Chapter 5 Deir Revisions

CHAPTER 5 DEIR REVISIONS

In some cases, responses to comments on the DEIR warrant changes to the text of the DEIR. Also, changes in the DEIR may result from discovery of meaningful editorial errors during preparation of the Final EIR. Revisions to the DEIR text are shown in Section 5.1, DEIR Text Changes, in the order they appear in the DEIR. Text underlined (underlined) represents language that has been added to the EIR’s text. Words with strikeout (strikeout) indicate text has been deleted from the EIR.

Revisions to the Executive Summary Table of the DEIR are shown in Section 5.2, Revised Executive Summary Table. Table 2-1, Executive Summary, is reproduced in its entirety at the end of Section 5.2 and contains all underlined and strikeout changes, additions, revisions, and corrections.

5.1 DEIR TEXT CHANGES General The DEIR is revised as follows: All occurrences of “Borel Creek” or “19th Avenue Channel” are to be replaced with “Borel Creek (19th Avenue Channel)”.

Chapter 1: Introduction No changes are made to Chapter 1 of the DEIR.

Chapter 2: Executive Summary (Note: Changes to Table 2.3 in the DEIR are provided in section 5.2 of this chapter)

Page 2-4, the last paragraph is revised as follows: Increased traffic associated with implementation of the Corridor Plan would result in significant impacts at three local intersections. San Mateo uses a “delay-based” methodology for measuring intersection level of service (LOS). Utilizing this methodology, an intersection impact is considered significant if it does not comply with the adopted LOS delay standard of 45 seconds and the project would result in an increase of four or more seconds.

At the El Camino Real/17th Avenue/Bovet intersection, increased delays during the AM peak hour would be substantial (14.6 and 15.5 seconds under Scenarios A and Z, respectively). Note that as the City of Belmont has no adopted LOS standard, the traffic analysis utilized the San Mateo standard in evaluating the El Camino Real/Ralston intersection. Since average delay would exceed 55.8 seconds and would increase by more than

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-1 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments 2nd Administrative Draft CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS four seconds over General Plan conditions, this would be a significant impact. At the El Camino Real/ Ralston Avenue intersection (in the City of Belmont), increased delays during the PM peak hour would be substantial (15.6 and 9.1 seconds under Scenarios A and Z, respectively). Since the intersection would operate at level of service (LOS) F and the increase in delay would be more than four seconds, this would be a significant impact. To address both impacts, the City would require project applicants to implement a transportation demand management (TDM) program to reduce trip generation, but the estimated reduction in trips would not be enough to mitigate these impacts. At the intersection of El Camino Real and 20th Avenue, increased delays during the PM peak hour would be substantial under Scenario A only. Construction of a grade separation at 28th Avenue would mitigate this impact, but because funding for such an improvement could not be assured under Scenario A, the impact is assumed to be significant unavoidable.

Page 2-10, the last paragraph is revised as follows: High school students in the Corridor Plan Area would attend Aragon, Hillsdale, and San Mateo High Schools. Aragon and Hillsdale High Schools are is currently at overcapacity and would be impacted by the addition of students. Hillsdale and San Mateo High Schools has have excess capacity; Hillsdale High School could accommodate up to approximately 86 additional students and San Mateo High School could accommodate up to approximately 141 additional students. This capacity would be adequate under Corridor Plan A, but not under Corridor Plan Z. As such, the addition of 263 students under Corridor Plan Z would result in a significant impact to San Mateo Unified High School District (SMUHSD) schools. Under current policies, the SMUHSD would collect developer fees from individual development projects within the Corridor Plan Area to help finance expansion of existing schools, construction of new schools, and the rental of temporary classroom facilities in the Corridor Plan Area, which would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level.

Page 2-11, the 3rd paragraph is revised as follows: Hydrology and Water Quality Adoption of the Corridor Plan would increase the probability of redevelopment in the Corridor Plan Area and therefore could potentially increase the probability that construction activities would result in a variety of adverse water quality effects. Because the Corridor Plan would not result in a significant net increase in impervious surfaces in the project area or significantly alter groundwater recharge, effects to groundwater supply would be less than significant. Because the majority of the Corridor Plan area is currently developed, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a change to the impervious surface coverage in the area that would significantly alter groundwater recharge to the point where it would make dewatering during excavation and construction result in a significant impact to groundwater supplies. In addition, dewatering during construction would be of a limited duration, and thus would not result in a significant effect to groundwater supply. Erosion, siltation, and additional polluted runoff that could occur as a result of construction activities would have the potential to have a significant impact to water quality. With mitigation

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-2 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS of the City requiring project applicants to implement appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction, these impacts would be less than significant. Construction activities could also result in adverse water quality effects related to dewatering. Compliance with all Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations and procedures for discharging wastewater, and the use of BMPs for subsurface excavation, drilling, and construction would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level.

Page 2-24, the 3rd paragraph is revised as follows: New residential units that could be developed under the Bay Meadows project would contribute students to SMFCSD area elementary and middle schools. The addition of 126 elementary school students to the project area would not result in the need for additional elementary school classrooms. The increase in the number of middle school students (63), would result in the need for three additional middle school classrooms. Students would attend Aragon, Hillsdale, and San Mateo High Schools. Neither of the two closest high schools (Hillsdale and Aragon) would be able to accommodate students from the proposed project without expansion of additional classrooms. San Mateo High School, with an excess capacity of 141 students, would be able to accommodate the additional 98 students generated by the proposed project. However, the two closest high schools (Hillsdale and Aragon), would not be able to accommodate all of the students from the proposed project without expansion of additional classrooms. Under current policies, the SMFCSD and SMUHSD would collect developer fees from the Bay Meadows project to help finance expansion of existing schools, construction of new schools, and the rental of temporary classroom facilities. Collection of these fees would mitigate this impact to a less than significant level. The Bay Meadows project would also result in increased enrollment within the San Mateo County Community College District (SMCCCD). Because the SMCCCD colleges currently have excess capacity and would be able to provide adult education services to the additional community residents, this would be a less than significant impact.

