DOCSLIB.ORG

49Ers SANTA CLARA STADIUM PROJECT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 49ers SANTA CLARA STADIUM PROJECT VOLUME I of III EIR Text City of Santa Clara July 2009 PREFACE The document has been prepared by the City of Santa Clara as the Lead Agency, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to inform decision makers and the general public of the environmental effects of the proposed project. This document provides environmental review appropriate for the approval of the proposed 49ers Santa Clara Stadium project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15121, 15145, and 15151. Purpose of the EIR In accordance with CEQA, this EIR provides objective information regarding the environmental consequences of the proposed project to the decision makers who will be considering and reviewing the proposed project. The CEQA Guidelines contain the following general information on the role of an EIR and its contents: §15121(a). Informational Document. An EIR is an informational document, which will inform public agency decision makers, and the public of the significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project. The public agency shall consider the information in the EIR, along with other information that may be presented to the agency. §15145. Speculation. If, after thorough investigation, a Lead Agency finds that a particular impact is too speculative for evaluation, the agency should note its conclusion and terminate discussion of the impact. §15151. Standards for Adequacy of an EIR. An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers with information that enables them to make a decision that intelligently considers environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of the proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection, but for adequacy, completeness, and a good-faith effort at full disclosure. In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was circulated to the public and responsible agencies for input regarding the analysis in this EIR. This EIR addresses those issues which were raised by the public and responsible agencies in response to the NOP. The NOP and the responses to the NOP are presented in Appendix M of this EIR. This EIR, and all documents referenced in this EIR, are available for public review in the Department of Planning and Inspection, 1500 Warburton Ave Santa Clara, California, on weekdays during normal business hours. i TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE……………………………………………………………………………………... i SUMMARY…………………………………………………………………………………… vii Section 1.0 – Introduction and Purpose……………………………………………………... 1 1.1 OVERVIEW………………………………………………………………. 1 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION…………………………………………………… 1 1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES…………………………………………………. 5 1.4 USES OF THE EIR……………………………………………………….. 7 Section 2.0 – Description of the Proposed Project………………………………………….. 8 Section 3.0 – Consistency with Plans and Policies…………………………………………... 23 Section 4.0 – Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures………………… 29 4.1 LAND USE……………………………………………………………… 29 4.2 VISUAL…………………………………………………………………. 42 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS……………………………………………….. 72 4.4 HYDROLOGY…………………………………………………………. 76 4.5 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE……………………………………… 84 4.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS………………………………………….. 100 4.7 CULTURAL RESOURCES…………………………………………….. 115 4.8 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION………………………….. 120 4.9 AIR QUALITY………………………………………………………….. 211 4.10 NOISE…………………………………………………………………… 233 4.11 UTILITIES……………………………………………………………… 256 4.12 ENERGY………………………………………………………………... 262 Section 5.0 – Public Facilities and Services…………………………………………………. 267 Section 6.0 – Cumulative Impacts……………………………………………………………. 270 Section 7.0 – Alternatives to the Proposed Project…………………………………………. 314 Section 8.0 – Significant Unavoidable Impacts of the Project……………………………... 340 Section 9.0 – Irreversible Environmental Changes and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources…………………………………………………... 341 Section 10.0 – Growth Inducing Impacts of the Project……………………………………. 342 Section 11.0 – Authors and Consultants…………………………………………………….. 343 Section 12.0 – References……………………………………………………………………... 344 ii FIGURES Figure 1 Project Locations……………………………………..………………............... 1 Figure 2 Regional……………………………………...………………………………... 2 Figure 3 Vicinity………………………………………………………………………....3 Figure 4 Project Area…………………………………………………………………….4 Figure 5 Parking Locations.…………………………………...………………………. 6 Figure 6 Site Plan…………………………………………………………………….…. 9 Figure 7 Proposed and Available Parking……..………………………………………... 