DOCSLIB.ORG

BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project State Clearinghouse Number 2018042081 San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District June 2018 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project State Clearinghouse Number 2018042081 Prepared for San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 300 Lakeside Drive, 21st floor Oakland, CA 94612 Prepared by AECOM 300 Lakeside Drive, Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 June 2018 Introduction The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) is acting as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project (proposed project). BART is working in cooperation with the City and County of San Francisco to install canopy covers over the majority of the entrances/exits at the four downtown San Francisco BART/Muni stations (Embarcadero, Montgomery Street, Powell Street, and Civic Center/UN Plaza), as well as replace/refurbish existing street-level escalators. On April 30, 2018, BART published a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) which analyzed potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The Draft IS/MND was available for a 30-day public review period from April 30, 2018 to May 30, 2018 pursuant to Section 15073 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Notice of Availability and Notice of Intent (NOA/NOI) to adopt the IS/MND was posted with the City and County of San Francisco Clerk and the State Clearinghouse, mailed to all residents and businesses within ¼-mile of the project site, emailed to the project’s listserv of relevant stakeholders and interested people, made available on the BART website, and provided for public review at the San Francisco Main Library at Civic Center. A public meeting was held on May 16, 2018 in the Latino/Hispanic Community Room in the San Francisco Main Library from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. to provide the public an opportunity to learn more about the project, discuss project features with project staff, and collect public comments on the Draft IS/MND. No oral comments were received at the public meeting. The transcript of the meeting is included below under Comments and Responses. This Final MND for the proposed project has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and includes the following information: • A copy of each public comment letter received during the public review period and a response to each substantive issue raised. • A Final IS/MND including edits to provide clarification or additional detail made in response to comments. In this Final IS/MND, new or revised text is shown with underline for additions and strikethrough for deletions. This document constitutes the proposed Final MND for the proposed project. The BART Board of Directors will consider the proposed Final MND, including the responses to comments, and may adopt the proposed Final MND if it finds, on the basis of the whole record before it, that there is no substantial evidence that the proposed project will have a significant effect on the environment. BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-1 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Comments and Responses Comments Received on the Draft IS/MND This section includes all comments received on the Draft IS/MND. Comment letters and their associated commenters are listed in Table A. Comments within each comment letter are bracketed by topic and assigned a number in the margin. No oral comments were received at the public meeting. Table A. Comments Received on Draft IS/MND Letter # Commenter Date 1 Ana Noles May 7, 2018 2 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) May 30, 2018 3 David Pilpel May 30, 2018 4 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research May 30, 2018 Responses to Comments This section contains responses for each comment identified in the comment letters. Each response provides a response to the comment and identifies if revisions to the Draft IS/MND are required or if revisions have been made for clarification. The CEQA Guidelines do not require written responses to comments received on an MND; however, BART has reviewed the comments received and has prepared these responses to provide full information to the decision-makers and the public. BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-2 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Comment Letter 1: Ana Noles BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-3 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Response to Comment Letter 1: Ana Noles Response to Comment 1.1 Comment noted. This comment states the commenter’s support of the proposed project and does not concern the adequacy of the Draft IS/MND. No revisions to the Draft IS/MND are necessary. BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-4 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Comment Letter 2: SFMTA BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-5 