Remedial Cap Limits

0200400600100

SCALE IN FEET

Structure 1 (one) Solar Major Oil Storage Array Facility (MOSF) and Associated Infrastructure Arthur Kill Road 021.mxd

Building G

Building H Ellis Road

Building I

Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

SAAF - /RFDWLRQVRI ATTACHMENT PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT NUMBER: 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD Existing StructuresOver BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 & BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 50 Years Old Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND and Landscape Architecture, P.C. DRAWN BY: APPROVED BY: PROJECT NO.: 26 Columbia Turnpike Tel: 973.240.1800 MD RS 20-383 13.2 RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK Florham Park, NJ 07932 Fax: 973.240.1818 DATE: DATE: SCALE: WBE / DBE matrixneworld.com 05-10-2021 05-10-2021 1 " = 392 ' F:\2020\20-383 Kinder Morgan Staten Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDs - Permitting\Att 11.2 - SAAF Existing Structures Over 50 Years Old 051 OldF:\2020\20-383 KinderMorganSAAF Staten Existing - Island\GIS\MXDs\MXDsYears Structures Over 50 Permitting\Att11.2 - Attachment 12.0 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Record of Compliance

Attachment 12.1 Record of Compliance Supplement $  H '(3$570(1786(21/< 1(:<25.67$7('(3$570(172)(19,5210(17$/&216(59$7,21 '(&$33/,&$7,21180%(5 5(&25'2)&203/,$1&(3HUPLW$SSOLFDWLRQ6XSSOHPHQW 3OHDVHUHDGDOOLQVWUXFWLRQVRQUHYHUVHVLGHEHIRUHFRPSOHWLQJWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQ  )8//1$0(2)$33/,&$17 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard  0$,/,1*$''5(66 3ULQFLSDO3ODFHRI%XVLQHVV  1(:<25.67$7(0$,/,1*$''5(66 ,IGLIIHUHQW 6WUHHW 6WUHHW 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500

&LW\6WDWH=LS&RGH &LW\6WDWH=LS&RGH Riverside, MO 64150   7<3(2)25*$1,=$7,21 ,QGLYLGXDO 3DUWQHUVKLS ,IRWKHUWKDQLQGLYLGXDOSURYLGH)HGHUDO7D[SD\HU,'1XPEHU &RPSDQ\ ✔ &RUSRUDWLRQ 2WKHU 85-0868506  'RHVWKH DSSOLFDQW FXUUHQWO\ KROGDQ\ SHUPLW LVVXHGXQGHUWKH (QYLURQPHQWDO&RQVHUYDWLRQ /DZ" ✔ 

D 

E

,7(067+528*+72%(&203/(7('%<$1$33/,&$1727+(57+$1$1,1',9,'8$/  63(&,)<81'(5:+$7/$:$33/,&$17:$625*$1,=('  67$7(  '$7(2)25*$1,=$7,21

 &(57,),&$7,21 %\DQ$SSOLFDQW2WKHU7KDQDQ,QGLYLGXDO ,KHUHE\DIILUPXQGHUSHQDOW\RISHUMXU\WKDW,DP Development Manager WLWOH RI NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC HQWLW\  WKDW,DPDXWKRUL]HGE\WKDWHQWLW\WRPDNHWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQWKDWWKLVDSSOLFDWLRQZDVSUHSDUHGE\PHRUXQGHUP\VXSHUYLVLRQDQGGLUHFWLRQDQGWKDW LQIRUPDWLRQSURYLGHGRQWKLVIRUPDQGDWWDFKHGVWDWHPHQWVDQGH[KLELWVLVWUXHWRWKHEHVWRIP\NQRZOHGJHDQGEHOLHI,DPDZDUHWKDWDQ\IDOVHVWDWHPHQW PDGHKHUHLQLVSXQLVKDEOHDVD&ODVVV$$PLVGHPHDQRUPLVVGHPHDQRUSXUVXDQWWSXUVXDQW R6HFWLRQRIWKH3HQDO/DZ 'DWH 6LJQDWXUHDWXUH 3ULQW1DPH 5/11/2021 David Rickard NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

This document provides supplementary information to the NYSDEC Record of Compliance Permit Application Statement.

5. Does the applicant currently hold any permit issued under the Environmental Conservation Law?

Existing Permit Authorizations for Port Mobil facility: Application Permit Type Regulations Permit ID Effective Expiration Type ECL Article New 06/18/15 12/31/21 Tidal Wetlands 2-6405-00073/00076 25 Modification 01/04/18 12/31/21 Clean Water New 06/18/15 12/31/21 Water Quality Act, Section 2-6405-00073/00077 Certification Modification 01/04/18 12/31/21 401 Excavation & Fill New 06/18/15 12/31/21 ECL Article in Navigable 2-6405-00073/00078 15, Title 5 Modification 01/04/18 12/31/21 Waters ECL Article New 12/20/17 12/19/27 Tidal Wetlands 2-6405-00073/00082 25 Modification 02/28/19 12/19/27 Industrial SPDES ECL Article 2-6405-00073/00024 Minor – Surface 02/11/21 10/31/23 17, Title 8 (Transfer NY0004961) Modification Discharge

6b. Is the applicant currently the subject of an enforcement action under the Environmental Conservation Law?

The Site is the former Port Mobil facility, which had operated as a Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF) since the 1930’s. The MOSF was closed in 2019 and the 38 existing aboveground storage tanks on the property were shut down in accordance with the MOSF permit. The Applicant is party to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Orders on Consent, originally dated August 2009 and September 2020, respectively, which dictate the site remediation and closure requirements in accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the MOSF permit.1

1 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12- 1111-A-SBC.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 12.1, NYSDEC Record of Compliance Supplement 1 of 1 Attachment 13.0

New York City (NYC) Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) Consistency Assessment Form (CAF)

Attachment 13.1 NYC WRP CAF Narrative Attachment 13.2 Policy 6.2 Flood Evaluation Worksheet

FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY WRP No. ______Date Received: ______DOS No. ______

NEW YORK CITY WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM Consistency Assessment Form

Proposed actions that are subject to CEQR, ULURP or other local, state or federal discretionary review procedures, and that are within New York City’s Coastal Zone, must be reviewed and assessed for their consistency with the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) which has been approved as part of the State’s Coastal Management Program. This form is intended to assist an applicant in certifying that the proposed activity is consistent with the WRP. It should be completed when the local, state, or federal application is prepared. The completed form and accompanying information will be used by the New York State Department of State, the New York City Department of City Planning, or other city or state agencies in their review of the applicant’s certification of consistency.

A. APPLICANT INFORMATION

Name of Applicant: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard

Name of Applicant Representative: Robert Fiorile

Address: 26 Columbia Turnpike, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

Telephone: 973-845-7505 Email: [email protected]

Project site owner (if different than above): NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC ATTN: David Rickard

B. PROPOSED ACTIVITY If more space is needed, include as an attachment. 1. Brief description of activity NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island into a warehouse complex. The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, 10309. The proposed project would construct four one-story buildings with a net total floor area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet. Developed waterfront portions of the site would be retained for a marine service yard industrial use. Refer to the attached Consistency Assessment Form Narrative for further details.

2. Purpose of activity The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned Site into a warehouse complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehouse space, reactivating a working waterfront use, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, while preserving valuable natural resources within the Site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goals of the comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses. Refer to the attached Consistency Assessment Form Narrative for further details.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

1 C. PROJECT LOCATION

Borough: Staten Island Tax Block/Lot(s): Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1

Street Address: 4101 Arthur Kill Road

Name of water body (if located on the waterfront): Arthur Kill tidal strait

D. REQUIRED ACTIONS OR APPROVALS Check all that apply.

City Actions/Approvals/Funding

City Planning Commission ✔ Yes No City Map Amendment ✔ Zoning Certification Concession Zoning Map Amendment ✔ Zoning Authorizations UDAAP Zoning Text Amendment Acquisition – Real Property Revocable Consent Site Selection – Public Facility Disposition – Real Property Franchise Housing Plan & Project Other, explain: ______Special Permit (if appropriate, specify type: Modification Renewal other) Expiration Date:

Board of Standards and Appeals Yes ✔ No Variance (use) Variance (bulk) Special Permit (if appropriate, specify type: Modification Renewal other) Expiration Date:

Other City Approvals Legislation Funding for Construction, specify: Rulemaking Policy or Plan, specify: Construction of Public Facilities Funding of Program, specify: 384 (b) (4) Approval ✔ Permits, specify: See attached Narrative Other, explain:

State Actions/Approvals/Funding

✔ State permit or license, specify Agency: See attached Narrative Permit type and number: Funding for Construction, specify: Funding of a Program, specify: Other, explain:

Federal Actions/Approvals/Funding

✔ Federal permit or license, specify Agency: See attached Narrative Permit type and number: Funding for Construction, specify: Funding of a Program, specify: Other, explain:

Is this being reviewed in conjunction with a Joint Application for Permits? ✔ Yes No

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

2 E. LOCATION QUESTIONS

1. Does the project require a waterfront site? ✔ Yes No

2. Would the action result in a physical alteration to a waterfront site, including land along the ✔ shoreline, land under water or coastal waters? Yes No 3. Is the project located on publicly owned land or receiving public assistance? Yes ✔ No

4. Is the project located within a FEMA 1% annual chance floodplain? (6.2) ✔ Yes No

5. Is the project located within a FEMA 0.2% annual chance floodplain? (6.2) ✔ Yes No

6. Is the project located adjacent to or within a special area designation? See Maps – Part III of the ✔ Yes No NYC WRP. If so, check appropriate boxes below and evaluate policies noted in parentheses as part of WRP Policy Assessment (Section F).