Chapter 3: Project Description Page 3-11, the second bullet is revised as follows: Pacific Boulevard: Extension of a two-lane section south of 31st Avenue to Delaware Street, elimination of the westbound ramp linking Pacific Boulevard to Hillsdale Boulevard, and streetscape improvements.

Page 3-14, footnote 13 has been revised as follows: 13 The approximately 13-acre public park, discussed further below, would be located in the northern extension of the South Residential Neighborhood.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-3 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Chapter 4: Environmental Analysis

Page 4.1-9, the 3rd paragraph is revised as follows: This Corridor Plan and the Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment would be adopted prior to the updated General Plan. Incorporation of the Corridor Plan into the General Plan may require voter approval of amendments to Measure H, since the Corridor Plan proposes land uses potentially inconsistent with Measure H, a voter-approved density and height restriction ordinance. Following the voter’s re-approval of decision regarding Measure H and any amendments, the Corridor Plan would be incorporated into the City’s General Plan during the General Plan Update process. These changes would be made as part of the current General Plan Update process, which includes adoption of the updated General Plan. New development and major modifications to existing development in the Corridor Plan Area would be expected to comply with the updated General Plan and with this Corridor Plan.

Subsequent to the close of the public comment period for the DEIR, the voters approved Measure P, which was an extension of Measure H. Measure P continues to limit heights to 55 feet and did not extend the “public benefit” areas that would permit heights to 75 feet upon certain findings by the City Council. Therefore, the Draft Corridor Plan will need to revise its proposed heights prior to its approval in order to be consistent with Measure P. The Bay Meadows proposal does not request any heights greater than 55 feet and so is consistent with Measure P.

Chapter 4.3 is revised as follows: All occurrences of “General Plan 2020” or “General Plan” (as used in “General Plan conditions”) in Chapter 4.3: Traffic and Circulation are revised to be replaced with “ABAG 2020”. For example, page 4.3-1, 3rd bullet, last sentence is revised as follows:

The Bay Meadows Cumulative discussion is broken into two subsections – General Plan 2020 ABAG 2020 plus Bay Meadows (which looks at the cumulative impacts of the Bay Meadows project independent of the Corridor Plan) and Corridor Plan plus Bay Meadows (which looks at the expected impacts of all development permitted by the Corridor Plan together with the Bay Meadows project.

Page 4.3-8, the 3rd paragraph (2nd bullet) is revised as follows: General Plan ABAG 2020 + Bay Meadows: This scenario comprises the land use and transportation provisions included in the existing City of San Mateo General Plan, and uses the ABAG 2020 population projections, disaggregated to a city-level based on these General Plan land uses in the C/CAG 2020 traffic model.

Page 4.3-16 is revised as follows: Local Intersection Levels of Service Criteria Intersection impacts were based on the City of San Mateo traffic standards. According to the standards, a significant impact would occur when the project causes the level of service to deteriorate beyond the accepted

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-4 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS standard (45 seconds of delay – mid LOS D). If the level of service does not comply with the adopted standard and the project if project traffic would result in an increase in average delay of four or more seconds, the project may be required to construct the needed improvements. and where the resultant delay would be greater than 45 seconds (LOS mid-D).

The City of San Mateo has adopted a Transportation Mitigation Program to mitigate cumulative intersection impacts anticipated by 2020. Under the Transportation Mitigation Program, the project will be required to pay a mitigation fee. These fees are used to fund and construct intersection improvements in San Mateo that are required to maintain levels of service within the adopted standard.

Projects approved within the Transportation Mitigation Program are considered part of the Baseline Condition and mitigate potentially significant impacts unless either:

1. the project adds 4 seconds or more delay at an intersection that does not comply with the adopted LOS standard, or 2. the intersection is not included in the adopted Transportation Mitigation Program.

Therefore, for the purposes of this EIR, an impact is considered significant if an intersection will not comply with the adopted standard and the project traffic would result in an increase in average delay of 4 or more seconds, or the intersection is not included in the Traffic Mitigation Program. For intersections already operating with a delay of 45 seconds or more, a significant impact would occur if the project would result in an additional delay of four or more seconds. These standards apply to all signalized intersections in the city except for the intersection of El Camino Real and 17th Avenue/Bovet. For that intersection, the standard is 55.8 seconds (LOS E), instead of 45 seconds. The average delay time is calculated as the weighted average time it takes for vehicles to go through an intersection.

The study intersection of El Camino Real and Ralston Avenue is located in Belmont. The City of Belmont uses the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program (CMP) definition of acceptable levels of service. Therefore, an acceptable level of service is LOS E or better. Belmont does not have a standard for what constitutes a significant traffic impact. To be conservative, this study applies the San Mateo standards to the intersection of El Camino Real and Ralston Avenue.

An impact can be mitigated to a less than significant level if an improvement to the intersection that would improve the level of service to an acceptable level is funded in the applicable five-year City Capital Improvement Program from the date of application approval. Intersection and roadway segment Level of Service standards are shown in Table 4.3-3.

Page 4.3-22, Table 4.3-6 is revised as follows in order to clarify the table to show impacts to a freeway segment already identified in the Bay Meadows Phase II and Transportation Corridor Plan Transportation Impact Analysis (February 2004) in Table 6.3:

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-5 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 4.3-6 Analysis Scenario Impacts Prior to and After Mitigation BASELINE + BAY GP 2020 + BAY IMPACT CORRIDOR PLAN A CORRIDOR PLAN Z MEADOWS MEADOWS LOCAL TRAFFIC Intersections El Camino Real and 17th Avenue/Bovet (AM) S [SU] S [SU] ─ LTS El Camino Real and Ralston Avenue (AM & PM) S (PM only) [SU] S (PM only) [SU] ─ S [SU] El Camino Real and 20th Avenue (PM) S [SU] ─ ─ ─ Intersections of Delaware/9th, Delaware/25th, ECR/28th, ECR/4th, SB ─ ─ LTS ─ 101/Fashion Island Neighborhood Traffic Increase in Traffic on Local Streets LTS LTS LTS ─ FREEWAY OPERATIONS Ramps Eastbound SR 92 on-ramp from southbound El Camino Real (AM & PM) S (AM only) [SU] S [SU] LTS S (AM only)[SU] Westbound SR 92 off-ramp to northbound El Camino Real (AM & PM) ─ ─ LTS S (PM only) [SU] Freeway Segments Southbound US 101, north of SR 92 (AM & PM) S (AM only) [SU] S (AM only) [SU] ─ S (PM only) [SU] Northbound US 101, south of SR 92 (AM & PM) S [SU] S [SU] ─ S (PM only) [SU] Southbound US 101, south of SR 92 (AM & PM) S (PM only) [SU] S [SU] ─ S (PM only) [SU] Westbound SR 92, west of El Camino Real (AM) ─ S [SU] ─ ─ Eastbound SR 92, west of El Camino Real (AM) ─ ─ S[SU] ─ SR 92 weaving section between El Camino Real & Delaware Street (AM & PM) S [SU] S [SU] S [SU] S [SU] TRANSIT Increase in transit ridership LTS LTS LTS LTS BICYCLE USAGE/SAFETY Delaware Street—Provision of Bicycle Lanes S [LTS] S [LTS] LTS LTS PARKING Increase in Demand for Parking LTS LTS LTS LTS BAY MEADOWS CONSTRUCTION Construction Traffic ─ ─ LTS LTS 1. LTS = Less than significant; S = Significant; SU = Significant Unavoidable. ─ = No Impact. 2. Impact levels without brackets are prior to mitigation; impact levels identified in brackets are after mitigation (where applicable).

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-6 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.3-47, the 6th paragraph (Mitigation Measure Traffic-CP6), and Page 4.3-29, the last paragraph (Mitigation Measure Traffic-CP8) are revised as follows: In addition, the Corridor Plan includes a TDM element. The TDM element specifies that each specific development shall establish a trip reduction goal at the time of approval. The city shall monitor compliance with the goal. Developments may implement TDM programs of their choice, provided that the goal is met. Trip reduction goals are unspecified at this point in time. However, studies have shown that an aggressive TDM program can reduce the drive alone percentage from 80 percent (without a TDM program) to 60 percent (Implementing Effective Travel Demand Management Measures, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1993.) The TOD development pattern, alone, is expected to reduce the drive-alone percentage to 74 percent. If drive-alone percentage could be further reduced to 60 percent, that would eliminate about 430 peak-hour trips. Although beneficial, this reduction alone would not be enough to eliminate the significant freeway impacts.

Page 4.3-43, ImpactTraffic-BM14 is revised as follows in order to clarify the text to show impacts to a freeway segment already identified in the Bay Meadows Phase II and Transportation Corridor Plan Transportation Impact Analysis (February 2004) in Table 6.3:

Impact Traffic-BM14: Development of the Bay Meadows project would result in the substantial worsening of operating conditions on the northbound US 101 south of SR 92 and the southbound US 101 north and south of SR 92 freeway segments under cumulative conditions. This would be a significant impact.

Under cumulative conditions, significant impacts would occur on twothree freeway segments that would operate at LOS F under General Plan 2020 conditions. Under cumulative conditions, northbound US 101 south of SR 92 would operate with a V/C ratio of 1.11 during the PM peak hour, representing a 1.6 percent increase of the capacity by the Bay Meadows project on this segment. Because this segment would operate at LOS F and the Bay Meadows project would contribute more than 1 percent of capacity to that condition, this would be a significant impact.

Southbound US 101 north of SR-92 would operate with a V/C ratio of 1.14 during the PM peak hour, representing 4 percent of the capacity by the Bay Meadows project on this segment. Because this segment would operate at LOS F and the Bay Meadows project would contribute more than 1 percent of capacity to that condition, this would be a significant impact.

Southbound US 101 south of SR 92 would operate with a V/C ratio of 1.04 during the PM peak hour, representing 1.1 percent of the capacity by the Bay Meadows project on this segment. Because this segment would operate at LOS F and the Bay Meadows project would contribute more than 1 percent of capacity to that condition, this would be a significant impact.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-7 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.3-43, Mitigation Measure Traffic-BM14 is revised as follows:

Mitigation Measure Traffic-BM14: The City shall require the project sponsor to implement a TDM program and shall monitor its implementation in accordance with the Corridor Plan TDM requirements to ensure that it achieves a trip reduction goal established at the time of project approval.

Direct mitigation involving physical changes to the freeway itself (i.e., widening) is not feasible. TDM measures could reduce the impact. The Bay Meadows project would be required to have a trip reduction goal established at the time of approval. The city would monitor compliance with the goal. The Bay Meadows project would be permitted to implement a TDM program of the project sponsor’s choice, provided that the goal is met. The TDM trip reduction goal in the Corridor Plan is 25%. This would not be sufficient to offset the project’s impacts on US 101. While the TDM program would reduce vehicle trips, typical TDM reductions are in the range of 10-15 percent, which would not offset the project’s impacts on US 101. Thus, the project’s impacts on the two segments of US 101 would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Page 4.3-45, the following text is added after the 4th paragraph, “Mitigation Measure Treaffic-BM17: None required”: Project Phasing In response to comments on the DEIR, additional traffic analysis has been completed to ensure that the phasing of transportation improvements and development levels for the proposed Bay Meadows project are consistent. (See Appendix E: Memorandum re: Bay Meadows II Phasing Plan in the Response to Comments Document.) Major transportation improvements that will support redevelopment of the Bay Meadows race track site include the extension of Delaware Street through the site to Pacific Boulevard and the relocation and upgrade of the Hillsdale Caltrain station. In conjunction with the Caltrain station relocation, the Peninsula Joint Powers Board (JBP) plans to construct grade separations and the City of San Mateo plans to connect 28th Avenue under the Caltrain tracks and through the site to Saratoga Drive and to connect 31st Avenue similarly to Franklin Parkway. It is anticipated that an allocation of the costs of the 28th and 31st grade separation improvements will be added to the San Mateo Traffic Mitigation Program, so that all development city-wide will contribute to their funding through traffic mitigation fees. This EIR assumes the completion of these improvements and thereby concludes that the Bay Meadows development would have no significant impacts to intersections in the area.