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Response to Comment Letter 2: SFMTA Response to Comment 2.1 SFMTA has expressed concerns that the canopies proposed for the station entrances/exits on the near-side of a select number of intersections and in close proximity to existing crosswalks may result in reduced driver visibility of near-side traffic signals and impact a driver’s view of pedestrians preparing to step into the crosswalk. SFMTA has also expressed concerns that the overhang of the proposed canopy roofs that are in close proximity to existing crosswalks on the near-side of intersections may interfere with the visibility of future near-side signals planned as part of the Better Market Street project, as well as interfere with pedestrian’s views of oncoming traffic. The proposed canopies that were identified by SFMTA during their review of the 35% design plans as having potential impacts are shown in Table B. BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-6 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Table B. Station Entrance/Exit Escalator and Canopy Count Planned Future Better Distance Market to Existing Street Canopy Side of Crosswalk Nearside Nearside Number Station Intersection Street (Feet)1 Signal? Signal? 2 Spear Street South 45 No Yes 3 Davis Street North 65 No Yes Embarcadero 4 Main Street South 53 No Yes 6 Beale Street South 54 No Yes Sansome Street/ 7 West 35 No N/A Sutter Street Montgomery Pedestrian Crosswalk 8 South 70 No Yes Street to Sutter Street 12 New Montgomery Street South 6 Yes Yes Pedestrian Crossing 15 th South 54 No Yes Midblock before 4 Street Powell Pedestrian Crossing 16 South 55 No Yes Street Midblock to Powell Street 17 5th Street South 19 Yes Yes Civic Center/ Hyde Street/ 21 North 17 No Yes UN Plaza Grove Street Source: STV, Inc., 2018 Note: 1. Distance from closest canopy enclosure element to nearside of crosswalk. In order to assess SFMTA’s concerns, a signal visibility assessment is being conducted as part of the BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project. The plans for the future Better Market Street project are still under development; as the plans for the Better Market Street project progress, the proposed canopies will be re-assessed (if necessary) for potential signal and pedestrian visibility conflicts. BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-7 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Currently, the Better Market Street project proposes to widen existing sidewalks thereby placing near-side signals further away from the proposed canopies resulting in improved sight lines for both signal and pedestrian visibility. Signal Visibility Assessment Signal visibility requirements are defined in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2014 Edition Revision 3 (March 9, 2018). The MUTCD requires a minimum of two signal faces be provided for the major movement on an approach to an intersection. Signal heads placed in accordance with the MUTCD should be visible to all motorists approaching the intersection from a minimum distance as prescribed by Table 4D-1 of the MUTCD (reproduced as Table C below). In the case of Market Street, the 85th percentile speed is set as 25 mile per hour (mph) with a minimum sight distance of 215 feet for two primary signal faces. There is also a "cone of vision" requirement that states that at least one traffic signal must be not less than 40 feet beyond the stop line and not greater than 150 feet from the stop line and within a 40-degree cone of vision centered on the center of the approach lanes. Table C. Station Entrance/Exit Escalator and Canopy Count 85th Percentile Speed Minimum Sight Distance (mph) (feet) 20 175 25 215 30 270 35 325 40 390 45 460 50 540 55 625 60 715 Source: Table 4D-1, California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2014 Edition Revision 3 (March 9, 2018). Note: Shading indicates minimum sight distance for Market Street BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Page i-8 Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration June 2018 Potential Issues with Proposed Canopies and Primary Signal Faces Of the eleven proposed canopies identified in Table B, eight are in close proximity to intersections on the approach side. The signal visibility assessment determined that all but one has the required two overhead primary signal faces where the canopies would not impair the visible sight distance at 215 feet. Montgomery Street Station canopy #7, proposed for the intersection of Sansome Street and Sutter Street, is the exception. The primary overhead signal (far right side) for southbound Sansome Street is not centered on the approach lane, but offset to the west.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Improvements to Powell Street Station Are Included As Part of the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency's Mid-Market Plan. This H