✔ Significant Maritime and Industrial Area (SMIA) (2.1) Special Natural Waterfront Area (SNWA) (4.1) ✔ Priority MariWLPe Activity Zone (PMAZ) (3.5) ✔ Recognized Ecological Complex (REC) (4.4) West Shore Ecologically Sensitive Maritime and Industrial Area (ESMIA) (2.2, 4.2)

F. WRP POLICY ASSESSMENT Review the project or action for consistency with the WRP policies. For each policy, check Promote, Hinder or Not Applicable (N/A). For more information about consistency review process and determination, see Part I of the NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program. When assessing each policy, review the full policy language, including all sub-policies, contained within Part II of the WRP. The relevance of each applicable policy may vary depending upon the project type and where it is located (i.e. if it is located within one of the special area designations). For those policies checked Promote or Hinder, provide a written statement on a separate page that assesses the effects of the proposed activity on the relevant policies or standards. If the project or action promotes a policy, explain how the action would be consistent with the goals of the policy. If it hinders a policy, consideration should be given toward any practical means of altering or modifying the project to eliminate the hindrance. Policies that would be advanced by the project should be balanced against those that would be hindered by the project. If reasonable modifications to eliminate the hindrance are not possible, consideration should be given as to whether the hindrance is of such a degree as to be substantial, and if so, those adverse effects should be mitigated to the extent practicable. Promote Hinder N/A Support and facilitate commercial and residential redevelopment in areas well-suited 1 ✔ to such development.

1.1 Encourage commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate Coastal Zone areas. ✔

Encourage non-industrial development with uses and design features that enliven the waterfront 1.2 ✔ and attract the public.

Encourage redevelopment in the Coastal Zone where public facilities and infrastructure are 1.3 ✔ adequate or will be developed.

In areas adjacent to SMIAs, ensure new residential development maximizes compatibility with 1.4 ✔ existing adjacent maritime and industrial uses.

Integrate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of 1.5 ✔ waterfront residential and commercial development, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

3 Promote Hinder N/A Support water-dependent and industrial uses in New York City coastal areas that are 2 ✔ well-suited to their continued operation.

2.1 Promote water-dependent and industrial uses in Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas. ✔

Encourage a compatible relationship between working waterfront uses, upland development and 2.2 ✔ natural resources within the Ecologically Sensitive Maritime and Industrial Area.

Encourage working waterfront uses at appropriate sites outside the Significant Maritime and 2.3 ✔ Industrial Areas or Ecologically Sensitive Maritime Industrial Area.

2.4 Provide infrastructure improvements necessary to support working waterfront uses. ✔

Incorporate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of 2.5 ✔ waterfront industrial development and infrastructure, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2.

Promote use of New York City's waterways for commercial and recreational boating 3 ✔ and water-dependent transportation.

3.1. Support and encourage in-water recreational activities in suitable locations. ✔

Support and encourage recreational, educational and commercial boating in New York City's 3.2 ✔ maritime centers.

3.3 Minimize conflicts between recreational boating and commercial ship operations. ✔

Minimize impact of commercial and recreational boating activities on the aquatic environment and 3.4 ✔ surrounding land and water uses.

In Priority Marine Activity Zones, support the ongoing maintenance of maritime infrastructure for 3.5 ✔ water-dependent uses.

Protect and restore the quality and function of ecological systems within the New 4 ✔ York City coastal area.

Protect and restore the ecological quality and component habitats and resources within the Special 4.1 ✔ Natural Waterfront Areas.

Protect and restore the ecological quality and component habitats and resources within the 4.2 ✔ Ecologically Sensitive Maritime and Industrial Area.

4.3 Protect designated Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats. ✔

4.4 Identify, remediate and restore ecological functions within Recognized Ecological Complexes. ✔

4.5 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. ✔ In addition to wetlands, seek opportunities to create a mosaic of habitats with high ecological value 4.6 and function that provide environmental and societal benefits. Restoration should strive to ✔ incorporate multiple habitat characteristics to achieve the greatest ecological benefit at a single location. Protect vulnerable plant, fish and wildlife species, and rare ecological communities. Design and 4.7 develop land and water uses to maximize their integration or compatibility with the identified ✔ ecological community.

4.8 Maintain and protect living aquatic resources. ✔

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

4 Promote Hinder N/A

5 Protect and improve water quality in the New York City coastal area. ✔

5.1 Manage direct or indirect discharges to waterbodies. ✔

Protect the quality of New York City's waters by managing activities that generate nonpoint 5.2 ✔ source pollution.

Protect water quality when excavating or placing fill in navigable waters and in or near marshes, 5.3 ✔ estuaries, tidal marshes, and wetlands.

5.4 Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands. ✔

Protect and improve water quality through cost-effective grey-infrastructure and in-water 5.5 ✔ ecological strategies.

Minimize loss of life, structures, infrastructure, and natural resources caused by flooding 6 ✔ and erosion, and increase resilience to future conditions created by climate change.

Minimize losses from flooding and erosion by employing non-structural and structural management 6.1 ✔ measures appropriate to the site, the use of the property to be protected, and the surrounding area.

Integrate consideration of the latest New York City projections of climate change and sea level 6.2 rise (as published in New York City Panel on Climate Change 2015 Report, Chapter 2: Sea Level Rise and ✔ Coastal Storms) into the planning and design of projects in the city’s Coastal Zone. Direct public funding for flood prevention or erosion control measures to those locations where 6.3 ✔ the investment will yield significant public benefit.

6.4 Protect and preserve non-renewable sources of sand for beach nourishment. ✔ Minimize environmental degradation and negative impacts on public health from solid 7 waste, toxic pollutants, hazardous materials, and industrial materials that may pose ✔ risks to the environment and public health and safety. Manage solid waste material, hazardous wastes, toxic pollutants, substances hazardous to the 7.1 environment, and the unenclosed storage of industrial materials to protect public health, control ✔ pollution and prevent degradation of coastal ecosystems.

7.2 Prevent and remediate discharge of petroleum products. ✔

Transport solid waste and hazardous materials and site solid and hazardous waste facilities in a 7.3 ✔ manner that minimizes potential degradation of coastal resources.

8 Provide public access to, from, and along New York City's coastal waters. ✔

8.1 Preserve, protect, maintain, and enhance physical, visual and recreational access to the waterfront. ✔

Incorporate public access into new public and private development where compatible with 8.2 ✔ proposed land use and coastal location.

8.3 Provide visual access to the waterfront where physically practical. ✔

Preserve and develop waterfront open space and recreation on publicly owned land at suitable 8.4 ✔ locations.

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

5 Promote Hinder N/A

8.5 Preserve the public interest in and use of lands and waters held in public trust by the State and City. ✔

Design waterfront public spaces to encourage the waterfront’s identity and encourage 8.6 ✔ stewardship. Protect scenic resources that contribute to the visual quality of the New York City 9 ✔ coastal area.

Protect and improve visual quality associated with New York City's urban context and the historic 9.1 ✔ and working waterfront.

9.2 Protect and enhance scenic values associated with natural resources. ✔

Protect, preserve, and enhance resources significant to the historical, archaeological, 10 ✔ architectural, and cultural legacy of the New York City coastal area.

Retain and preserve historic resources, and enhance resources significant to the coastal culture of 10.1 ✔ New York City.

10.2 Protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts. ✔

G. CERTIFICATION

The applicant or agent must certify that the proposed activity is consistent with New York City’s approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, pursuant to New York State’s Coastal Management Program. If this certification cannot be made, the proposed activity shall not be undertaken. If this certification can be made, complete this Section.

"The proposed activity complies with New York State's approved Coastal Management Program as expressed in New York City’s approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, pursuant to New York State’s Coastal Management Program, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program."

Applicant/Agent's Name: Robert Fiorile 26 Columbia Turnpike, Florham Park, New Jersey 07932 Address: 973-845-7505 [email protected] Telephone: Email:

Applicant/Agent's Signature:

Date:

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

6 Submission Requirements

For all actions requiring City Planning Commission approval, materials should be submitted to the Department of City Planning.

For local actions not requiring City Planning Commission review, the applicant or agent shall submit materials to the Lead Agency responsible for environmental review. A copy should also be sent to the Department of City Planning.

For State actions or funding, the Lead Agency responsible for environmental review should transmit its WRP consistency assessment to the Department of City Planning.

For Federal direct actions, funding, or permits applications, including Joint Applicants for Permits, the applicant or agent shall also submit a copy of this completed form along with his/her application to the NYS Department of State Office of Planning and Development and other relevant state and federal agencies. A copy of the application should be provided to the NYC Department of City Planning.

The Department of City Planning is also available for consultation and advisement regarding WRP consistency procedural matters.

New York City Department of City Planning New York State Department of State Waterfront and Open Space Division Office of Planning and Development 120 Broadway, 31st Floor Suite 1010 New York, New York 10271 One Commerce Place, 99 Washington Avenue 212-720-366 Albany, New York 12231-0001 [email protected] 518474-6000 www.nyc.gov/wrp www.dos.ny.gov/opd/programs/consistency

Applicant Checklist

✔ Copy of original signed NYC Consistency Assessment Form

✔ Attachment with consistency assessment statements for all relevant policies

✔ )RU-RLQW$SSOLFDWLRQVIRU3HUPLWVRQH  FRS\RIWKHFRPSOHWHDSSOLFDWLRQSDFNDJH

✔ (QYLURQPHQWDO5HYLHZGRFXPHQWV

✔ 'UDZLQJV SODQVVHFWLRQVHOHYDWLRQV VXUYH\VSKRWRJUDSKVPDSVRURWKHULQIRUPDWLRQRUPDWHULDOV ZKLFKZRXOGVXSSRUWWKHFHUWLILFDWLRQRIFRQVLVWHQF\DQGDUHQRWLQFOXGHGLQRWKHUGRFXPHQWV VXEPLWWHG$OOGUDZLQJVVKRXOGEHFOHDUO\ODEHOHGDQGDWDVFDOHWKDWLVOHJLEOH

3ROLF\)ORRG(OHYDWLRQZRUNVKHHWLIDSSOLFDEOH)RUJXLGDQFHRQDSSOLFDELOLW\UHIHUWRWKH:533ROLF\ ✔ *XLGDQFHGRFXPHQWDYDLODEOHDWZZZQ\FJRYZUS

NYC WRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM – 2016

7 NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM CONSISTENCY ASSESMENT FOR

PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT

BLOCK 7207, LOT 60 AND BLOCK 7247, LOT 1 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD BOUNDED BY ARTHUR KILL ROAD, ELLIS ROAD, AND PART OF JOHNSON STREET BOROUGH OF STATEN ISLAND, RICHMOND COUNTY, NEW YORK

Submitted to: New York City Department of City Planning Waterfront and Open Space Division 120 Broadway, 31st Floor New York, New York 10271

Prepared For: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC 4825 NW 41st Street, Suite 500 Riverside, MO 64150

Prepared By: Matrix New World Engineering 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

Matrix Project No.: 20-383

May 2021 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

This narrative has been prepared in support of the New York City’s Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) policy consistency assessment for the Port Mobil Redevelopment project.