17 Figure 8 Photo Locations……………………………..………………………..………... 42 Figure 9 Photo Simulations…………...………………………………………..……….. 55 Figure 10 Photo Simulation 1…………………………………………………………..… 56 Figure 11 Photo Simulation 2…………………………………………………………….. 57 Figure 12 Photo Simulation 3…………………………………………………………...... 58 Figure 13 Photo Simulation 4…………………………………………………………….. 59 Figure 14 Shade and Shadow March 9am………………………………………………... 62 Figure 15 Shade and Shadow March 3pm……………..……………………………….… 63 Figure 16 Shade and Shadow June 9am………..………………………………………… 64 Figure 17 Shade and Shadow June 3pm……………………….……………………….… 65 Figure 18 Shade and Shadow September 9am…………………………………………… 66 Figure 19 Shade and Shadow September 3pm…………………………………………… 67 Figure 20 Shade and Shadow December 9am……………………………………………. 68 Figure 21 Shade and Shadow December 3pm………………………………………….… 69 Figure 22 Tree Survey Sub-Area A…………………………………………………..…... 86 Figure 23 Tree Survey Sub-Areas B and C…………………………………………….… 87 Figure 24 Trees to be Removed…………………………………………………………... 97 Figure 25 Hazardous Release Impact Zone………………………………………………….. 112 Figure 26 Stadium Core Study Intersections………………………………………………..... 124 Figure 27 Santa Clara Intersections Part 1………………………………………………….... 125 Figure 28 Santa Clara Intersections Part 2…………………………………………………… 126 Figure 29 San José Intersections……………………………………………………….…..… 127 Figure 30 Sunnyvale Intersections……………………………………………………..…..… 128 Figure 31 Milpitas Intersections………………………………………………………..…..… 129 Figure 32 Existing Bicycle Facilities…………………………………………………..…. 138 Figure 33 Existing Transit Service……………………………………………………..… 139 Figure 34 Stadium Core Study Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekday…………... 144 Figure 35 Santa Clara Intersections Part 1 Existing Level of Service Weekday……….... 145 Figure 36 Santa Clara Intersections Part 2 Existing Level of Service Weekday……..….. 146 Figure 37 San José Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekday…………………… 147 Figure 38 Sunnyvale Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekday…………...…….. 148 Figure 39 Milpitas Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekday………….……..…. 149 Figure 40 Stadium Core Study Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekend….…… 151 Figure 41 Santa Clara Intersections Part 1 Existing Level of Service Weekend…….…... 152 Figure 42 Santa Clara Intersections Part 2 Existing Level of Service Weekend…...……. 153 Figure 43 San José Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekend…………………… 154 Figure 44 Sunnyvale Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekend…………..…….. 155 Figure 45 Milpitas Intersections Existing Level of Service Weekend……………………156 Figure 46 Stadium Core Study Intersections Background Level of Service Weekday…... 160 Figure 47 Santa Clara Intersections Part 1 Background Level of Service Weekday…….. 161 iii Figure 48 Santa Clara Intersections Part 2 Background Level of Service Weekday…….. 162 Figure 49 San José Intersections Background Level of Service Weekday………………..163 Figure 50 Sunnyvale Intersections Background Level of Service Weekday………….…..164 Figure 51 Milpitas Intersections Background Level of Service Weekday……………….. 165 Figure 52 Stadium Core Study Intersections Background Level of Service Weekend……… 168 Figure 53 Santa Clara Intersections Part 1 Background Level of Service Weekend…….. 169 Figure 54 Santa Clara Intersections Part 2 Background Level of Service Weekend…….. 170 Figure 55 San José Intersections Background Level of Service Weekend………………. 171 Figure 56 Sunnyvale Intersections Background Level of Service Weekend…………….. 172 Figure 57 Milpitas Intersections Background Level of Service Weekend……………….. 173 Figure 58 Identified Potential Parking Area……………………………………………… 181 Figure 59 Micro Stadium Project Trip Distribution……………………………………......… 184 Figure 60 General Routes to Identified Parking Zones…………………………………...185 Figure 61 Planned Road Closures……………………………………………………...… 186 Figure 62 Stadium Core Study Intersections Level of Service with Project Weekday………. 189 Figure 63 Santa Clara Intersections Part 1 Level of Service with Project Weekday…….. 190 Figure 64 Santa Clara Intersections Part 2 Level of Service with Project Weekday……...191 Figure 65 San José Intersections Level of Service with Project Weekday………………. 192 Figure 66 Sunnyvale Intersections Level of Service with Project Weekday…………….. 193 Figure 67 Milpitas intersections Level of Service with Project Weekday……………..… 194 Figure 68 Stadium Core Study Intersections Level of Service with Project Weekend…... 196 Figure 69 Identified Routes and Stadium Trips………………………………………….. 200 Figure 70 Pedestrian Routes and Volumes……………………………………………….. 202
Recommended publications
  • NCAA Division II-III Football Records (Special Games)