However, because the road improvements and the Bay Meadows project are on separate but parallel planning tracks, the question remained about the level of development that could be sustained without impacts prior to the completion of these improvements. The additional traffic analysis indicates that 1,127 net new trips could be accommodated without the need for grade separations. To ensure that the street grid is not overloaded, a mitigation measure that ensures that Bay Meadows project traffic can be accommodated regardless of the status of the JPB improvements can be imposed that is based upon the supplemental traffic analysis included in the EIR Response to Comments Document. This mitigation measure ensures that development of the Bay

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-8 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Meadows project and the road improvements are phased in a manner consistent with the assumptions used in this EIR.

Mitigation Measure Traffic-BM18: No building permit shall be issued which would individually or cumulatively permit the development of uses that would generate traffic in excess of 1,127 net new trips unless and until the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board has commenced construction of grade separated crossings at either or both of 28th and 31st Avenues. The applicant shall pay a fee proportional to the project's share of transportation improvements needed to serve the cumulative development within the City of San Mateo. Subject to any Development Agreement, the fee amount will be based upon the City Council resolution in effect at the time that the building application permit is made. The applicant understands that the City is going to update its "General Plan Traffic Mitigation Fee Program" to include the costs of the grade separations to be constructed by the JPB at 28th Avenue and 31st Avenue.

Page 4.4-13, the 4th paragraph is revised as follows: Eligibility of Bay Meadows Project Site as an Historic District. The buildings on the Bay Meadows project site would not be eligible for the National Register as contributing features of an historic district because the integrity of the grandstand, the most prominent structure at Bay Meadows, has been seriously compromised. The original grandstand was virtually demolished in the 1950s significantly altered in 1949 when it was remodeled and expanded, and it received additional alterations in the 1960s and 1970s. The major 1949 expansion and remodeling included expanding the Grandstand on the north, south, and west, a new Paddock Building, rebuilding the Club House and building the Turf Club, and creating new entrance lobbies and entrances. The Grandstand’s original north and south facades were completely removed and about two-thirds of the west façade removed because of later additions and alterations. Currently only about thirty percent of the existing east (track) side of the existing Grandstand/Turf Club building includes the original Grandstand. However, given Given that little survives of the original grandstand from 1934, the integrity of Bay Meadows as an historic district has been seriously compromised (EDAW, 1996, Dobkin and Hill, 2004.).

Page 4.4-18, the 5th paragraph and page 4.4-20, 6th paragraph, 2nd sentence are revised as follows: The grandstand, the most prominent structure at Bay Meadows, was previously substantially compromised by changes made in the 1940s, 1960s and 1970s.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-9 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.5-2, the typographical error in Table 4.5-1 has been revised as follows:

Table 4.5-1 Households, Population, Employed Residents, and Jobs for San Mateo and Nearby Cities, 2000 and 2020 TOTAL TOTAL CHANGE AREA 2000 2020 2000-2020 San Mateo Households 37,338 43,600 + 6,262 Population 92,482 109,300 + 16,818 Employed Residents 57,067 68,350 + 11,283 Jobs 60,130 75,240 + 15,110 Jobs/Housing Ratioa 1.05 1.10

San Mateo and Nearby Citiesb Households 123,040 138,340 + 15,300 Population 309,229 352,700 + 43,471 Employed Residents 163,468 231,660 + 68,192 Jobs 207,800 250,940 + 43,140 Jobs/Housing Ratio 1.21 1.08

San Mateo County Households 254,103 288,190 + 34,087 Population 707,161 813,300 + 106,139 Employed Residents 403,083 496,700 + 66,617 Jobs 395,890 489,020 +93,130 Jobs/Housing Ratio .98 1.04 a Jobs/Housing ratio = number of jobs/employed residents. b Includes San Mateo, Redwood City, Foster City, Belmont, Burlingame, San Carlos, Millbrae, and Hillsborough, which are the San Mateo County cities closest to the project area. Source: Census 2000, ABAG 2003

Pages 4.6-13 and 4.6-20 of the DEIR are revised as follows:

Mitigation Measure Air Quality-CP1 and -BM1: The BAAQMD conducts evaluations of various mitigations during its update of the CAP. The BAAQMD has identified several mitigation measures they consider feasible. Applicable BAAQMD Basic and Enhanced Control Measures shall be implemented for all components of construction related to the proposed project site. Specific controls to be implemented shall include the following: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-10 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

• Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. The following optional control measures are recommended as improvement measures to further reduce fugitive dust and particulate emissions: • Install wheel washers for all existing trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site (BAAQMD optional control measure). • Suspend excavation and grading activities when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour (BAAQMD optional control measure). • Limit the area subject to excavation, grading and other construction activity at any one time (BAAQMD optional control measure). • Minimize heavy construction equipment and delivery truck idling times. • Properly maintain construction equipment. • Locate stationary construction equipment, such as generators and compressors as far away as feasible from existing residential uses. • Locate construction staging areas as far from existing residential uses as is feasible. With inclusion of the BAAQMD optional measures, this represents all feasible mitigation measures developed by the BAAQMD, the regional agency charged with implementing the Clean Air Act in the San Francisco Bay Area. According to the BAAQMD, implementation of these measures reduces a project’s impacts on air quality less than significant, thus no further mitigation measures are required.

Pages 4.8-2 and 4.8-3, the text from the 3rd paragraph on page 4.8-2 to the 2nd paragraph on page 4.8- 3, is revised as follows: The contract with the SFPUC was amended in 1984 with the adoption of the Supplemental Agreement and Master Sales Contract. This agreement called for the development of a Supply Assurance Allocation (SAA) for all SFPUC suburban customers. The SAA allocates to these customers the available supply of 206,106 acre-feet per year (AFY) as a maximum annual average metered supply. This allocation was reached through negotiation in the early 1990s between the SFPUC and the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA, formerly known as the Bay Area Water Users Association (BAWUA)), an association of the suburban customers of the SFPUC. Cal Water’s SAA for its collective systems is 39,642 AFY.