B. PROPOSED ACTIVITY

Description of the proposed activity: NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC (the “Applicant”) proposes to redevelop an approximately 242-acre property located along the West Shore of Staten Island into a warehouse complex (the “Project”). The Project is proposed on a brownfield site at 4101 Arthur Kill Road in Community District 3 (CD 3) of the Borough of Staten Island, New York, identified on the New York City Tax Map as Block 7207, Lot 60 and Block 7247, Lot 1 (the “Site”). The Project would include the following elements:

x Construct four (4) commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximately 2.15± million SF with the following breakdown for each building; o Building 1: approximately 229,632 SF o Building 2: approximately 477,880 SF o Building 3: approximately 1,225,120 SF o Building 4: approximately 215,280 SF x Construct parking areas that would support tenant requirements and include passenger (employee) vehicle parking totaling 1,999 spaces and additionally include approximately 400 loading berths and approximately 550 commercial trailer parking spaces; x Construct internal access roads and an additional access point (curb cut) off Arthur Kill Road at the southeastern region of the Site; x Relocate the existing ground-mouted solar array to top of proposed buildings; x Perform several offsite road frontage improvements along Arthur Kill Road including widening the roadway, providing curb and gutter improvements, constructing sidewalks, and installing a new traffic signal; x Install new sanitary sewer, water, electrial, and gas infrastructure within the Site; x Preserve the existing developed, waterfront portion of the Site, including bulkhead and three of the five existing buildings1 with a total of approximately 30,333 SF that support waterfront uses, to be tenanted as a marine service yard with industrial use; and x Construct a series of catch basins and subsurface conveyance piping connecting to two proposed stormwater quality basins with vegetation that would ultimately discharge to the Arthur Kill through two new outfalls (one new outfall and one replacement outfall). The NYCDCP is the lead agency for the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR). Site remediation pursuant to two consent orders2 is ongoing, and is not part of the Project.

1 Buildings A, H, and I to be preserved. See Attachment 5.0, Photo Key Map and Site Photographs. 2 USEPA Administrative Order on Consent Docket No. RCRA-02-2009-7306; and NYSDEC Order on Consent Case No. 12-1111-A-SBC.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 1 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Purpose of the proposed activity: The Project would serve to redevelop the currently unutilized Site and fulfill a need for large-scale warehouse building space in Staten Island, and New York City as a whole. The Project is on a brownfield that is one of the largest, unutilized sites in the area. Site selection included consideration of a few slightly smaller sites on Staten Island, but these sites have more restrictive environmental constraints, mainly relating to presence of tidal and freshwater wetlands. The Site was selected for multiple reasons including its historic use as a significant industrial development and its existing developed and disturbed nature that minimizes encroachments into previously undisturbed environments when compared to the aforementioned sites. Development on this Site has several constraints due to the redevelopment occurring above a remedial cap for the former Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF); adjacency to the Arthur Kill River; and the presence of natural areas adjacent to the existing developed and disturbed footprint of the MOSF. These unique Site conditions necessitate a project of sufficient size to off-set costs for a complex, large-scale development. The Applicant has performed extensive market analyses in selecting both the location for the Project and the proposed redevelopment design. Specifically, market analyses performed for the Project indicate a continued trend toward online shopping that has resulted in a deficit of warehouse space available to serve Long Island and the 5 boroughs of NYC, and indicates this location would address the market demand to serve at least 14 million people, and up to 23 million people, in a 30 mile radius. The redevelopment has been designed to provide the 2.15 million square feet of space required for the client to see a return on their investment. The building sizes and layouts identified in the project plans have been selected specifically to meet the target markets identified for this location; one anchor logistics tenant with supporting warehouse buildings specifically sized to meet the requirements of the anticipated tenant needs. In order to meet very specific storage and loading requirements, the largest proposed building design includes interior spaces for racking and movement of equipment and exterior loading/offloading areas on both sides of the building. Without the building depth identified on the plans, the building would not be marketable to a logistics tenant that is intended as the anchor for this entire redevelopment. Additionally, due to the remedial cap, the former MOSF area will be elevated to a grade that limits extending or changing orientation of the development further toward the waterfront area as it would encroach into the area necessary to attract the future marine service operator. The formerly operating MOSF within the Site was decommissioned in 2019 and the Site is undergoing remediation pursuant to two consent orders. Although the proposed redevelopment is expediting Site remediation and being carried out by the Applicant, it is not subject to discretionary approvals and is not part of the proposed Project discussed herein. The purpose of the Project is to redevelop the privately-owned Site into a warehouse complex that would benefit the Charleston-Tottenville neighborhood of Staten Island and the larger metropolitan region by providing much needed commercial warehouse space, reactivating an industrial maritime use, increasing the local workforce, and providing upgrades to the local road network, while preserving valuable natural resources within the Site to the maximum extent practicable. The Project would additionally promote several goals of the comprehensive development plan Working West Shore 2030 and would be consistent with intents of the Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) to promote industrial uses. The Project would meet the increasing market demand for warehousing space through construction of 4 buildings, totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet (SF), dedicated to warehousing and logistics uses, and would activate a marine service yard industrial use along the waterfront. The proposed warehouse and marine service yard industrial uses are consistent with the underlying M3-1 zoning district

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 2 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

that the Site is within and would be reactivating a former industrial area which had closed in 2019, consistent with IBZ intents. The scale of the Project is critical to support future success of the development at the Site and to meet the needs of potential local and national retail distribution networks. Other logistics parks on Staten Island – including the 200-acre Matrix Global Logistics Park in the Bloomfield neighborhood to the north, which houses Amazon and Ikea facilities – have documented the creation of a significant number of full-time equivalent jobs and temporary construction positions. Along with job creation, fulfilling market demand for commercial warehousing, and creating industrial uses in the IBZ, the Project would preserve natural features in the perimeter of the Site to the maximum extent practicable through avoiding and minimizing encroachment on natural features.

D. REQUIRED ACTIONS OR APPROVALS City Actions/Approvals: i. New York City (NYC) Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP) coastal consistency assessment ii. Three Zoning Authorizations pursuant to the NYC Zoning Resolution (ZR): a. Removal of trees pursuant to ZR 107-64 (to modify 107-32), b. Modification existing topography pursuant to ZR 107-65 (to modify 107-31), and c. Modification of group parking facility pursuant to ZR 107-68 (to modify 107-472) iii. One Zoning Certification of cross access connections pursuant to ZR 36-592 iv. New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) v. NYC Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Construction Permit – NYC Department of Environmental Protection State Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act (CWA) – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) i. Tidal Wetlands Permit under Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) Article 25 – NYSDEC ii. Freshwater Wetlands Permit under ECL Article 24 – NYSDEC iii. State Pollution Discharge Elimination (SPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities – NYSDEC iv. SPDES Multi-Sector General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity – NYSDEC v. 6 New York Code of Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 360.17 Nonspecific Facilities Permit – NYSDEC Federal Actions/ Approvals: i. Section 404 Clean Water Act – USACE

F. WRP POLICY ASSESSMENT

Policy 1 – Support and facilitate commercial and residential redevelopment in areas well-suited to such development.

Policy 1.1 – Encourage commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate Coastal Zone areas.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 3 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

The Project includes commercial development and industrial uses within the Coastal Zone and does not include any residential development. The Site is mapped for Industrial and Manufacturing land uses and was formerly operating a MOSF. Additionally, the Site lies within the Rossville Industrial Business Zone (IBZ), which encourages Industrial and Manufacturing development within its’ borders. The Project proposes to redevelop the Site with commercial warehouse buildings and marine service yard industrial uses, appropriate for the Site and consistent with the land uses and manufacturing zoning for the Site. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 1.1.

Policy 1.3 – Encourage redevelopment in the Coastal Zone where public facilities and infrastructure are adequate or will be developed. The Project includes commercial development and industrial uses that would not strain existing public facilities (such as schools, community centers, etc.) or require new public facilities to be constructed. The Project would utilize existing infrastructure within the Site to the extent feasible and would include construction of additional infrastructure to support redevelopment of the Site. Infrastructure proposed under the Project includes construction of a stormwater management system that would include a series of catch basins and manholes directed via subsurface conveyance piping to two proposed stormwater quality basins that ultimately would discharge to the Arthur Kill (including one new outfall and one replacement outfall); new potable water and sanitary sewer infrastructure that would connect to existing NYC DEP water and sewer infrastructure along Arthur Kill Road; and transportation improvements including widening of Arthur Kill Road adjacent to the Site. As public facilities are adequate in the surrounding areas and infrastructure would be developed to support the proposed redevelopment, the Project is consistent with and promotes this policy. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 1.1.

Policy 1.5 – Integrate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of waterfront residential and commercial development, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2. The Project includes commercial development and industrial uses and would not include residential uses. The Project would promote Policy 6.2 (see discussion below). Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 1.5.

Policy 2 – Support water-dependent and industrial uses in New York City coastal areas that are well-suited to their continued operation.

Policy 2.1 – Promote water-dependent and industrial uses in Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas. The Site lies entirely within a SMIA and a portion of the Site’s waterfront is already developed with buildings, parking, and a functional bulkhead. This developed waterfront region is in the northwestern portion of the Site and is also mapped as a Priority Marine Activity Zone (PMAZ) by the NYC WRP. The working waterfront region of the Site was formerly used to support the transport of petroleum products when the Site operated as a MOSF. This developed waterfront portion of the Site would be protected and preserved under the Project for a future maritime user that would use the existing marine infrastructure as a marine service yard, or for similar operations such as storage, mobilization, or repair of marine equipment. These water-dependent and industrial uses would be consistent with uses in the New York City coastal area and consistent with former uses of the working waterfront region of the Site. Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 4 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 2.1.