    POWELL STREET PLANNING Improvements to Powell Street Station are included as part of the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency’s Mid-Market Plan. This has been enhanced by the recommended improvements to Hallidie Plaza that were identified in the 2004 charrette funded in part by the owners of the soon-to- open (2006) Bloomingdale’s at San Francisco Center. Planning is also underway to make best use of the station space, which was studied in the 2004 Capacity Plan and found to be constricted in key areas (near the BART Police facility, in the mezzanine corridor between the fare gate areas, etc.) which may be affected when and if Muni’s Central Subway is connected to BART at this station. The Muni Central Subway project is proposed to connect to Powell station and to the new Transbay Terminal Project. The Powell station was studied in 2004 to analyze the critical areas of platform capacity, vertical circulation (stairs/escalators) capacity, and fare gate capacity. DEVELOPMENT BART is negotiating special entrance agreements with Forest City Development for a Bloomingdale’s entrance and with Millennium Partners and San Francisco Redevelopment Agency to consider what will become of the “tunnel” space between the station and and Yerba Buena Center. Owners of the Flood Building are also working with BART staff to address the possibilities of sub-street connections to the station. The Four Seasons high-rise tower, containing 150 housing units, 100 long-term hotel suites and 250 hotel rooms, is directly adjacent to the station and opened in 2002. Construction is underway at the adjacent Mexican Museum and the Jewish Museum in Yerba Buena Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Overview a Quarterly Publication of the San Francisco Office Market by the Axiant Group 2Nd Quarter 2020
    Market Overview A quarterly publication of the San Francisco office market by The Axiant Group 2nd Quarter 2020 PG&E Moves Across The Bay Covid-19 has in essence shut down the PG&E, embroiled in bankruptcy proceedings, has just office leasing market in San Francisco. committed to moving its headquarters from San Francisco Because of shelter in place orders and a real fear of contracting to Oakland as a cost-cutting move. They have leased 600,000 the virus, building tours are non-existent. In addition, the square feet at 300 Lakeside Drive. PG&E plans to occupy the economy has been stilted due to the pandemic. Most tenants space in 2022. As want to see stabilization of the virus or a vaccine before leases expire, considering long term commitments. We are seeing increased they will fill inventory of sublease space flooding the market, particularly the rest of the from the tech industry. building and also have a right to Sublease Space Increases Dramatically purchase the Second quarter vacancy rates increased dramatically from an building. 300 adjusted 6.7% in the 1st quarter to 8.4% in the 2nd quarter. Lakeshore Drive, Gross leasing activity decreased from 1,037,496 square feet built in 1960 in the 1st quarter to 791,518 square feet in the 2nd quarter. for Kaiser as Net absorption was significantly lower again at negative 300 LAKESIDE DRIVE, OAKLAND their company absorpstion of 1,043,366 square feet, compared to 1st quarter headquarters, went through a significant renovation in 2004. with negative absorption of 297,300 square feet.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Star Qualified Buildings
    1 ENERGY STAR® Qualified Buildings As of 1-1-03 Building Address City State Alabama 10044 3535 Colonnade Parkway Birmingham AL Bellsouth City Center 600 N 19th St. Birmingham AL Arkansas 598 John L. McClellan Memorial Veterans Hospital 4300 West 7th Street Little Rock AR Arizona 24th at Camelback 2375 E Camelback Phoenix AZ Phoenix Federal Courthouse -AZ0052ZZ 230 N. First Ave. Phoenix AZ 649 N. Arizona VA Health Care System - Prescott 500 Highway 89 North Prescott AZ America West Airlines Corporate Headquarters 111 W. Rio Salado Pkwy. Tempe AZ Tempe, AZ - Branch 83 2032 West Fourth Street Tempe AZ 678 Southern Arizona VA Health Care System-Tucson 3601 South 6th Avenue Tucson AZ Federal Building 300 West Congress Tucson AZ Holualoa Centre East 7810-7840 East Broadway Tucson AZ Holualoa Corporate Center 7750 East Broadway Tucson AZ Thomas O' Price Service Center Building #1 4004 S. Park Ave. Tucson AZ California Agoura Westlake 31355 31355 Oak Crest Drive Agoura CA Agoura Westlake 31365 31365 Oak Crest Drive Agoura CA Agoura Westlake 4373 4373 Park Terrace Dr Agoura CA Stadium Centre 2099 S. State College Anaheim CA Team Disney Anaheim 700 West Ball Road Anaheim CA Anahiem City Centre 222 S Harbor Blvd. Anahiem CA 91 Freeway Business Center 17100 Poineer Blvd. Artesia CA California Twin Towers 4900 California Ave. Bakersfield CA Parkway Center 4200 Truxton Bakersfield CA Building 69 1 Cyclotron Rd. Berkeley CA 120 Spalding 120 Spalding Dr. Beverly Hills CA 8383 Wilshire 8383 Wilshire Blvd. Beverly Hills CA 9100 9100 Wilshire Blvd. Beverly Hills CA 9665 Wilshire 9665 Wilshire Blvd.