Cal Water has also developed, and continues to develop, its own local water supplies, so that it does not rely exclusively on water supplied by the SFPUC. Cal Water's local water supply in 2003 totaled 2,352 AFY (Cal Water, 2004b). For Cal Water’s South San Francisco District, groundwater provides 12.8 percent of supply

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-11 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS and the balance is from the SFPUC. For the Bear Gulch District, local treated surface waters provide 10 percent of supply with the balance from the SFPUC. Cal Water does not currently have any local water supplies in the Mid-Peninsula District. However it is important to note that Cal Water’s total water supply allocation from the SFPUC is for all three districts and that Cal Water has flexibility with respect to how it allocates SFPUC supplied water among its three districts.

Dry Year Water Supply For single dry and multiple dry years, Cal Water uses SFPUC's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) information to estimate the availability of supply over a 20 year projection since the current source of all water to the Mid-Peninsula system is the SFPUC. During a single dry year, SFPUC anticipates a supply of 90 percent of normal supply. For multiple dry years, SFPUC anticipates a supply of 90 percent of normal supply for the first year and 80 percent of normal supply for each subsequent year (Cal Water, 2004b).

Experience has shown that cumulative dry years in a developed area like the San Francisco Bay Area do not result in a progressively greater annual demand for water as the dry period continues, beyond the second year. The region is mostly developed with urban uses that are comparatively resistant to dry climatic periods in terms of their water demands. Historical records indicate that residential, commercial and industrial uses generally will use the same amount of water during droughts as normal years, with perhaps an increase in irrigation for landscaping, however in multiple dry years, irrigation water use is substantially decreased (City of San Mateo Public Works Department, 2004).

Therefore, in a single dry year Cal Water would be allocated 35,678 AFY (39,642 x 90%), and during by the SFPUC. During subsequent multiple dry years, Cal Water would be allocated 31,714 AFY (39,642 x 80%) by the SFPUC. (Cal Water, 2004b). The ten-year average total annual purchase from SFPUC is 37,234 37,579 AFY, and the five-year average is 39,142 39,456 AFY. Both the ten-year average and the five-year average are below Cal Water’s annual SAA for its collective Peninsula systems of 39,642 AFY. However, they exceed the anticipated supply during single and multiple dry years. During each of the last threefour years Cal Water's purchases were in excess of the SAA of 39,642 AFY, by amounts ranging from 326 AFY (0.52 million gallons per day (mgpd)) to 1,787 AFY (1.6 mgpd) (Cal Water, 2003a; Cal Water 2004b).

BAWUABAWSCA’s Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan BAWUABAWSCA has developed an Interim Water Shortage Allocation Plan (IWSAP) that allocates water between its member water agencies during supply shortages. The allocation is based on the SAA and past and current demand levels. Under the IWSAP, water agencies that are exceeding their SAA could face cutbacks greater than the overall requested cutbacks. For example, if a supply shortage emergency prompted a 20 percent reduction in overall supply, then Cal Water, which exceeded its SAA over the last three years by two to three percent, would probably face a reduction in the order of 23 or 24 percent rather than 20 percent.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-12 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.8-3, the citation at the end of the 4th paragraph is revised as follows: (Cal Water, 2004a).

Page 4.8-3, the 5th and 6th paragraphs are revised as follows: Future Supply Plans and Sources Cal Water is investigating development of a intends to develop additional local water supply supplies in its three districts within the next three to ten years to reduce their its reliance on SFPUC supplies and to supplement supply for redevelopment projects (Cal Water, 2004b). Moreover, developing a local supply will cost much less than paying to develop additional imported supplies (Cal Water, 2003a). Potential sources for local water supplies include groundwater and reclaimed water (for non-potable uses).

Cal Water intends to develop sufficient local sources in the Mid-Peninsula District to generate an amount of water equal to 10 percent of the total system district demand, which would amount to approximately 1,900 1,865 AFY (Cal Water, 2004b). To this purpose Cal Water has budgeted the drilling of a test well in the Mid- Peninsula District service area. The assessment of the planned test well will take nearly one year to complete. If a sufficient groundwater supply is detected, then it would take another year to drill, develop and equip the well, with an additional year required for constructing any necessary water treatment facilities. In total, an additional water supply could be provided within two to three years (Cal Water, 2004a). Since one well would not likely supply 10 percent of the total district demand, it is anticipated that Cal Water will need to develop two more wells to meet the 10 percent goal. These two wells could be constructed in areas identified in a report prepared for Cal Water as potentially being suitable to meet production yields, water quality and availability requirements (2004b).

In the South San Francisco District, Cal Water aims to increase local water supplies from 12.6 percent to 20 percent of the total water supplies for the district, which would amount to approximately 681 AFY. Cal Water is preparing a 20-year Master Water Supply and Facilities Plan, and a major portion of this effort is to establish a groundwater plan for the Westside basin, which the district overlies. Significant groundwater development work has been accomplished in the last seven years, and a groundwater model will be developed to evaluate the Westside Basin to test feasible well sites and estimate recommended extraction rates, and determine the optimum number of wells and well locations.