Policy 2.4 – Provide infrastructure improvements necessary to support working waterfront uses. The northwestern portion of the Site is already developed with buildings, parking, and a functional bulkhead. Infrastructure improvements in the working waterfront region of the Site are not necessary to support waterfront uses and are not proposed for this Project. Therefore, Policy 2.4 is not applicable to the Project.

Policy 2.5 – Incorporate consideration of climate change and sea level rise into the planning and design of waterfront industrial development and infrastructure, pursuant to WRP Policy 6.2. The Project would promote Policy 6.2 (see discussion below). Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 2.5.

Policy 3 – Promote use of New York City’s waterways for commercial and recreational boating and water-dependent transportation.

Policy 3.5 – In Priority Marine Activity Zones, support the ongoing maintenance of maritime infrastructure for water-dependent uses. The northwestern region of the Site is mapped as a PMAZ and is already developed with buildings, parking, a functional bulkhead, and supporting marine infrastructure. The existing maritime infrastructure currently does not require any upgrades and would be retained under the Project for future maritime uses. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 3.5.

Policy 4 – Protect and restore the quality and function of ecological systems within the New York City coastal area.

Policy 4.4 – Identify, remediate, and restore ecological functions within Recognized Ecological Complexes. The Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands Recognized Ecological Complex (REC) is in the eastern portion of the Site (see Attachment Number 8.6, New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program, for mapped location). There are additional wetlands in the northwestern, eastern, and southern portions of the Site (see Policy 4.5 discussion for further information). The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize disturbance to regulated wetlands and regulated wetland Adjacent Areas within the Site through coordination with the USACE and the NYSDEC. Measures to limit wetland disturbance, including retaining walls, have also been incorporated into the design. There would be no impacts to the regulated wetlands within the Port Mobil Swamp Forest Tidal Wetlands REC under the Project and minor impacts to the regulated adjacent areas of these wetlands. A retaining wall would be constructed to help minimize Adjacent Area encroachment within the REC; improvements to the stormwater management system as part of the project would aide in preventing and reducing stormwater runoff into wetlands; and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be prepared for the Project and erosion and sediment

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 5 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

control practices would be implemented during demolition and construction activities to aid in the protection of wetlands.. Although avoidance, minimization, and protection of the eastern REC wetlands has been incorporated into the design and planning of the Project, remediation and restoration of this REC is not proposed under the Project; therefore, the Project would hinder Policy 4.4. While the Project hinders Policy 4.4, USACE and NYSDEC permits will require minimization of such effects and will result in requirements for mitigation that would offset these effects.

Policy 4.5 – Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. Based on a review of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data, the Site contains a mixture of Estuarine and Marine Deepwater, Estuarine and Marine Wetlands, Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetlands, Freshwater Ponds, and Freshwater Emergent Wetlands (see Attachment 8.3, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map). A review of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map (see Attachment 8.1, NYSDEC 1974 Tidal Wetlands Map) indicates the presence of Littoral Zone (LZ); Coastal Shoals, Bars and Mudflats (SM); and Adjacent Area (AA) within the Site. The NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map (see Attachment 8.2, NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map) identifies Class I Freshwater Wetlands in the eastern and southern portions of the Site and associated Freshwater Wetlands Check Zones (Check Zones act as buffers areas to account for errors in wetland boundaries and wetlands may occur within Check Zones). Class I wetlands are the most valuable and subject to the most stringent standards. Due to the presence of NYSDEC and USFWS mapped wetlands, a wetland delineation was performed for the Site by Matrix New World Engineering in 2020. Applications to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and NYSDEC to verify jurisdictional extents are currently under review. The wetland delineation reports approximately 19.6 acres of both tidal and freshwater wetlands in the northeastern, eastern, and southern regions of the Site under varying jurisdiction (NYSDEC and/or USACE, or non- jurisdictional). The eastern wetlands within the Site additionally contain the Port Mobil Swamp Forest and Tidal Wetlands Recognized Ecological Complex (REC) (see Attachment 8.6, New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Map), mapped by the NYC WRP. This is discussed further under Policy 4.4, above. The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize disturbance to regulated wetlands and regulated wetland Adjacent Areas within the Site to the maximum extent feasible through close coordination with the NYSDEC and USACE. Wetland protection measures such as the use of retaining walls have also been incorporated into the design, along with several BMPs and protection measures that would be implemented during construction of the Project to protect tidal and freshwater wetlands. Three retaining walls would be constructed under the Project to minimize encroachment into wetlands. The proposed Project involves the construction of two outfalls within tidal wetland areas, as well as buildings and roadways that would minimally encroach on existing wetlands and wetland Adjacent Areas. No dredging activity is proposed for the Project. Construction of the Project would result in a permanent disturbance of approximately 0.02 acres USACE Jurisdiction freshwater wetlands in the northern portion of the Site; permanent disturbance of approximately 0.13 acres USACE/NYSDEC Dual Jurisdiction wetlands in the southwestern portion of the Site; permanent disturbance of approximately 1.66 acres of

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 6 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

NYSDEC Jurisdiction Adjacent Areas in the eastern and southwestern portions of the Site; and permanent disturbance of 1.31 acres of Non-Jurisdictional wetlands in the southern portion of the Site. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan would be prepared for the Project and erosion and sediment control practices would be implemented during demolition and construction activities to aid in the protection of tidal and freshwater wetlands. A turbidity curtain would be placed during outfall construction to minimize the likelihood of sediment migration beyond the work area. Additionally, all wetland impacts would comply with applicable Federal and State wetland regulations to ensure no significant impact is made to wetlands and associated habitats. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 4.5.

Policy 4.7 – Protect vulnerable plant, fish and wildlife species, and rare ecological communities. Design and develop land and water uses to maximize their integration or compatibility with the identified ecological community. The Project has been designed to avoid and minimize impacts on existing forested and wetland regions of the Site containing plant, fish, and wildlife species. These ecological communities would be protected during construction and implementation of the Project through adherence to all Federal, State, and local environmental permitting conditions. The proposed stormwater quality basins would be designed to incorporate landscaping vegetation. Ecological communities within the Site would be expected to experience temporary construction-related impacts due to increased activity and noise during development. However, species that currently utilize the Site are expected to be accustomed to development and human activity due to the Site’s former operation as a MOSF and these species would be expected to re-establish use of the Site following construction. Coordination with NYSDEC, USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on the potential presence of rare, threatened, or endangered species within the Site is ongoing. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 4.7.

Policy 4.8 – Maintain and protect living aquatic resources. The Project is located adjacent to the Arthur Kill tidal strait and would include construction of one new outfall and one replacement outfall along the northern shoreline within the Site. The Project would utilize all necessary and applicable protection measures such as BMPs, measures to control noise in accordance with City ordinances, and obtain and comply with the conditions of all required Federal, State, and local environmental permits. All work for the outfalls would occur above the Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) line. Thus, the Project is not expected to adversely affect the aquatic living resources. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 4.8.

Policy 5 – Protect and improve water quality in the New York City coastal areas.

Policy 5.1 – Manage direct or indirect discharges to waterbodies. The Project development would occur mainly in the approximately 120-acre footprint of the former MOSF that was impervious. These impervious surfaces will be removed in order to remediate the site under a separate action. The Project would result in a net increase in impervious surfaces above that of the remediated site (post-removal of MOSF infrastructure/tanks/etc.) of approximately 3,879,346 SF (89.1

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 7 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York acres) . Stormwater discharge would be treated through construction of two stormwater quality basins and associated outfalls (one new outfall and one replacement outfall) at the northern portion of the Site that would discharge to the Arthur Kill tidal strait. New impervious surfaces constructed under the Project would mainly occur in the footprint of the northeastern storm water quality basin and Building 1 (see Attachment 15, Project Permit Plans, for further details). The stormwater quality treatment basins would adhere with all conditions of the NYSDEC Stormwater Pollution Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) general permit for the Project and would be designed in accordance with the New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual. The construction activities to develop the Project may temporarily introduce suspended sediment into the Arthur Kill tidal strait, however, such events would be mitigated through installation of turbidity curtains and other sediment control measures as necessary. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.1.

Policy 5.2 – Protect the quality of New York City’s waters by managing activities that generate nonpoint source pollution. This policy aims to protect waterbodies from non-point pollution sources such as stormwater run-off. BMPs such as implementing pollution prevention measures would be utilized throughout the course of the Project to manage activities that could generate non-point sources of pollution. Prevention of flooding the upland area would further prevent creating nonpoint source pollution. Additional precautions such as minimizing the sources of pollution and preventing stormwater runoff from upland surfaces would also be implemented. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.2.

Policy 5.3 – Protect water quality when excavating or placing fill in navigable waters and in or near marshes, estuaries, tidal marshes, and wetlands. The Project would ensure protection of water quality by utilizing all necessary and applicable measures such as BMPs during construction to prevent discharge of debris and excavated soil into the waterway. All debris would be disposed at an approved offsite location. A Section 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act would be obtained from NYSDEC prior to initiating construction. All applicable Federal and State permit requirements would be addressed and implemented prior to and/or during construction of the Project, as applicable. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.3.

Policy 5.4 – Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands. No significant impacts to the quality and quantity of surface and groundwater supplies is anticipated due to construction and implementation of the Project. As discussed in Section B. Proposed Activity above, the Site is currently undergoing remediation (in compliance with consent orders, not as part of the Project) and will be capped to prevent the leaching of contaminants and to restrict surface water and rainwater infiltration into the contamination source area. Construction of the Project would add coverage and impervious surfaces on top of the remediation cap, which would further aide in keeping surface water and rainwater from infiltrating through contaminated materials as they do in current conditions. Groundwater within and adjacent to the Site is not used for drinking water or other purposes in the Project vicinity.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 8 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

The Project would utilize all necessary and applicable protection measures such as BMPs and comply with the conditions of all required environmental permits and NYSDEC and USACE specifications. Erosion and sediment control practices would be implemented to ensure there are no adverse impacts to the quality and quantity of groundwater, streams, and the sources of water for wetlands. Therefore, the Project promotes Policy 5.4.