    NCAA Division II-III Football Records (Special Games)

    Special Regular- and Postseason- Games Special Regular- and Postseason-Games .................................. 178 178 SPECIAL REGULAR- AND POSTSEASON GAMES Special Regular- and Postseason Games 11-19-77—Mo. Western St. 35, Benedictine 30 (1,000) 12-9-72—Harding 30, Langston 27 Postseason Games 11-18-78—Chadron St. 30, Baker (Kan.) 19 (3,000) DOLL AND TOY CHARITY GAME 11-17-79—Pittsburg St. 43, Peru St. 14 (2,800) 11-21-80—Cameron 34, Adams St. 16 (Gulfport, Miss.) 12-3-37—Southern Miss. 7, Appalachian St. 0 (2,000) UNSANCTIONED OR OTHER BOWLS BOTANY BOWL The following bowl and/or postseason games were 11-24-55—Neb.-Kearney 34, Northern St. 13 EASTERN BOWL (Allentown, Pa.) unsanctioned by the NCAA or otherwise had no BOY’S RANCH BOWL team classified as major college at the time of the 12-14-63—East Carolina 27, Northeastern 6 (2,700) bowl. Most are postseason games; in many cases, (Abilene, Texas) 12-13-47—Missouri Valley 20, McMurry 13 (2,500) ELKS BOWL complete dates and/or statistics are not avail- 1-2-54—Charleston (W.V.) 12, East Carolina 0 (4,500) (at able and the scores are listed only to provide a BURLEY BOWL Greenville, N.C.) historical reference. Attendance of the game, (Johnson City, Tenn.) 12-11-54—Newberry 20, Appalachian St. 13 (at Raleigh, if known, is listed in parentheses after the score. 1-1-46—High Point 7, Milligan 7 (3,500) N.C.) ALL-SPORTS BOWL 11-28-46—Southeastern La. 21, Milligan 13 (7,500) FISH Bowl (Oklahoma City, Okla.) 11-27-47—West Chester 20, Carson-Newman 6 (10,000) 11-25-48—West Chester 7, Appalachian St.
  • An Analysis of the American Outdoor Sport Facility: Developing an Ideal Type on the Evolution of Professional Baseball and Football Structures

    An Analysis of the American Outdoor Sport Facility: Developing an Ideal Type on the Evolution of Professional Baseball and Football Structures

    AN ANALYSIS OF THE AMERICAN OUTDOOR SPORT FACILITY: DEVELOPING AN IDEAL TYPE ON THE EVOLUTION OF PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL AND FOOTBALL STRUCTURES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Chad S. Seifried, B.S., M.Ed. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2005 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Donna Pastore, Advisor Professor Melvin Adelman _________________________________ Professor Janet Fink Advisor College of Education Copyright by Chad Seifried 2005 ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to analyze the physical layout of the American baseball and football professional sport facility from 1850 to present and design an ideal-type appropriate for its evolution. Specifically, this study attempts to establish a logical expansion and adaptation of Bale’s Four-Stage Ideal-type on the Evolution of the Modern English Soccer Stadium appropriate for the history of professional baseball and football and that predicts future changes in American sport facilities. In essence, it is the author’s intention to provide a more coherent and comprehensive account of the evolving professional baseball and football sport facility and where it appears to be headed. This investigation concludes eight stages exist concerning the evolution of the professional baseball and football sport facility. Stages one through four primarily appeared before the beginning of the 20th century and existed as temporary structures which were small and cheaply built. Stages five and six materialize as the first permanent professional baseball and football facilities. Stage seven surfaces as a multi-purpose facility which attempted to accommodate both professional football and baseball equally.
  • Recreation and Parks Department