    [Show full text]
  • Brief of Creditor Reliant Energy Services, Inc., Regarding Debtor's
    McCUTCHEN, DOYLE, BROWN & ENERSEN, LLP 1 10 -- TERRY J. HOULIHAN (SBN 42877) 2 WILLIAM BATES III (SBN 63317) RANDY MICHELSON (SBN 114095) 3 GEOFFREY T. HOLTZ (SBN 191370) Three Embarcadero Center 4 San Francisco, California 94111-4067 Telephone: (415) 393-2000 5 Facsimile: (415) 393-2286 6 Attorneys for Creditor Reliant Energy Services, Inc. 7 8 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 In re Case No. 01-30923 DM 13 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, a Chapter 11 California corporation, 14 PROOF OF SERVICE Debtor. 15 Tax Identification No. 94-742640 16 17 18 I am over 18 years of age, not a party to this action and employed in the County 19 of San Francisco, California at Three Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, California 94111 20 4067. I am readily familiar with the practice of this office for collection and processing of 21 correspondence for facsimile transmission/mail/hand delivery/next business day delivery, and 22 they are deposited that same day in the ordinary course of business. 23 Today I served the following: 24 BRIEF OF CREDITOR RELIANT ENERGY SERVICES, INC. RE 25 DEBTOR'S MOTION FOR ORDER ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES CLAIMS 26 AND DEADLINES FOR FILING CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE PROOF OF SERVICE (--1 1 OPPOSITION OF CREDITOR RELIANT ENERGY SERVICES, INC. TO 2 MOTION FOR AUTHORITY TO ASSUME POWER PURCHASE 3 AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PG&E AND CERTAIN QUALIFYING FACILITIES 4 DECLARATION OF BILL T. HAMILTON IN SUPPORT OF BRIEF OF 5 CREDITOR RELIANT ENERGY SERVICES, INC. RE DEBTOR'S MOTION FOR ORDER ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND 6 DEADLINES FOR FILING CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE CLAIMS 7 on the following by facsimile transmission/mail/hand delivery/next business day delivery, in 8 sealed envelope(s), as respectively noted, with all fees prepaid at San Francisco, California, 9 addressed as follow: 11 SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST 12 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America 13 that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on August 2, 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • SAN FRANCISCO 2Nd Quarter 2014 Office Market Report
    SAN FRANCISCO 2nd Quarter 2014 Office Market Report Historical Asking Rental Rates (Direct, FSG) SF MARKET OVERVIEW $60.00 $57.00 $55.00 $53.50 $52.50 $53.00 $52.00 $50.50 $52.00 Prepared by Kathryn Driver, Market Researcher $49.00 $49.00 $50.00 $50.00 $47.50 $48.50 $48.50 $47.00 $46.00 $44.50 $43.00 Approaching the second half of 2014, the job market in San Francisco is $40.00 continuing to grow. With over 465,000 city residents employed, the San $30.00 Francisco unemployment rate dropped to 4.4%, the lowest the county has witnessed since 2008 and the third-lowest in California. The two counties with $20.00 lower unemployment rates are neighboring San Mateo and Marin counties, $10.00 a mark of the success of the region. The technology sector has been and continues to be a large contributor to this success, accounting for 30% of job $0.00 growth since 2010 and accounting for over 1.5 million sf of leased office space Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 this quarter. Class A Class B Pre-leasing large blocks of space remains a prime option for large tech Historical Vacancy Rates companies looking to grow within the city. Three of the top 5 deals involved 16.0% pre-leasing, including Salesforce who took over half of the Transbay Tower 14.0% (delivering Q1 2017) with a 713,727 sf lease. Other pre-leases included two 12.0% full buildings: LinkedIn signed a deal for all 450,000 sf at 222 2nd Street as well 10.0% as Splunk, who grabbed all 182,000 sf at 270 Brannan Street.