Policy 6 – Minimize loss of life, structures, infrastructure, and natural resources caused by flooding and erosion, and increase resilience to future conditions created by climate change.

Policy 6.1 – Minimize losses from flooding and erosion by employing non-structural and structural management measures appropriate to the site, the use of the property to be protected, and the surrounding area. The redevelopment would occur above the remedial cap that elevates it above the flood hazard area thereby minimizing potential for flooding and related losses/damage. While the redevelopment does not specifically implement other resiliency measures, it is important to note that it does maintain and preserve the existing coastal area, including the bulkhead and existing shoreline, thereby minimizing changes that affect the current tidal flows and minimizing potential for erosion. More detail on the elevation and effects on floodplains and flood hazard areas is provided below in response to Policy 6.2. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 6.1. Policy 6.2 – Integrate consideration of the latest New York City projections of climate change and sea level rise (as published in New York City Panel on Climate Change 2015 Report, Chapter 2: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Storms) into the planning and design of projects in the city’s Coastal Zone. As the Project involves development of new vulnerable features (buildings), the detailed methodology in the WRP’s Climate Change Adaptation Guidance was followed to assess the Project’s consistency with Policy 6.2. The detailed methodology consists of three steps: 1) identify vulnerabilities and consequences; 2) identify adaptive strategies; and 3) assess policy consistency, which are followed for the Project in the text below. 1) Identify Vulnerabilities and Consequences 1a) Complete the Flood Elevation Worksheet to identify current and future flood elevations in relation to the elevations of the site and project features. See Attachment 13.2, Policy 6.2 Flood Evaluation Worksheet. 1b) Identify any project features that may be located below the elevation of the 1% floodplain over the lifespan of the project under any sea level rise scenario. As indicated in Attachment 13.2, Policy 6.2 Flood Evaluation Worksheet, the buildings, roadways, and parking areas would be well above the 1% Flood Elevation for the lifespan of the project under all sea level rise (SLR) scenarios. The stormwater ponds would be below the 2100 High SLR projection and the stormwater outfalls would be below the low SLR projection for the entire lifespan of the project. Coastal flooding at outfalls may drive backflow into the system, causing upland flooding through street drains and drainage ditches. The reactivated waterfront use (marine service yard) would be below the 1% Flood Elevation for the lifespan of the project under all SLR projections, however, the waterfront region of the Site including existing bulkhead, Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 9 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

existing paved areas, and existing buildings, would not introduce any new vulnerable features as they are already existing on the Site and would be retained under the Project. 1c) Identify any vulnerable, critical, or potentially hazardous features that may be located below the elevation of Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) over the lifespan of the project under any sea level rise scenario. The stormwater outfalls are the only new project feature that would be below the MHHW elevation for the 2080s High-Mid SLR projection and the 2100 Mid SLR projection. Daily inundation of this feature could cause backflow into the stormwater management system inducing flooding through street drains and drainage ditches. The reactivated waterfront use (marine service yard) would be below the MHHW elevation for the 2100 High SLR projection. However, the waterfront region of the Site including existing bulkhead, existing paved areas, and existing buildings, would not introduce any new vulnerable features as they are already existing on the Site and would be retained under the Project. 1d) Describe how any additional coastal hazards are likely to affect the project, both currently and in the future, such as waves, high winds, or debris. The New York City Department of City Planning (DCP) Flood Hazard Mapper indicates that portions of the Site are within the 500-year (0.2% annual chance flooding) floodplain and within the 100-year (1% chance annual flooding) floodplain (see Attachment 8.5, FEMA Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map). The Site is located partially within a coastal VE and AE zones. 2) Identify Adaptive Strategies 2a) The stormwater detention basins and outfalls were identified in step 1b) as below the 1% Flood Elevation for portions of the project lifespan. While these features would likely sustain damage during a flood event of severe magnitude, there is minimal damage to human life as there are no occupiable structures at any of these features and these features are designed to withstand inundation. Additionally, natural elevations on the Site along with proposed topographic modifications would protect vulnerable upland features from flooding, including the buildings and roadways/parking areas proposed for the Project. These vulnerable features would be constructed at approximately 40 feet elevation, minimally, reducing potential for damage from flooding. 2b) The stormwater outfalls are the only project feature identified in step 1c) as below the MHHW for the 2080s High-Mid and 2100s Mid SLR projections, respectively. These features are designed to be inundated and would not experience damage due to regular daily inundation. 2c) Due to Site remediation constraints, the final grade of the Site post-remediation may be elevated at approximately 45 feet above sea level, or greater. This substantial elevation for a waterfront Site would protect Project features from coastal hazards such as waves, high winds, or debris. As previously mentioned, all buildings, roadways, and parking areas would be located at a minimum elevation of 40 feet, providing ample protection from coastal hazards and the amplification of coastal hazards due to of sea level rise. 2d) The Project is not anticipated to significantly affect the flood protection of adjacent sites. Wooded, pervious regions along the shoreline in the northern and eastern portions of the Site would be preserved, and there are additional large, pervious areas located along the shoreline to the south of the Site that remain undeveloped. Preservation of these natural areas would provide Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 10 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

regions within and adjacent to the Site for flood inundation and the proposed Project would not create conflicts with any known, planned, or adjacent flood protection projects. 3) Assess Policy Consistency The Project would substantially elevate vulnerable features (buildings) that would protect them from flooding and coastal hazards. Project elements that would be below the 1% Flood Elevation and MHHW include the stormwater outfalls and stormwater detention ponds, which are features designed to be inundated. Based on the foregoing, the Project is consistent with Policy 6.2.

Policy 7 – Minimize environmental degradation and negative impacts on public health from solid waste, toxic pollutants, hazardous materials, and industrial materials that may pose risks to the environment and public health and safety.

Policy 7.1 – Manage solid waste material, hazardous wastes, toxic pollutants, substances hazardous to the environment, and the unenclosed storage of industrial materials to protect public health, control pollution and prevent degradation of coastal ecosystems. As discussed in Section B. Proposed Activity above, the Site is currently undergoing remediation (in compliance with consent orders, not as part of the Project) and will be capped to prevent the leaching of contaminants and to restrict surface water and rainwater infiltration into the contamination source areas. Construction of the Project would occur after remediation activities are complete and would add impervious surface coverage on top of the remediation cap. This additional impervious coverage would limit the potential for human disturbance of the remedial cap and would aide in keeping surface water and rainwater from infiltrating the capped, contaminated material, which would assist in controlling pollution. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 7.1.

Policy 8 – Provide public access to, from, and along New York City’s coastal waters. As discussed in Section B. Proposed Activity above, the Site is currently undergoing remediation activities pursuant to two consent orders. These orders state that the Site will not be accessible to the public. Therefore, Policy 8 is not applicable to the Project.

Policy 9 – Protect scenic resources that contribute to the visual quality of the New York City coastal area.

Policy 9.1 – Protect and improve visual quality associated with New York City’s urban context and the historic and working waterfront. The western portion of the Site contains functional bulkhead, piers, and docks that were formerly used to transport petroleum products when the Site was operating as a MOSF. This working waterfront region of the Site would be protected and preserved under the Project for a future maritime user to be used as a

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 11 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

marine service yard / industrial use. This use would be consistent with the historic working waterfront context of the Site. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 9.1.

Policy 10 – Protect, preserve, and enhance resources significant to the historical, archaeological, architectural, and cultural legacy of the New York City coastal area.

Policy 10.1 – Retain and preserve historic resources, and enhance resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City. A review of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS), which includes the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), does not indicate any historic resources listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Register of Historic Places (S/NR) are present within the Site or immediate surrounding areas. The Site’s former use as a MOSF with heavy industrial infrastructure, limits the possibility that any significant historic resources would be present within the Site. In a letter from the New York City Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC) dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified Westfield Township School #7 located at 4210 Arthur Kill Road as an LPC designated and S/NR eligible property with Architectural significance in the radius of the Project. This property is located approximately 550 feet from the Site boundary, outside the 400 foot radius study area for the Project, and is not anticipated to be affected by the Project. The LPC identified the Site (BBL 5072070060 and 5072470001) as containing no properties with Architectural significance (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for letter from LPC). Consultation with the OPRHP is ongoing to verify that there are no historic resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City within the Site or the vicinity of the Site that may be affected by the Project. As historic resources and resources significant to the coastal culture of New York City have not been identified within the Site or study area for the Project (400 foot radius from the Site), Policy 10.1 would not be applicable to the Project.

Policy 10.2 – Protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts. A review of the OPRHP CRIS, which includes the SHPO, maps the entire Site as an Archaeological Sensitive Area. Additionally, a Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study was performed for the southeastern portion of the Site in 2018.3 The Phase 1A study identified this small southeastern portion of the Site to have moderate to high sensitivity for precontact archaeological resources and moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources associated with the historic period (early 18th century through early 20th century) occupation of the Site. A Phase 1B investigation was recommended in the Phase 1A study to confirm the presence or absence of archaeological resources within this small southeastern portion of the Site. Archaeological studies for the remainder of the Site have not been performed to date. In a letter from the LPC dated 4/28/2021, LPC identified the Site (BBL 5072070060 and 5072470001) as containing properties with Archaeological significance and indicated that there is potential for the recovery of remains from native American occupation on the Site. The LPC recommends an archaeological documentary study be performed for the Site to clarify initial determinations and provide the threshold for

3 BioGas Corp Proposed Anaerobic Digester. 4101 Arthur Kill Road: Block 7247, Part of Lot 1 and Block 7207, Part of Lot 60. Phase 1A Archaeological Documentary Study. Prepared by AKRF, Inc. May 2018. Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 12 of 13 NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC Port Mobil Redevelopment 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York

the next level of review (see Attachment 14.0, Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data, for letter from LPC). Consultation with the OPRHP is ongoing regarding the potential presence of archaeological resources and artifacts within the Site and recommendations for performing archaeological studies for the Site. The Applicant will follow recommendations and guidance from the LPC and OPRHP in order to protect and preserve archaeological resources and artifacts within the Site and is in the process of scheduling archaeology investigations for the Site. Therefore, the Project would promote Policy 10.2.