    Recreation and Parks Department

    April 2013 Mayor Edwin Lee San Francisco Board of Supervisors Eric Mar, Mark Farrell, David Chiu, Katy Tang, London Breed, Jane Kim, Norman Yee, Scott Wiener, David Campos, Malia Cohen and John Avalos. Recreation & Park Commission Mark Buell, Allan Low, Tom Harrison, Paige Arata, Gloria Bonilla, Meaghan Levitan and Larry Martin. SFRPD General Manager Philip A. Ginsburg SFRPD Climate Action Liaisons Ana M. Alvarez, Superintendent of Parks & Open Spaces CLIMATE ACTION Erin Anderson, Field Operations Senior Administrative Analyst MITIGATION REPORTING Contributing Staff Jeffrey Bramlett, Environment, Health and Safety Manager DATA YEAR: Kelly Cornell, Tree Topper Supervisor Dennis Kern, Director of Operations FY 2011-2012 Sean McFadden, Purchasing Principle Administrative Analyst Jacqueline Muller, San Francisco State University Intern Lydia Zaverukha, Fleet Operations Principle Administrative Analyst This report was developed in compliance with Sec. 904. City and County of San Francisco Environment Code Page 1 of 44 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 3 2. Departmental Profile ......................................................................................................... 4 3. Carbon Footprint ............................................................................................................... 9 3a. Building Energy ...................................................................................................................
  • 2018 Battle of the Bay Art Show

    2018 Battle of the Bay Art Show

    NBC SPORTS BAY AREA, NBC SPORTS CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND A’S AND SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS PRESENT INAUGURAL “BATTLE OF THE BAY ART SHOW” A’s & Giants-Themed Art Exhibit During Bay Bridge Series, July 13-15 at AT&T Park and July 20-22 at the Oakland Coliseum “Battle of the Bay Art Show” to Showcase Artwork of 40 Northern California Artists “The Bridge,” New Trophy Awarded to Winner of A’s-Giants Bay Bridge Series, on Public Display for First Time at Show SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. – July 9, 2018 – NBC Sports Bay Area and NBC Sports California (@NBCSAuthentic) – “Home of Authentic Bay Area Sports” – and Major League Baseball’s Oakland Athletics (@Athletics) and San Francisco Giants (@SFGiants) today announced the inaugural Battle of the Bay Art Show . The A’s and Giants-themed art exhibit takes place during the Giants and A’s annual Bay Bridge Series. The Battle of the Bay Art Show features the artwork of 40 Northern California artists and will be on display on July 13-15 adjacent to AT&T Park’s Giants Vault (located inside the Lefty O’Doul Gate) and July 20-22 at the Oakland Coliseum’s Championship Plaza . The exhibit is accessible to all fans inside the ballpark. To purchase game tickets for July 13-15 at AT&T Park click HERE , for July 20-22 game tickets at the Oakland Coliseum, click HERE . Admission to the art show is free with the purchase of a ticket to the game. The Battle of the Bay Art Show will feature A’s and Giants-themed art including legends, current players, mascots, stadiums and abstract representations.
  • R. C. Owens: Alley Oop

    R. C. Owens: Alley Oop

    THE COFFIN CORNER: Vol. 9, No. 9 (1987) R. C. OWENS: ALLEY OOP By Joseph Hession From Forty Niners: Looking Back It seemed unlikely that a rookie receiver playing in his sixth NFL game would leap into the stratosphere, gram a 50-yard pass above Detroit's All-Pro secondary and score a winning touchdown with 10 seconds on the clock. But that's exactly what R. C. Owens did in 1957 when he and Y.A. Tittle made the Alley-Oop pass as much a part of San Francisco as Coit Tower and the Golden Gate Bridge. Owens' touchdown reception against the Lions that day was not the first time the Alley-Oop was put to use, but it was certainly the most dramatic. San Francisco trailed Detroit, 31-28, with 1:20 to play. The 49ers had the ball on their own 38-yard line. Three straight pass completions by Tittle moved the ball to the Lions' 42. There was 11 seconds to go. Everyone at Kezar Stadium knew what was coming. The Lions completely surrounded Owens all the way downfield. Tittle let fly a rocket that sailed about 50 yards in the air. In the end zone, All-Pro Jack Christiansen covered Owens along with Jim David. Owens leapt, grabbed the pigskin over the defenders and scored. San Francisco won, 35-31. "That Detroit game was probably the most satisfying win for me," Owens said. "Detroit had just scored to go ahead and Abe Woodson made a good kick return. Y.A. went to work after that.
  • Texas Lutheran University Pound the Footballrock 2012 Bulldogs Fight