    [Show full text]
  • D D D D D D D D D
    File No. -------17068 Item No.10------- SUNSHINE ORDINANCE TASK FORCE AGENDA PACKET CONTENTS LIST =S=O....:.T..:....F_-......:C=o=m=p=la=in..:..:t:.....;:C:;..;:o=m=m=itt=e..;;;;..e_______ Date: July 25, 2017 ~ Petition/Complaint Page:_f D Memorandum - Deputy City Attorney Page:_ D Complainant's Supporting Documents Page:_ ~ Respondent's Response Page:s]o D Correspondence Page:_ D Order of Determination Page:_ D Minutes Page:_ D Committee Recommendation/Referral Page:_ D Administrator's Report Page:_._ D No Attachments OTHER D D D D D D D D D Completed by: __V_. Y_o_u_n_g ______Date 07/21/17 *An asterisked item represents the cover sheet to a document that exceeds 25 pages. The complete document is in the file. P321 Sunshine Ordinance Task Force Complaint Summary File No. 17068 Ann Treboux V. Arts Commission Contacts information (Complainant information listed first): [email protected] (Complainant) Kate Patterson, Arts Commission (Respondent) File No. 17067: Complaint filed by Ann Treboux against the Arts Commission, for allegedly violating Administrative Code (Sunshine Ordinance), Section 67.25, by failing to respond to an Immediate Disclosure Request in a complete manner. Administrative Summary if applicable: Complaint Attached. P322 Young, Victor From: atreboux1 [email protected] Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 3:29 PM To: SOTF, (BOS); Patterson, Kate (ART) Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Immediate Disclosure Request-please open a file and schedule a hearing. There is no PDF attachment in this response. I have some serious doubts as to what Kate Patterson's constant mistakes have to do with me.
    [Show full text]
  • Sobriety First, Housing Plus Meet the Man Who Runs a Homeless Program with a 93 Percent Success Rate and Why He Says Even He Couldn’T Solve San Francisco’S Crisis
    Good food and drink Travel tips The Tablehopper says get ready for hops Bay Area cannabis tours p.18 at Fort Mason p.10 Visiting Cavallo Point — Susan Dyer Reynolds’s favorite things p.11 The Lodge at the Golden Anthony Torres scopes out Madrone Art Bar p.12 Gate p.19 MARINATIMES.COM CELEBRATING OUR 34TH YEAR VOLUME 34 ISSUE 09 SEPTEMBER 2018 Reynolds Rap Sobriety first, housing plus Meet the man who runs a homeless program with a 93 percent success rate and why he says even he couldn’t solve San Francisco’s crisis BY SUSAN DYER REYNOLDS Detail of Gillian Ayres, 1948, The Walmer Castle pub near Camberwell School of Art, with Gillian Ayres (center) hris megison has worked with the home- and Henry Mundy (to the right of Ayres). PHOTO: COURTESY OF GILLIAN AYRES less for nearly three decades. He and his wife, Tammy, helped thousands of men get off the Cstreets, find employment, and earn their way back into Book review: ‘Modernists and Mavericks: Bacon, Freud, society. But it was a volunteer stint at a winter emergency shelter for families where they saw mothers and babies Hockney and The London Painters,’ by Martin Gayford sleeping on the floor that gave them the vision for their organization Solutions for Change. The plan was far from BY SHARON ANDERSON tionships — artists as friends, as photographs and artworks, Gayford traditional: Shelter beds, feeding programs, and conven- students and teachers, and as par- draws on extensive interviews with tional human services were replaced with a hybrid model artin gayford’s latest ticipants who combined to define artists to build an intimate history of where parents worked, paid rent, and attended onsite book takes on the history painting from Soho bohemia in the an era.