Joint Application for Permit Attachment 13.1, NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form Narrative 13 of 13 NYC Waterfront Revitalization Program - Policy 6.2 Flood Elevation Workhsheet

COMPLETE INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO USE THIS WORKSHEET ARE PROVIDED IN THE "CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION GUIDANCE" DOCUMENT AVAILABLE AT www.nyc.gov/wrp

Enter information about the project and site in highlighted cells in Tabs 1-3. Tab 4, "Summary Charts" contains primary results. Tab 5, "0.2%+SLR" produces charts to be used for critical infrastructure or facilities. Tab 6, "Calculations" contains background computations. Appendix A contains tide elevations for station across the city to be used for the elevation of MHHW if a site survey is not available. Non-highlighted cells have been locked.

Background Information Project Name Port Mobil Redevelopment

Location 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, NY 10309 (Block 7207 Lot 60 and Block 7247 Lot 1)

Type(s) Residential, Commercial, Parkland, Open Space, and Critical Infrastructure or Tidal Wetland Restoration Industrial Uses Community Facility Natural Areas Facility

Wastewater Over-water Structures Shoreline Structures Transportation Coastal Protection Treatment/Drainage Description Site development includes four (4) buildings totaling approximately 2.15 million square feet to be used for warehouse commercial or logistics uses; reactivation of a working waterfront use as a marine service yard industrial use; parking areas for passenger vehicles and commercial trailers; internal access roads and an additional access point off Arthur Kill Road; new sanitary sewer, water, electrial, and gas infrastructure; and new stormwater management infrastructure. See Attachment 13.1 NYC WRP CAF Narrative for further information.

Planned Completion Date Aug-24 Expected Project Lifespan 60 years

The New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program Climate Change Adaptation Guidance document was developed by the NYC Department of City Planning. It is a guidance document only and is not intended to serve as a substitute for actual regulations. The City disclaims any liability for errors that may be contained herein and shall not be responsible for any damages, consequential or actual, arising out of or in connection with the use of this information. The City reserves the right to update or correct information in this guidance document at any time and without notice.

For technical assistance on using this worksheet, email [email protected], using the message subject "Policy 6.2 Worksheet."

Last update: Sept. 7, 2018 Establish current tidal and flood heights.

FT (NAVD88) Feet Datum Source MHHW 2.55 2.55 NAVD88 Site survey/ wetland delineation 1% flood height 13.00 13.00 NAVD88 NYC Flood Hazard Mapper Design flood elevation 15.00 15.00 NAVD88 BFE+2' As relevant: 0.2% flood height -->

Data will be converted based on the following datums: Datum FT (NAVD88) NAVD88 0.00 NGVD29 -1.10 Manhattan Datum 1.65 Bronx Datum 1.51 Brooklyn Datum (Sewer) 0.61 Brooklyn Datum (Highway) 1.45 Queens Datum 1.63 Richmond Datum 2.09 Describe key physical features of the project.

Ft Above Ft Above Ft Above Feature (enter name) Feature Category Lifespan Elevation Units Datum Ft NAVD88 MHHW 0.2% flood height A Four Buildings Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 60 years 43.0 Feet NAVD88 43.0 43.0 40.5 #VALUE! Commercial warehouse buildings totaling approximatelyil215 2.15 million square feet. Elevations range between 43 and 62 feet.

Other B Roadways/Parking Areas Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous 20 years 40.0 Feet NAVD88 40.0 40.0 37.5 #VALUE! Parking areas and circulation roadways surroundingding each building bu with internal circulation and two connections to Arthur Kill Road. Elevations range between 40 and 57 feet.

C Stormwater Ponds Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 100 years 19.0 Feet NAVD88 19.0 19.0 16.5 #VALUE! Two stormwater detention basins in the northern portionsif of the Site made of compacted firm, soil/clay liner, with plantings. Elevation surrounding wet ponds are 19 feet for Wet Pond A and 21 feet for Wet Pond B.

D Stormwater Outfalls Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 100 years 5.7 Feet NAVD88 5.7 5.7 3.2 #VALUE! Discharge points to the Arthur Kill tidal strait for the two stormwaterstor ponds. Min elevation for Wet Pond A outfall is 8.15 feet and minimum elevation for Wet Pond B outfall is 5.7 feet.

E Reactivated Waterfront Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other 100 8.0 Feet NAVD88 8.0 8.0 5.5 #VALUE! Use existing waterfront bulkhead, paved areas, and three exiexisting buildings for a marine service yard industrial use. No new construction would occur along the waterfront

F Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other Feet NAVD88 Description of Planned Uses and Materials

G Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other Feet NAVD88 Description of Planned Uses and Materials

H Vulnerable Critical Potentially Hazardous Other Feet NAVD88 Description of Planned Uses and Materials Assess project vulnerability over a range of sea level rise projections.

Mean Higher High Water + Sea Level Rise 1% Flood Elevation + Sea Level Rise 50 50 48 48 46 46 44 A… 44 42 A Four Buildings 42 40 B… 40 B Roadways/Parking 38 38 Areas 36 36 34 34 32 32 30 30 28 28 26 26 24 24

Feet above NAVD88 above Feet 22 20 22 C Stormwater Ponds NAVD88 above Feet 20 18 C Stormwater Ponds 16 18 16 14 DFE 12 14 10 12 E Reactivated8 10 E Reactivated WaterfrontD Stormwater Outfalls 8 6 Waterfront 4 6 D Stormwater Outfalls 2 4 0 HGF 2 Baseline 2020s 2050s 2080s 2100 0 HFG Baseline 2020s 2050s 2080s 2100 SLR PROJECTIONS SLR PROJECTIONS High High High-Mid High-Mid Mid Mid Low-Mid Low-Mid Low Low Attachment 14.0

Resource Agencies Correspondence and Data Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape Architecture, P.C. 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park NJ 07932 973.240-1800 Fax 973.240.1818

www.matrixneworld.com WBE/DBE

February 12, 2021

New York Natural Heritage Program – Information Services NYSDEC 625 Broadway, 5th Floor Albany, NY 12233-4757

Via Email To: [email protected]

RE: Request for ESA, MMPA and Fisheries Data for the Port Mobil Redevelopment Project Block 7207/Lot 60 and Block 7247/Lot 1 Borough of Staten Island, Richmond County, New York Matrix Project # 20-383

To Whom It May Concern:

Matrix New World is requesting data in support of permit applications and New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) compliance documents. We request that your office provide all available information on protected endangered/threatened species, critical or proposed critical habitats, wetlands, national wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, wild and scenic river corridors, heritage trust reserves and/or National and State parks that occur on or in the vicinity of the above referenced project site located along the Arthur Kill on the west shore of Staten Island.

The proposed development includes revitalization of the 242± acre site on the Arthur Kill in Staten Island, New York. Approximately 120 acres of the site is developed and, for about 80 years, operated as a Port Mobil Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF). The remaining acreage consists of forested land, wetlands, a 15.4-acre solar array, existing piers and bulkheads, and natural shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. MOSF infrastructure demolition and site remediation activities will be performed in accordance with Administrative Orders on Consent from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, as separate actions to the proposed development. Part of the proposed development includes tree removal.

The proposed development would mainly occur within the 120 acres of existing MOSF infrastructure and would construct three or four warehouse and light manufacturing and assembly buildings with a total building area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet along with associated site improvements including new utilities to serve the site, internal access roads, paved parking areas and improvements to offsite transportation facilities. The existing solar array field would be moved to the rooftop of one of the proposed buildings. The proposed development would also include construction of a stormwater management system including two (2) stormwater quality basins that discharge to the Arthur Kill. Additionally, within the waterfront portion of the site, the existing bulkhead and piers including three (3) existing buildings would be preserved to support the intent for a maritime user to establish future water-dependent use.

No dredging activity is proposed at or near the navigable waterway.

Attached or your reference are figures showing the approximate limits of the proposed project as outlined on a portion of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle (Arthur Kill NY-NJ), a Vicinity Map, and an Aerial Map.

1 of 2 Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 973-585- 9066 or by email at [email protected]. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Rejina Sharma Ecologist, Regulatory Specialist

Attachments:

Figure 1 – USGS Topographic Map Figure 2 – Vicinity Map Figure 3 – Aerial Map

2 of 2 March 25, 2021 Rejina Sharma Matrix New World Engineering 26 Columbia Turnpike, Second Floor Florham Park, NJ 07932

Re: Port Mobil Redevelopment Project, Staten Island (Matrix Project # 20-383) County: Richmond Town/City: 6WDWHQ,VODQG

Dear Rejina Sharma:

In response to your recent request, we have reviewed the New York Natural Heritage Program database with respect to the above project.

Enclosed is a report of rare or state-listed animals and plants, and significant natural communities that our database indicates occur in the vicinity of the project site.

For most sites, comprehensive field surveys have not been conducted; the enclosed report only includes records from our database. We cannot provide a definitive statement as to the presence or absence of all rare or state-listed species or significant natural communities. Depending on the nature of the project and the conditions at the project site, further information from on-site surveys or other sources may be required to fully assess impacts on biological resources.

The presence of the plants and animals identified in the enclosed report may result in this project requiring additional review or permit conditions. For further guidance, and for information regarding other permits that may be required under state law for regulated areas or activities (e.g., regulated wetlands), please contact the NYS DEC Region 2 Office, Division of Environmental Permits, at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Heidi Krahling Environmental Review Specialist New York Natural Heritage Program

232 New York Natural Heritage Program Report on State-listed Animals

The following state-listed animals have been documented RQWKHSURMHFWVLWHRUin LWV vicinity.

The following list includes animals that are listed by NYS as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern; and/or that are federally listed.

For information about any permit considerations for the project, contact the NYSDEC Region Office, Division of Environmental Permits, at dep.r@dec.ny.gov  .