    Texas Lutheran University Pound the Footballrock 2012 Bulldogs Fight

    TEXAS LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY POUND THE FOOTBALLROCK 2012 BULLDOGS FIGHT. FINISH. FAITH. TABLE OF CONTENTS In and Around TLU The Schedule TLU Up Close ................................................................... 2 About the NCAA DIII ....................................................... 44 Notable Alumni & Quick Facts ......................................... 3 About the American Southwest Conference ................ 44 TLU Athletics – A Force in the NCAA and the ASC ......... 4 ASC Preseason Football Poll ......................................... 45 About Seguin, Texas ........................................................ 5 Game 1 Austin College ................................................... 46 Media / Fan Information .................................................. 6 Game 2 Trinity ................................................................ 46 Dr Stuart Dorsey, TLU President .......................................7 Game 3 Southwestern Assemblies of God ....................47 Steve Anderson, Assistant to the President.....................7 Game 4 East Texas Baptist .............................................47 Bill Miller, Director of Athletics .........................................7 Game 5 Mary Hardin-Baylor .......................................... 48 Medical / Athletic Training Staff ....................................8-9 Game 6 Sul Ross State .................................................. 48 Sports Information / Athletics Office Staff ....................... 9 Game 7 Mississippi College .........................................
  • PRESS RELEASE** SFMTA Weekend Transit and Traffic Advisory for Weekend of Saturday, June 5, 2021

    PRESS RELEASE** SFMTA Weekend Transit and Traffic Advisory for Weekend of Saturday, June 5, 2021

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 3, 2021 Contact: Erica Kato [email protected] **PRESS RELEASE** SFMTA Weekend Transit and Traffic Advisory for Weekend of Saturday, June 5, 2021 San Francisco—The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) releases the following upcoming event-related traffic and transit impacts for this weekend, from Friday, June 4 through Sunday, June 6, 2021. For real-time updates, follow us on https://twitter.com/sfmta_muni or visit SFMTA.com/EmailText to sign up for real-time text messages or email alerts. For details of Muni re-routes, visit SFMTA.com/Updates. This website will be updated when it is closer to the event date. For additional notifications and agency updates, subscribe to our blog, Moving SF for daily or weekly updates. Federal Law Requires Face Masks on Muni To help stop the spread of COVID-19, federal law requires wearing a mask in Muni stations, when purchasing a ticket and while waiting for, boarding, riding or exiting transit. Masks are also required on paratransit and in taxis. Violations can result in denial of boarding or removal from Muni and may carry federal penalties. Face coverings like scarves and bandanas do not meet this requirement. For more information, please visit sfmta.com/COVID. San Francisco Unified School District High School Outdoor Commencements Tuesday, June 1 through Friday, June 4: San Francisco Unified School District is hosting 12 outdoor high school graduation commencements at Kezar Stadium and nine at McAteer High School. more – more - more San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency 1 South Van Ness Avenue, 7th Floor San Francisco, CA 94103 SFMTA.com San Francisco Unified School District High School Outdoor Commencements continued Commencements at Kezar Stadium There are 12 commencements taking place at Kezar Stadium: 1) Three on Tuesday, June 1; 2) Four on Wednesday, June 2; 3) Four on Thursday, June 3; and 4) One on Friday, June 4.
  • History and Results