In the Bear Gulch District, Cal Water aims to increase local water supplies from 10 percent to approximately 16 percent of total water supplies for the district, which would amount to approximately 807 AFY. Cal Water is evaluating the feasibility of developing wells in the next two to five years, and plans to conduct a study in 2005 to determine the best locations for new production wells. Cal Water also plans to conduct a feasibility study in 2005 to evaluate how to maximize yield from its existing surface water treatment plant.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-13 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.8-4, the 1st paragraph is revised as follows: Water Planning The following water supply data are based upon a Water Supply Assessment prepared by Cal Water and subsequent communications with Cal Water. The City of San Mateo requested that Cal Water prepare a Water Supply Assessment in accordance with Senate Bill 610 (SB 610). SB 610 amended existing California land use and water supply law by requiring that water retail providers like Cal Water demonstrate that sufficient and reliable supplies are available to serve large-scale developments prior to completion of the environmental review for such projects. Specifically, SB 610 requires that a Water Supply Assessment include an inventory of the water provider’s total projected supplies and address whether those supplies will be available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years during a 20-year projection, and also evaluate whether that projected available water would satisfy the demand of the proposed project; given present and planned future uses. Therefore, the Water Supply Assessment projects the available water supply through 2023, although other environmental impacts in this EIR are considered through 2020. The initial Water Supply Assessment prepared by Cal Water in accordance with SB 610 is provided in Appendix E 1. In response to public comments on the initial Water Supply Assessment, Cal Water supplemented it with additional information and data and prepared a revised Water Supply Assessment, which is provided as Appendix C in the Response to Comments Document of this EIR1. The revised Water Supply Assessment comes to the same conclusions as the initial Water Supply Assessment, finding that there would be an adequate water supply for the Corridor Plan and the Bay Meadows project under a 20-year projection. The revised Water Supply Assessment does not contain significant new information or identify significant new impacts not previously identified, but rather supplements the conclusions in the initial Water Supply Assessment, and therefore does not trigger recirculation pursuant to Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Page 4.8-4, the last paragraph (extending to the first lines of page 4.8-5) is revised as follows: The City's underground collection system comprises 260 miles of sanitary sewer lines and 75 miles of storm drains. Storm drains typically flow to the nearest creek or watercourse. Indoor waste drains are connected to a network of sewer lines that flow into a wastewater treatment plant where the waste is treated before it is discharged into the San Francisco Bay. The City's wastewater treatment plant has been in operation since 1935 and treats an average of 12.1 million gallons per day (mgd). Approximately 7.5 dry tons of biosolids (sludge) are removed from the plant process each day (City of San Mateo, 2003a). The SMWTP has a rated flow capacity of 15.7 mgd (City of San Mateo, 2003b). A Joint Powers Agreement between the City of San Mateo and EMID allocates 11.4 mgd average daily flow to the City of San Mateo and 4.3 mgd to EMID. For dry weather conditions, the treatment plant has adequate flow capacity for existing flows.

1 Additional related materials, including Cal Water’s UWMP, are available in the project case file at the City of San Mateo Planning Division.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-14 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.8-6, the last paragraph (rolling over to the top of page 4.8-7) is revised as follows: The California Integrated Waste Management Act, also known as AB 939, requires that each city and county in California reduce the amount of waste disposed to the landfill by 50 percent from 1990 levels by the year 2000, and to maintain the a 50 percent level diversion (recycling) rate thereafter. Municipalities face penalties up to $10,000 per day for failure to comply. This act further required every city and county in California to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE). The SRRE describes the chief characteristics of each jurisdiction's waste, existing waste diversion programs and rates of waste diversion, and the new or expanded programs the jurisdiction intends to implement to achieve the mandated rates of diversion.

Pages 4.8-12 through 4.8-16, Impact Utilities-CP1 is revised as follows: Water Supply Impact Utilities-CP1: Implementation of the proposed Corridor Plan (Scenarios A and Z) would increase residential and commercial land uses in the project area, resulting in an increase in demand for water. This would be a significant impact.

The Corridor Plan would allow for a range of new residential and commercial development by 2020. The increase in residential units and commercial space would generate increased numbers of people within the City boundaries and would increase demand for water supply.

Cal Water prepared a Water Supply Assessment for the Corridor Plan on December 18, 2003.22003, and to respond to public comments, Cal Water prepared a revised Water Supply Assessment on November 12, 2004.2 Cal Water estimated the historical and anticipated water demand for the Corridor Plan, based on information regarding the existing and proposed land uses as provided by the City of San Mateo. Current and future land uses were combined with water use factors from various sources including factors provided by the City of San Mateo and, factors from Cal Water's recently revised Urban Water Management Plan, and actual data based on the first phase of the Bay Meadows project and other local projects.

The estimated historical total annual water demand for the current land uses within the Corridor Plan Area is 278.4 AFY. The annual demand used by the Bay Meadows Racetrack is 176.5 AFY (obtained from metered sales records of Cal Water at the Racetrack). The remaining 101.9 AFY used within the Corridor Plan Area is an estimate of demand based on various water use factors and land uses and are exclusive of the Bay Meadows Racetrack water use.

The anticipated future water use within the Corridor Plan Area is 488.15 351.47 AFY under Scenario A. Under Scenario Z, the anticipated future water use increases to 930 604.14 AFY. Thus, compared to current water use, the net change in anticipated water use for the Corridor Plan is 210 73.07 AFY (488.15 351.47

2 The Water Supply Assessment is presented in Appendix E in the DEIR, and the revised Water Supply Assessment is presented as Appendix C in the Response to Comments Document.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-15 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

AFY - 278.4 AFY) for Scenario A and 652 325.74 AFY (930 604.14 AFY - 278.4 AFY) for Scenario Z. The Corridor Plan would increase Cal Water's existing average day demand value of 18,650 AFY (16.65 million gallons per day (mgpd)) for the Mid-Peninsula system to between 18,860 18,723 AFY (16.84 16.71 mgpd) (Scenario A) and 19,302 18,975.7 AFY (17.2316.94 mgpd) (Scenario Z).

The Corridor Plan would increase Cal Water's annual purchases from the SFPUC by at most 652 325.74 AF (0.582 0.291 mgpd), or four 1.7 percent. Contractually the water is available for the anticipated increase in demand for Scenario A of the Corridor Plan if the demand for each category of customer (the demand per service) can be reduced to the historical average demand level for each of Cal Water's San Francisco Peninsula Districts. Projected demand for 2023 at average demand per service levels is 38,931 AFY (see Attachment 7 to the Water Supply Assessment in Appendix E) 39,456 AFY. Consequently, about 711 186 AFY (39,642 AFY[SFPUC SAA] – 38,931 39,456 AFY[2023 projected average demand] = 711 186 AFY) would be available for the project. Under Scenario A, which would result in a net increase in demand of 210 73.07 AFY, there would be a surplus supply of 501 112.93 AFY (711 186 AFY – 210 73.07 AFY = 501 112.93 AFY) in 2023. Under Scenario Z, which would result in a net increase in demand of 652 AFY, there would be a surplus supply of 59 AFY (711 AFY – 652 AFY = 59 AFY) in 2023. ) in 2023.