    [Show full text]
  • A Year of Movement
    A Year of Movement San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Annual Report VISION Excellent transportation choices for San Francisco. MISSION We connect San Francisco through a safe, equitable and sustainable transportation system. Table of Contents Letter from the DOT About the SFMTA SFMTA Strategic Plan Moving Muni Forward Improving Access to Transportation Making Streets Safer with Vision Zero Building Out the Bike Network Driving Innovation Protecting the Environment Our Workplace Connects to the Transportation System Working with Communities Completed Projects FY 2017-2018 Projects on the Horizon Financial Information Key Performance Indicators Acknowledgments This annual report shares milestones and data covering the fiscal year that began July 1, 2017 and closed June 30, 2018. This period comprises the final year of the Fiscal Year 2013–2018 SFMTA Strategic Plan. A Year of Movement San Francisco is the epicenter of transportation innovation. This was true a century ago, when our city introduced Muni as the first publicly owned transit system in the nation. San Francisco continues to be the home of transportation innovations, from the great strides we’ve made to embrace environmentally friendly transportation options and being the home of the greenest public transit system in North America, to proactively designing streets that prioritize your safety and well-being no matter how you move around the city. Our annual report describes the many ways that we work to manage, operate and regulate the city’s transportation system to ensure that it is safe, reliable and equitable. Thanks to historic investments to replace and expand the entire Muni fleet with state-of-the-art light rail vehicles and new coaches, trolleys and hybrid buses, Muni now generates less than 2 percent of the city’s greenhouse gas emissions.
    [Show full text]
  • Coherent, Inc. 5100 Patrick Henry Drive, Santa Clara, Ca 95054
    COHERENT, INC. 5100 PATRICK HENRY DRIVE, SANTA CLARA, CA 95054 San Francisco International Airport (SFO) Mineta San Jose International Airport (SJC) – is approximately 30 miles north of Santa Clara – is approximately 6 miles south of Santa Clara Website: https://www.flysfo.com/ 1701 Airport Boulevard, San Jose, CA 95110 Website: http://www.flysanjose.com/fl/ Directions: Get on US-101 S from International Terminal Arrivals Directions: Level - 1.4 mi http://www.flysanjose.com/fl/travelers.php?page=map s/to_here&exp=7 Follow US-101 South Leaving the rental car area, follow the signs to CA-87 Merge onto US-101 S to Lawrence Expressway in and US-101 North Sunnyvale (Exit 394 from US 101) - 27.5 mi Use the right lane to turn right on to Skyport Drive (430 Use the 2nd from the right lane to take Exit 394 for ft.) Lawrence Expressway - 0.3 mi Use the right lane to merge onto CA-87 via the ramp Follow Lawrence Expressway and Tasman Drive to to Hwy 101 N – 0.8 mi Patrick Henry Drive in Santa Clara - 1.7 mi Use the left 3 lanes to take exit 9B to merge onto Turn left on Patrick Henry Drive – Coherent is on your US-101 N toward San Francisco – 2.7 mi immediate left ___________________________ Take exit 393 to merge on to Great America Parkway – 1.4 mi Keep right at the fork & merge onto Great America Parkway – 1.5 mi Taxi from/to SFO and/or SJC airports: Use the left 2 lanes to turn left onto Tasman Drive - 0.4 SFO – you can have a sedan arranged for your arrival mi SJC – you can take a taxi or have a sedan arranged for your arrival.