    History and Results

    H DENVER BRONCOS ISTORY ­­ Miscellaneous & R ESULTS Year-by-Year Stats Postseason Records Honors History/Results 252 Staff/Coaches Players Roster Breakdown 2019 Season Staff/Coaches Players Roster Breakdown 2019 Season DENVER BRONCOS BRONCOS ALL-TIME DRAFT CHOICES NUMBER OF DRAFT CHOICES PER SCHOOL 20 — Florida 15 — Colorado, Georgia 14 — Miami (Fla.), Nebraska 13 — Louisiana State, Houston, Southern California 12 — Michigan State, Washington 11 — Arkansas, Arizona State, Michigan 10 — Iowa, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oregon 9 — Maryland, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Purdue, Virginia Tech 8 — Arizona, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Minnesota, Syracuse, Texas, Utah State, Washington State 7 — Baylor, Boise State, Boston College, Kansas, North Carolina, Penn State. 6 — Alabama, Auburn, Brigham Young, California, Florida A&M, Northwestern, Oklahoma State, San Diego, Tennessee, Texas A&M, UCLA, Utah, Virginia 5 — Alcorn State, Colorado State, Florida State, Grambling, Illinois, Mississippi State, Pittsburgh, San Jose State, Texas Christian, Tulane, Wisconsin 4 — Arkansas State, Bowling Green/Bowling Green State, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa State, Jackson State, Kansas State, Kentucky, Louisville, Maryland-Eastern Shore, Miami (Ohio), Missouri, Northern Arizona, Oregon State, Pacific, South Carolina, Southern, Stanford, Texas A&I/Texas A&M Kingsville, Texas Tech, Tulsa, Wyoming 3 — Detroit, Duke, Fresno State, Montana State, North Carolina State, North Texas State, Rice, Richmond, Tennessee State, Texas-El Paso, Toledo, Wake Forest, Weber State 2 — Alabama A&M, Bakersfield
  • 2375 Forest Ave San Jose, Ca 95128 Offering Memorandum Confidentiality and Disclaimer

    2375 Forest Ave San Jose, Ca 95128 Offering Memorandum Confidentiality and Disclaimer

    2375 FOREST AVE SAN JOSE, CA 95128 OFFERING MEMORANDUM CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLAIMER The information contained in the following Marketing Brochure is proprietary and strictly confidential. It is intended to be reviewed only by the party receiving it from Marcus & Millichap and should not be made available to any other person or entity without the written consent of Marcus & Millichap. This Marketing Brochure has been prepared to provide summary, unverified information to prospective purchasers, and to establish only a preliminary level of interest in the subject property. The information contained herein is not a substitute for a thorough due diligence investigation. Marcus & Millichap has not made any investigation, and makes no warranty or representation, with respect to the income or expenses for the subject property, the future projected financial performance of the property, the size and square footage of the property and improvements, the presence or absence of contaminating substances, PCB’s or asbestos, the compliance with State and Federal regulations, the physical condition of the improvements thereon, or the financial condition or business prospects of any tenant, or any tenant’s plans or intentions to continue its occupancy of the subject property. The information contained in this Marketing Brochure has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable; however, Marcus & Millichap has not verified, and will not verify, any of the information contained herein, nor has Marcus & Millichap conducted any investigation regarding these matters and makes no warranty or representation whatsoever regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information provided. All potential buyers must take appropriate measures to verify all of the information set forth herein.
  • Final Report Composting Processing Capacity and Organic Materials

    Final Report Composting Processing Capacity and Organic Materials

    Final Report Composting Processing Capacity and Organic Materials Diversion Study Presented to: County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency 1553 Berger Drive, Building 1 San Jose, CA 95112 Presented by: SCS ENGINEERS 7041 Koll Center Pkwy, Suite 135 Pleasanton, CA 94566 Cascadia Consulting Group 1109 1st Ave, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98101 October 2017 File No. 01217021 Offices Nationwide www.scsengineers.com Final Report Composting Processing Capacity and Organic Materials Diversion Study Presented to: County of Santa Clara Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency 1553 Berger Drive, Building 1 San Jose, CA 95112 Presented by: SCS ENGINEERS 7041 Koll Center Pkwy, Suite 135 Pleasanton, CA 94566 Cascadia Consulting Group 1109 1st Ave, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98101 October 2017 File No. 01217021 Offices Nationwide www.scsengineers.com County of Santa Clara Organic Materials Study Table of Contents Section Page Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Quantities and Types of Organic Materials Accepted and Processed by Existing Facilities .. 4 1.1 Survey of Local Organic Materials Processors ....................................................................... 4 1.2 Survey of Regional Facilities ..................................................................................................... 6 2.0 Current and Projected Organic MAterials Generation .................................................................
  • 1 Santa Clara University Welcome Weekend 2019 Highlights Note: This “Highlights” Document Is Not the Final Version of the W