However, in the past few years demand has escalated above the average demand per service value, and Cal Water has consumed more than its SAA. If this condition continues Also, Scenario Z would result in a net increase in demand of 325.74 AFY, so anticipated demand would exceed the SAA by 139.74 AFY (186 AFY – 325.74 AFY = (139.74) AFY) in 2023. If Cal Water continues to consume more than its SAA, or if the full Scenario Z project is built out, insufficient SFPUC water would be available within Cal Water’s SAA for these projects.

During single dry years, projected demand in 2023 would not be met by the supply available from Cal Water under existing contracts. With Cal Water's anticipated allocation reduced by 10% percent during a single dry year, Cal Water is anticipated to be approximately 3,253have 35,678 AFY available from the SFPUC, which is 3,778 AFY short on meeting its anticipated demands ((39,642 [SFPUC SAA] x 90%) – 38,931 39,456 AFY[2023 projected average demand] = 3,253 3,778 AFY). The Corridor Plan would incrementally contribute to this shortage, increasing it by 210 73.07 AFY under Scenario A and 652 325.74 AFY under Scenario Z. The total demand would be 39,141 39,529 AFY under Scenario A and 39,583 39,782 AFY under Scenario Z. Cal Water's total deficit (including the Corridor Plan) in a single dry year is anticipated to be 3,463 3,851 AFY (35,678 AFY – 39,141 39,529 AFY) under Scenario A, and 3,905 4,104 AFY (35,678 AFY – 39,583 39,782 AFY) under Scenario Z.

Similarly, during multiple-dry years, projected demand in 2023 would not be met by the supply available from Cal Water under existing contracts. With Cal Water's anticipated allocation reduced by 20% percent during a multiple-dry year, Cal Water is anticipated to be approximately 7,217 have 31,714 AFY available from the SFPUC, which is 7,742 AFY short on meeting its anticipated demands ((39,642 [SFPUC SAA] x 80%) – 38,931 39,456 AFY [2023 projected average demand] = 7,217 7,742 AFY). The Corridor Plan would

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-16 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS incrementally contribute to this shortage, increasing it by 210 73.07 AFY under Scenario A and 652 325.74 AFY under Scenario Z. The total demand would be 39,141 39,529 AFY under Scenario A and 39,583 39,782 under Scenario Z. Therefore, Cal Water's total deficit (including the Corridor Plan) in 2023 in multiple-dry years is anticipated to be 7,427 7,815 AFY (31,714 – 39,141 39,529) under Scenario A, and 7,869 8,068 AFY (31,714 – 39,583 39,782) under Scenario Z.

TheBased solely upon supplies anticipated to be available from the SFPUC, and without taking account of local water supplies (some of which already exist), the effects of the Corridor Plan would be significant under Scenario Z in normal years, and would be significant under both Scenarios A and Z during single dry years, or multiple-dry years, unless Cal Water can obtain additional water to serve existing and planned demand, or reduce demand through implementation of demand management practices. Cal Water’s supply is subject to cutbacks during dry years. Those dry-year cutbacks could result in shortages to current residential, commercial and industrial users. During water shortages, the increment of water provided for the Corridor Plan would be considered to be a significant adverse effect of the project, both individually and through its contribution to cumulative water demands.

It should be noted that while the incremental increase in demand associated with the Corridor Plan, together with cumulative water demand, would exceed Cal Water’s SAA in single dry and multiple-dry years, additional water in excess of the SAA could be purchased from the SFPUC at a substantially higher cost (an estimated $800 per acre-foot, compared to the current rate of $479 per acre-foot) (Cal Water, 2004a).

Mitigation would be needed to increase water supplies so the supply would be reliable and sufficient for the Corridor Plan without affecting other uses. Demand side management and development of a local water supply are two potential solutions to this situation. These two methods are addressed separately under Mitigation Measures Utilities-CP1a and CP1b.

Mitigation Measure Utilities-CP1a: Cal Water and the City shall implement demand side management practices to reduce water demand.

Demand side management can help control the demand of customers to the average demand per service level. The Urban Water Conservation Council, of which Cal Water is a member, has adopted 14 best management practices (BMPs) to help conserve water, such as plumbing retrofits and education programs. Implementation of water conservation measures requires approval of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), and approval will only be granted for those BMPs for which it is shown that the benefit outweighs the cost (Cal Water, 2004a).

Cal Water’s consultant analyzed the BMPs to determine their benefit/cost ratio as applied to Cal Water, and determined that seven of the 14 BMPs would be effective at reducing water demand in the Mid-Peninsula District. The CPUC has approved the implementation of these programs. As a result, should there be a need to reduce demand, these programs would be implemented in the Mid-Peninsula District.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-17 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

The SFPUC has estimated that implementation of long-term conservation efforts can reduce water demand by approximately 20 percent (SFPUC, 1996). Based on the SFPUC estimate, it is reasonable to assume that implementation of the BMPs could similarly reduce water demand in the Mid-Peninsula District by 20 percent from the second year following implementation. During the first year, while the BMPs are still being implemented, a 10 percent reduction could reasonably be anticipated.

Cal Water's consultant presented an annual projection of the water saved by year to the year 2020 based on the successful implementation of the BMPs identified. For the period from 2004 to 2020, the average projected savings is 605.6 AFY for the Mid-Peninsula District. The savings peak during the period from 2006 to 2011 is based on Cal Water conducting conservation surveys of key commercial, industrial and institutional accounts. Respectively, the water saved for those years is 607, 720, 833, 786, 740 and 647 AFY. After 2011, water savings are projected as a constant 554 AFY resulting from the permanent installation of water saving fixtures and appliances (Cal Water, 2004b).

With this reduced demand, projected demand in 2023 would be met by the anticipated supply. In a single dry year, and assuming a 10 percent reduction in demand due to the BMPs, the total Mid-Peninsula District demand would be 35,227 AFY (39,141 AFY x 90%) under Scenario A, and 35,625 AFY (39,583 AFY x 90%) under Scenario Z. In multiple-dry years, and assuming a 20 percent reduction in demand due to the BMPs, the total Mid-Peninsula District demand would be 31,313 AFY (39,141 AFY x 80%) under Scenario A, and 31,666 AFY (39,583 AFY x 80%) under Scenario Z. This would result in a surplus in a single dry year of 451 AFY (35,678 AFY – 35,227 AFY) under Scenario A, and 53 AFY (35,678 AFY – 35,625 AFY) under Scenario Z. The surplus in multiple-dry years would be 401 AFY (31,714 AFY – 31,313 AFY) under Scenario A, and 48 AFY (31,714 AFY – 31,666 AFY) under Scenario Z.