The following species have been documented at the project site )HQ]H/L]DUG or within \DUGVRIWKHSURMHFW VLWH (DVWHUQ0XG7XUWOH .

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAMENY STATE LISTING FEDERAL LISTING

Fence Lizard Sceloporus undulatus Threatened

Eastern Mud Turtle Kinosternon subrubrum Endangered

This report only includes records from the NY Natural Heritage database. If any rare plants or animals are documented during site visits, we request that information on the observations be provided to the New York Natural Heritage Program so that we may update our database.

Information about many of the listed animals in New York, including habitat, biology, identification, conservation, and management, are available online in Natural Heritage’s Conservation Guides at www.guides.nynhp.org, and from NYSDEC at www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7494.html.

ϯ/Ϯϱͬ202ϭ Page 1 of 1 Report on Rare Animals, Rare Plants, and New York Natural Heritage Program Significant Natural Communities

The following rare plants, rare animals, and significant natural communities have been documented at the project site or in its vicinity.

We recommend that potential impacts of the proposed project on these species or communities be addressed as part of any environmental assessment or review conducted as part of the planning, permitting and approval process, such as reviews conducted under SEQR. Field surveys of the project site may be necessary to determine whether a species currently occurs at the site, particularly for sites that are currently undeveloped and may still contain suitable habitat. Final requirements of the project to avoid, minimize, or mitigate potential impacts are determined by the lead permitting agency or the government body approving the project.

The following animals, while not listed by New York State as Endangered or Threatened, are rare in New York and are of conservation concern.

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME NY STATE LISTING HERITAGE CONSERVATION STATUS

Chuck-will's-widow Antrostomus carolinensis Protected Bird Critically Imperiled in NYS Breeding -ohnston StreetRQWKHSURMHFWVLWHLQWKHXQGHYHORSHGSRUWLRQRQWKHHDVWHUQVLGHRIWKHSURMHFWVLWH 2003-06-16: The birds were heard in a mixed woodlot on a public street adjacent to several private residences.

The following natural communities are considered significant from a statewide perspective by the NY Natural Heritage Program. Each community is an example of a community type that is rare in the state. By meeting specific, documented criteria, the NY Natural Heritage Program considers these community occurrences to have high ecological and conservation value.

COMMON NAME HERITAGE CONSERVATION STATUS

Wetland/Aquatic Communities

Red Maple-Sweetgum Swamp High Quality Occurrence of Rare Community Type

Clay Pit Ponds6WDWH3DUNH[WHQGLQJRQWRWKHXQGHYHORSHGDUHDRQWKHVRXWKHUQVLGHRIWKHSURMHFWVLWH: A forested swamp of moderate size with good diversity, but with several exotic species and altered hydrology due to development pressures. The community is partially buffered by adjoining natural communities of a small state park preserve, but is located within a heavily developed landscape.

Upland/Terrestrial Communities

Post Oak-Blackjack Oak Barrens Rare Community Typeand Globally Rare

Clay Pit Ponds6WDWH3DUNH[WHQGLQJRQWRWKHXQGHYHORSHGDUHDRQWKHVRXWKHUQVLGHRIWKHSURMHFWVLWH This is a small oak-dominated barrens of small size with moderate diversity, with few exotic species. The core of the community is buffered by the surrounding natural area. Peripheral patches have recovery potential if buffers can be maintained around them, but heavy deer browse and impacts from trail use are a concern. Most of the community is located in a small state park surrounded by a densely developed landscape.

ϯ/Ϯϱ/202ϭ Page 1 of 2 &OD\3LW3RQGV6WDWH3DUN3UHVHUYHDGMDFHQWWRWKHSURMHFWVLWHLVWKHORFDWLRQIRUWKHIROORZLQJUDUH plantsWKDW are listed as Endangered or Threatened by New York State, DQGRQHGUDJRQIO\VSHFLHVQRWOLVWHGEXWUDUHLQ1HZ

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME NY STATE LISTING HERITAGE CONSERVATION STATUS

Plants

/RZ6W-RKQ V:RUW +\SHULFXPVWUDJXOXP (QGDQJHUed &ULWLFDOO\Imperiled in NYS

6RXWKHUQ:LOG5DLVLQ 9LEXUQXPQXGXPYDUQXGXP (QGDQJHUHG &ULWLFDOO\Imperiled in NYS

:KRUOHG0RXQWDLQ0LQW 3\FQDQWKHPXPYHUWLFLOODWXP (QGDQJHUHG &ULWLFDOO\,PSHULOHGLQ1<6 YDUYHUWLFLOODWXP

6HGJH5XVK -XQFXVVFLUSRLGHVYDU (QGDQJHUHG &ULWLFDOO\,PSHULOHGLQ1<6 VFLUSRLGHV

6KRUW/HDYHG3LQH 3LQXVHFKLQDWD (QGDQJHUHG &ULWLFDOO\,PSHULOHGLQ1<6

9LUJLQLD3LQH 3LQXVYLUJLQLDQD (QGDQJHUHG &ULWLFDOO\,PSHULOHGLQ1<6

Torrey's Thoroughwort Eupatorium torreyanum Threatened Imperiled in NYS

'UDJRQIOLHVDQG'DPVHOIOLHs

This report only includes records from the NY Natural Heritage database. For most sites, comprehensive field surveys have not been conducted, and we cannot provide a definitive statement as to the presence or absence of all rare or state-listed species. Depending on the nature of the project and the conditions at the project site, further information from on-site surveys or other sources may be required to fully assess impacts on biological resources. If any rare plants or animals are documented during site visits, we request that information on the observations be provided to the New York Natural Heritage Program so that we may update our database. Information about many of the rare animals and plants in New York, including habitat, biology, identification, conservation, and management, are available online in Natural Heritage’s Conservation Guides at www.guides.nynhp.org, from NatureServe Explorer at www.natureserve.org/explorer, and from USDA’s Plants Database at http://plants.usda.gov/index.html (for plants). Information about many of the natural community types in New York, including identification, dominant and characteristic vegetation, distribution, conservation, and management, is available online in Natural Heritage’s Conservation Guides at www.guides.nynhp.org. For descriptions of all community types, go to www.dec.ny.gov/animals/29384.html for Ecological Communities of New York State.

ϯ/Ϯϱ/202ϭ Page 2 of 2 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape Architecture, P.C. 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park NJ 07932 973.240-1800 Fax 973.240.1818

www.matrixneworld.com WBE/DBE

April 9, 2021

Gina Santucci Director of Environmental Review New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission Municipal Building 1 Centre Street, 9th Floor North New York, NY 10007

Via Email To: [email protected]

RE: Request for Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) Historical and Archaeological Resources Data Review for the Port Mobil Redevelopment Project Block 7207/Lot 60 and Block 7247/Lot 1 Borough of Staten Island, Richmond County, New York Matrix Project # 20-383

Dear Ms. Santucci:

Matrix New World is requesting data in support of permit applications and New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) compliance documents. It is our understanding that your office maintains data on the presence of historic and archaeological resources protected under the State Historic Preservation Act and the National Historic Preservation Act. We hereby request any information your office may have regarding the presence of cultural resources on or in the vicinity of the project site. In order to assist you in providing all pertinent data and guidance, we provide the detailed site and project description below:

The proposed development includes revitalization of the 242± acre site located at 4101 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, New York. NP Staten Island Industrial, LLC owns the project site and is the project applicant. Approximately 120 acres of the site is developed and, for about 80 years, operated as a Port Mobil Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF). The remaining acreage consists of forested land, wetlands, a 15.4-acre ground-mounted solar array, and natural shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. There is previous ground disturbance within the developed portions of the project site encompassing MOSF infrastructure, the solar array, and the piers/bulkhead waterfront region. MOSF infrastructure demolition and site remediation activities including placement of a remedial cap will be performed in accordance with Administrative Orders on Consent from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, as separate actions to the proposed development. There are no State or National Register of Historic Places listed or eligible properties within or adjacent to the project site, according to the New York State Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS). The CRIS additionally identifies the entire project site as an Archaeological Sensitive Area. According to the LPC’s Discover NYC Landmarks mapper, there are no existing or proposed landmarks within or adjacent to the project site. Consultation with the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has been initiated. Part of the proposed development includes tree removal and minor grading outside of the remedial cap limits.

The proposed development would mainly occur within the 120 acres of existing MOSF infrastructure to be demolished and remediated under Consent Orders. The proposed project would construct three (1) warehouses and one (1) light manufacturing and assembly building with a total building area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet along with associated site improvements including new utilities to serve the site, internal access roads,

1 of 2

paved parking areas and improvements to offsite transportation facilities. The existing solar array field would be moved to the rooftop of one of the proposed buildings. The proposed development would also include construction of a stormwater management system including two stormwater quality basins that discharge to the Arthur Kill. Additionally, within the waterfront portion of the site, the existing bulkhead and piers, including three existing buildings 50+ years old, would be preserved to support the intent for a maritime user to establish future water- dependent use.

Attached for your reference are figures showing the approximate limits of the proposed project as outlined on a portion of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle (Arthur Kill NY-NJ), a Vicinity Map, and an Aerial Map. Additionally, there are site photos and a photo key map, and a completed Records Access Request form.

Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 973-585- 9066 or [email protected]. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Rejina Sharma Ecologist, Regulatory Specialist

Attachments:

Figure 1 – USGS Topographic Map Figure 2 – Vicinity Map Figure 3 – Aerial Map Photo Key Map and Site Photos Records Access Request Form

2 of 2 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape Architecture, P.C. 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park NJ 07932 973.240-1800 Fax 973.240.1818

www.matrixneworld.com WBE/DBE

February 12, 2021

NOAA Fisheries Service Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office 55 Great Republic Drive Gloucester, MA 01930

Via Email To: [email protected]

RE: Request for ESA, MMPA and Fisheries Data for the Port Mobil Redevelopment Project Block 7207/Lot 60 and Block 7247/Lot 1 Borough of Staten Island, Richmond County, New York Matrix Project # 20-383

To Whom It May Concern:

Matrix New World is requesting data in support of permit applications and New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) compliance documents. It is our understanding that your office maintains data on species protected under the Endangered Species Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, as well as fisheries and Essential Fish Habitat. In order to assist you in providing all pertinent data and guidance, we provide the detailed site and project description below:

The proposed development includes revitalization of the 242± acre site on the Arthur Kill in Staten Island, New York. Approximately 120 acres of the site is developed and, for about 80 years, operated as a Port Mobil Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF). The remaining acreage consists of forested land, wetlands, a 15.4-acre solar array, existing piers and bulkheads, and natural shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. MOSF infrastructure demolition and site remediation activities will be performed in accordance with Administrative Orders on Consent from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, as separate actions to the proposed development. Part of the proposed development includes tree removal.