    1 Santa Clara University Welcome Weekend 2019 Highlights Note: This “Highlights” Document Is Not the Final Version of the W

    Santa Clara University Welcome Weekend 2019 Highlights Note: This “highlights” document is not the final version of the Welcome Weekend 2019 schedule so please use it as a guide only. The final version will be available starting on September 9, 2019. Saturday, September 21 Move In-Times 8:30am- 10:30am: • Move-in even numbered rooms in Campisi, Casa Italiana, Dunne, Finn, Graham, McLaughlin- Walsh, Sobrato, and Sanfilippo • Swig floors 1, 2, 8, 9, 10 10:30am- 12:30pm: • Move-in odd numbered rooms in Campisi, Casa Italiana, Dunne, Finn, Graham, McLaughlin- Walsh, Sobrato, and Sanfilippo • Swig floors 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Welcome Weekend Check-In & Help Desk 8:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. | Santa Clara Mall (between Kenna and Benson) Get Organized! Vendor Fair 9:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. | Santa Clara Mall (between Kenna and Benson) Welcome Weekend Lunch 11:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. | Locatelli Center Preview Class: Elementary Italian I with Marie Bertola 1:30pm - 2:30pm | Kenna Hall 102 Tour of the University Library 1:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. | Learning Commons Engage and Inspire: Arts at SCU 1:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. | Edward M. Dowd Art and Art History Building Community Conversations (Required of all new students) 3:15 p.m. - 4:15 p.m. | Residential Learning Communities (RLCs) President’s New Student Welcome 4:30 p.m. - 5:15 p.m. | Leavey Center Chicanx Latinx New Student Welcome Reception Following the President’s Welcome | Kerr Alumni Park Black/African American New Student Welcome Reception Following the President’s Welcome | Leavey Center Box Suite 1 Asian Pacific Islander New Student Welcome Reception Following the President’s Welcome | Leavey Center West Concourse Havdalah Welcome Dinner 6:00 pm - 7:00 pm | Nobili Dining Hall SCU Live! 8:00 p.m.
  • The Recruitment and Retention Crisis Continues

    The Recruitment and Retention Crisis Continues

    c Official Publication Of The C SAN FRANCISCO POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION This Publication was Produced and Printed in California, USA ✯ Buy American ✯ Support Local Business VOLUME 51, NUMBER 4 SAN FRANCISCO, APRIL 2019 www.sfpoa.org The Recruitment and Retention Crisis Continues How Recruitment and Retention of Police Officers Remains an Ongoing Challenge By Tony Montoya 262nd Academy Class We should not have been surprised that SFPOA President 6 Lateral Officers and all completed DHR put on their blinders. DHR is all FTO about crunching the dollars during ne- In the October 2018 edition of the POA Excellent but that is only 6 Journal, I wrote about the challenges gotiations. They are not concerned about facing most law enforcement agencies 263rd Academy Class the safety of the residents and visitors of in our country surrounding the recruit- 51 Entered the Academy San Francisco. ment and retention crisis. In that article 33 remain in the academy The competition among law en- which is reprinted on page 9 of this Set to graduate on May 24, 2019 forcement agencies to recruit qualified edition, I highlighted the hard work 33 out of 51 so far? Not good candidates and agencies poaching being done by the SFPD to try and keep experienced officers from other police 264th Academy Class staffing levels up even though we are departments is at an all time high in our 42 Entered the Academy not at the mandated 1,971 available full country. The SFPD has recruited candi- 31 still in the Academy duty police officers per the City Charter.