    [Show full text]
  • F I L E D State of California 02-14-11 04:59 Pm
    BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE F I L E D STATE OF CALIFORNIA 02-14-11 04:59 PM Order Instituting Rulemaking to Develop ) Additional Methods to Implement the California ) Rulemaking 06-02-012 Renewables Portfolio Standard Program. ) (Filed February 16, 2006) ) APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR REHEARING OF DECISION 11-01-025 MICHAEL D. MONTOYA CATHY A. KARLSTAD Attorneys for SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Telephone: (626) 302-1096 Facsimile: (626) 302-1935 E-mail: [email protected] Dated: February 14, 2011 APPLICATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) FOR REHEARING OF DECISION 11-01-025 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY..............................................................................................2 II. THE DECISION EXCEEDS THE SCOPE OF THE COMMISSION’S JURISDISCTION ............................................................................................................................6 III. THE COMMISSION’S RECLASSIFICATION OF OUT-OF-STATE BUNDLED TRANSACTIONS AS REC-ONLY, MARRIED WITH A 25% LIMITATION AND PRICE CAP, VIOLATES THE COMMERCE CLAUSE ............................8 IV. THE COMMISSION’S ADOPTION OF DIFFERENT RPS RULES FOR DIFFERENT LSES VIOLATES CALIFORNIA STATUTES.....................................................12 V. CONCLUSION..............................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • AQ Conformity Amended PBA 2040 Supplemental Report Mar.2018
    TRANSPORTATION-AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY ANALYSIS FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Metropolitan Transportation Commission Association of Bay Area Governments MARCH 2018 Metropolitan Transportation Commission Jake Mackenzie, Chair Dorene M. Giacopini Julie Pierce Sonoma County and Cities U.S. Department of Transportation Association of Bay Area Governments Scott Haggerty, Vice Chair Federal D. Glover Alameda County Contra Costa County Bijan Sartipi California State Alicia C. Aguirre Anne W. Halsted Transportation Agency Cities of San Mateo County San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Libby Schaaf Tom Azumbrado Oakland Mayor’s Appointee U.S. Department of Housing Nick Josefowitz and Urban Development San Francisco Mayor’s Appointee Warren Slocum San Mateo County Jeannie Bruins Jane Kim Cities of Santa Clara County City and County of San Francisco James P. Spering Solano County and Cities Damon Connolly Sam Liccardo Marin County and Cities San Jose Mayor’s Appointee Amy R. Worth Cities of Contra Costa County Dave Cortese Alfredo Pedroza Santa Clara County Napa County and Cities Carol Dutra-Vernaci Cities of Alameda County Association of Bay Area Governments Supervisor David Rabbit Supervisor David Cortese Councilmember Pradeep Gupta ABAG President Santa Clara City of South San Francisco / County of Sonoma San Mateo Supervisor Erin Hannigan Mayor Greg Scharff Solano Mayor Liz Gibbons ABAG Vice President City of Campbell / Santa Clara City of Palo Alto Representatives From Mayor Len Augustine Cities in Each County City of Vacaville
    [Show full text]
  • F I L E D 07-18-12 04:59 Pm
    BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA F I L E D 07-18-12 04:59 PM Order Instituting Rulemaking to Continue R. 11-05-005 Implementation and Administration of California (Filed May 5, 2011) Renewables Portfolio Standard Program CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Annie Pham, certify that I have on this 18th day of July 2012 caused a copy of the foregoing SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA REPLY COMMENTS ON THE ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER’S RULING IDENTIFYING ISSUES AND SCHEDULE OF REVIEW FOR 2012 RENEWABLES PORTFOLIO STANDARD PROCUREMENT PLANS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTIONS 399.11 ET SEQ. AND REQUESTING COMMENTS ON NEW PROPOSALS to be served on all known parties to R.11-05-005 listed on the most recently updated service list available on the California Public Utilities Commission website, via email to those listed with email and via U.S. mail to those without email service, and to the Administrative Law Judge. ALJ Regina DeAngelis California Public Utilities Commission Division of Administrative Law Judges 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, California 94102 Michael Meacham City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Morgan Hansen Morgan Stanley-Commodities 2000 Westchester Ave 1st Floor, Purchase, NY, 10577 Samara Rassi Fellon-Mccord & Associates 10200 Forest Green Blvd., Ste. 501 Louisville, KY, 40223-5183 Commerce Energy, Inc. 5251 Westheimer Rd. Ste. 1000 Houston, TX, 77056-5414 Harvey Eder Public Solar Power Coalition 1218 12th Street, No. 25 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Kellie M. Hanigan Enco Utility Services 8141 E. KAISER BLVD., STE. 212 Anaheim, CA 92808 Rafi Hassan Susquehanna Financial Group, LLP 101 California St., Ste 3250 San Francisco, CA 94111 Tony Chen Cool Earth Solar 4659 Las Positas Rd., 94551 Livermore, CA 94551 Mountain Utilities PO Box 1 Kirkwood, CA 95646 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
    [Show full text]