The proposed development would mainly occur within the 120 acres of existing MOSF infrastructure and would construct three or four warehouse and light manufacturing and assembly buildings with a total building area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet along with associated site improvements including new utilities to serve the site, internal access roads, paved parking areas and improvements to offsite transportation facilities. The existing solar array field would be moved to the rooftop of one of the proposed buildings. The proposed development would also include construction of a stormwater management system including two (2) stormwater quality basins that discharge to the Arthur Kill. Additionally, within the waterfront portion of the site, the existing bulkhead and piers including three (3) existing buildings would be preserved to support the intent for a maritime user to establish future water-dependent use.

No dredging activity is proposed at or near the navigable waterway.

Attached for your reference are figures showing the approximate limits of the proposed project as outlined on a portion of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle (Arthur Kill NY-NJ), a Vicinity Map, and an Aerial Map.

1 of 2

Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 973-585- 9066 or by email at [email protected]. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Rejina Sharma Ecologist, Regulatory Specialist

Attachments:

Figure 1 – USGS Topographic Map Figure 2 – Vicinity Map Figure 3 – Aerial Map

2 of 2 Matrix New World Engineering, Land Surveying and Landscape Architecture, P.C. 26 Columbia Turnpike Florham Park NJ 07932 973.240-1800 Fax 973.240.1818

www.matrixneworld.com WBE/DBE

March 3, 2021

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 – Long Island Field Office 340 Smith Road Shirley, NY 11967

Attn: Mr. Steven Papa Via Email To: [email protected]

RE: Request for ESA, MBTA and Critical Habitat Data for the Port Mobil Redevelopment Project Block 7207/Lot 60 and Block 7247/Lot 1 Borough of Staten Island, Richmond County, New York Matrix Project # 20-383

Dear Mr. Papa:

Matrix New World is requesting data in support of permit applications and New York City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) compliance documents. It is our understanding that your office maintains data on species protected under the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as other protected species and critical habitats. In order to assist you in providing all pertinent data and guidance, we provide the detailed site and project description below:

The proposed development includes revitalization of the 242± acre site on the Arthur Kill in Staten Island, New York. Approximately 120 acres of the site is developed and, for about 80 years, operated as a Port Mobil Major Oil Storage Facility (MOSF). The remaining acreage consists of forested land, wetlands, a 15.4-acre solar array, existing piers and bulkheads, and natural shoreline along the Arthur Kill waterfront. MOSF infrastructure demolition and site remediation activities will be performed in accordance with Administrative Orders on Consent from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, as separate actions to the proposed development. Part of the proposed development includes tree removal.

The proposed development would mainly occur within the 120 acres of existing MOSF infrastructure and would construct three or four warehouse and light manufacturing and assembly buildings with a total building area of approximately 2.15 million gross square feet along with associated site improvements including new utilities to serve the site, internal access roads, paved parking areas and improvements to offsite transportation facilities. The existing solar array field would be moved to the rooftop of one of the proposed buildings. The proposed development would also include construction of a stormwater management system including two (2) stormwater quality basins that discharge to the Arthur Kill. Additionally, within the waterfront portion of the site, the existing bulkhead and piers including three (3) existing buildings would be preserved to support the intent for a maritime user to establish future water-dependent use.

No dredging activity is proposed at or near the navigable waterway.

Attached for your reference are figures showing the approximate limits of the proposed project as outlined on a portion of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle (Arthur Kill NY-NJ), a Vicinity Map, and an Aerial Map.

1 of 2

Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at 973-585- 9066 or by email at [email protected]. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Rejina Sharma Ecologist, Regulatory Specialist

Attachments:

Figure 1 – USGS Topographic Map Figure 2 – Vicinity Map Figure 3 – Aerial Map

2 of 2 MunicipalBuilding 1CentreStreet,9thFloorNorth NewYork,NY10007 Tel:212Ͳ669Ͳ2491 Fax:212Ͳ669Ͳ3844 www.nyc.gov/landmarks

RECORDSACCESSREQUEST

DATE: ______02/18/21  OFFICEUSEONLY:______

NAME TELEPHONE Rejina Sharma 973-585-9066 EMAILADDRESS FAX [email protected] AFFILIATION REPRESENTING Matrix New World Engineering NorthPoint Development ADDRESS APT./STE./FLR. 26 Columbia Turnpike

CITY,STATE ZIPCODE Florham Park, NJ 07932

SUBJECTOFINQUIRY Please see attached appointment request letter with supporting materials.

SITENAMEORADDRESS Staten Island See attached letter BOROUGH BLOCK LOT

MATERIALS REQUESTED PLEASECHECK

PERMITCOPY(Docket#______/Permit#______) DESIGNATIONREPORTS

FILESRELATEDTOBUILDINGALTERATION(Docket#______/Permit#______) ARCHAEOLOGICALREPORTS

VIOLATIONSRECORDS PREͲDESIGNATIONRESEARCHFILES

PUBLICHEARINGTAPES DESIGNATIONPHOTOS

ENVIRONMENTALREVIEWRECORDS✔ OTHER:

IFUNSURE,PLEASEDESCRIBEREQUEST Historic and archaeological resource data request in the vicinity of the project site as described in the attached letter.

PURPOSEOFINQUIRY In support of City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) and permitting.

Iwouldliketoscheduleanappointmentatamutuallyconvenienttime.Icanbereachedatthetelephonenumberoraddressprovidedabove.Bysigningthisform,Iagreeto observetheproceduresforuseofLandmarksPreservationCommissionmaterialsasdescribedbyCommissionstaff.

04/09/21

SIGNATUREATURE DATE

REQUESTSARETYPICALLYANSWEREDWITHINTWOTOFOURWEEKS.THERECORDSOFFICERWILLCONTACTYOUTOMAKEANAPPOINTMENT,IFNECESSARY. IFYOUHAVEQUESTIONSABOUTTHISFORM,PLEASECONTACTUSAT212Ͳ669Ͳ2491.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Project number: NO LEAD AGENCY / LA-CEQR-R Project: PORT MOBIL REDEVELOPMENT Date Received: 4/16/2021

Properties with no Architectural significance: 1) ARTHUR KILL ROAD, BBL: 5072070060 2) 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD, BBL: 5072470001

Properties with Architectural significance in the radius:

Westfield Township School #7, 4210 Arthur Kill Road, LPC designated and S/NR eligible.

Properties with Archaeological significance: 1) ARTHUR KILL ROAD, BBL: 5072070060 2) 4101 ARTHUR KILL ROAD, BBL: 5072470001

Comments: LPC review of archaeological sensitivity models and historic maps indicates that there is potential for the recovery of remains from Native American occupation on the project site. Accordingly, the Commission recommends that an archaeological documentary study be performed for this site to clarify these initial findings and provide the threshold for the next level of review, if such review is necessary (see CEQR Technical Manual 2020).

4/28/2021

SIGNATURE DATE Gina Santucci, Environmental Review Coordinator

File Name: 35554_FSO_DNP_04212021.docx Rejina Sharma

From: New York State Parks CRIS Application Sent: Friday, April 9, 2021 3:51 PM To: Rejina Sharma; Eric Farm Subject: SHPO Initial Consultation Submission Received

[EXTERNAL]

This message is a notification from the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) through its Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS). Initial submission G673X1AE174U has been received for the following project: Port Mobil Redevelopment .

No action on your part is required at this time. You will receive an email notification when the submission is accepted as a new project record or if more information is necessary to process the submission.

If you have any questions about CRIS, please contact CRIS Help at [email protected]. For any other questions, please call 518-237-8643.

Sincerely,

New York State Historic Preservation Office Peebles Island State Park, P.O. Box 189, Waterford, NY 12188-0189 518-237-8643 | https://parks.ny.gov/shpo CRIS: https://cris.parks.ny.gov

Are you registered to vote? Register to vote online today. Moved recently? Update your information with the NYS Board of Elections. Not sure if you're registered to vote? Search your voter registration status.

You are receiving this email as part of an online service administered by New York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation's Division for Historic Preservation, also known as the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The Cultural Resource Information System (CRIS) is an advanced Geographic Information System application that provides access to New York State's vast historic and cultural resource databases and digitized paper records. In addition, CRIS serves as an interactive portal for agencies, municipalities and the public who use or require consultation with our agency on historic preservation programs or issues.

Our email to you is in direct response to material that was submitted to our office regarding a project for which you were identified as a contact. Such projects include actions that are reviewable by our agency under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Section 106), the New York State Historic Preservation Act (Section 14.09 NYSPRHPL), or the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA).

If you did not enter this project directly into CRIS, you are receiving this notification as SHPO or another project contact has entered it in our system. You will receive future correspondence for this project via email.

1 If you are a registered CRIS user and the creator of this submission, you may edit the submission through the My Submissions tab on your Home dashboard. Otherwise, you may view or edit this submission in CRIS as follows:

1. Click or browse to CRIS: https://cris.parks.ny.gov

2. At the CRIS Legal Disclaimer, click I Agree to proceed.

3. Click Proceed as Guest or log in with an NY.gov ID account.

4. In the top navigation bar, click Submit.

5. On the Submit page, click the Consultation tile. Paste the submission Token (G673X1AE174U) in the text box and click the Continue button.

6. The CRIS Submit application will open in a new browser tab. NOTE: If you edit this submission, please make sure you click Submit to SHPO to ensure that SHPO receives the revised submission.

2 Attachment 15.0

Project Permit Plans