Therefore, for the Mid-Peninsula District, the projected long-term reduction in water consumption associated with implementing Cal Water’s proposed BMPs is 554 AFY. This is roughly three percent of total demand. Using that percentage as a whole for the other two districts, which will also be implementing the same water conservation programs, the total reduction in demand due to BMPs is estimated to be 1,184 AFY (39,456 x 0.03=1,184).

For the infrequent drought years, it is common for water agencies to impose restrictions on water use. Normally, the reductions are in the order of 10 to 20 percent, as occurred in the early 1990s throughout much of California. Cal Water has a four-stage rationing plan, which is described in its Urban Water Management Plan. The rationing includes both voluntary and mandatory water use restrictions, depending on the severity of the shortage. The demand reduction goals range from ten percent under a voluntary program during Stage 1, to up to 50 percent under a mandatory program during Stage 4. Mandatory conservation is viewed as generally acceptable during the infrequent drought situation, rather than spending substantial funds to address an unusual event.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-18 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Overall, this is a less costly option available to Cal Water to cope with the possible reduction in water supplies during a significant water shortage. While not viewed as an alternative to provide water for future growth, mandatory conservation would be used in extreme situations to ensure that water supplies are adequate to fulfill water needs. Its availability and proven effectiveness is an additional "back-up" to ensure that water needs are met even in the driest of conditions.

In the prior drought of the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Mid-Peninsula District demonstrated its ability to conserve water at a high rate. From 1987 to 1991, the Mid-Peninsula District reduced its water purchases from 19,998 AFY to 14,376 AFY, which represents a 28 percent reduction in water use (See Figure 1 of the revised Water Supply Assessment [Appendix C of the Response to Comments Document]). This reduction occurred even with the growth of 455 new services during that period. During the same period, Cal Water's combined purchases from SFPUC were reduced by 29 percent. (See Attachment 7 of the initial Water Supply Assessment in Appendix E.) This proven ability to substantially reduce demand during Reduction in use occurred after the public was informed of the seriousness of water supply conditions, which required implementation of a 25 percent mandatory rationing program. With the conclusion of drought constraints, total demand has gradually increased to pre-drought levels. It is expected, however, that per capita demand will remain below pre-drought levels due to installation of water conserving fixtures and controls.

This proven ability to substantially reduce demand during periods of extreme water shortage indicates that the Mid-Peninsula District would have adequate water to meet its demands during such periods. Therefore, with implementation of demand side management measures during single and multiple dry years, the water supply for the Mid-Peninsula District is anticipated to be adequate and the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. that the Mid-Peninsula District would have adequate water to meet its demands during such periods.

Mitigation Measure Utilities-CP1b: Cal Water shall continue to pursue development of a local water supply Cal Water shall continue to pursue development of local water supplies as identified in the Water Supply Assessment and the UWMP. Cal Water is investigating the development of local

Cal Water is investigating the development of additional local groundwater and other resources to supplemental supplement existing supply. A Additional local supply supplies would reduce Cal Water's reliance on SFPUC supplies and help provide supply for the Corridor Plan and other redevelopment projects. Moreover, developing a local supply supplies would cost much less than paying to develop additional imported supplies.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-19 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS would take another year to drill, develop and equip the well, with an additional year required for constructing any necessary water treatment facilities. In total, an additional water supply could be provided within two to three years (Cal Water, 2004a). Since one well would not likely supply ten percent of the total district demand, it is anticipated that Cal Water will need to develop two more wells to meet the ten percent goal. These two wells could be constructed in areas identified in a report prepared for Cal Water as potentially being suitable to meet production yields, water quality and availability requirements (2004b).

The test well would extract water from the San Mateo Sub-basin of the Santa Clara Groundwater Basin. This basin has not been adjudicated by a court or other body, and has not been identified by the California Department of Water Resources as being overdrafted.

A typical municipal supply groundwater well can produce approximately 1,600 AFY if operated 24 hours per day. This is about 2.5 times the amount of water needed to supply the maximum additional demand that would be placed on Cal Water from the Corridor Plan. The actual capacity of any well will depend on the hydrologic nature of the aquifers from which the well pumps, and cannot be determined until testing has been completed.

To accomplish this local water supply, Cal Water will need assistance from the Cities of San Carlos and San Mateo, and the property developers in obtaining property and permits, as well as regulatory approvals from the California Public Utility Utilities Commission. The permits that would be required to drill a new well include a system amendment permit from California Department of Health Services, a well construction permit from the County, a conditional use permit and a construction/building permit from the relevant city, an air quality permit from the local air quality management district (if an emergency generator is used), and well installation records from the California Department of Water Resources (Cal Water, 2004a; Cal Water, 2004b). All discretionary permits would also be accompanied by appropriate environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. With implementation of this mitigation measure

Cal Water has had a preliminary discussion with the Redwood City Director of Public Works regarding the possibility of Cal Water contracting for reclaimed water from Redwood City’s proposed treatment facility, which is currently being designed. Redwood City anticipates its reclaimed water treatment plant will be fully constructed and operational by Spring 2006 with water available to Cal Water’s San Carlos area in early 2007. Until the project is completed and the quantity and cost of reclaimed water available from Redwood City established, Cal Water cannot adequately assess at this time the feasibility of this serving as an additional local source of supply.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-20 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS the costs for constructing and operating a reclamation treatment plant and related pumping and conveyance facilities and whether these costs could be recovered at rates acceptable to the users.

In the South San Francisco District, Cal Water is preparing a 20-year Master Water Supply and Facilities Plan. A major portion of this effort is to establish a groundwater plan for the Westside Basin, which South San Francisco overlies. Significant groundwater modeling development work has been accomplished during the past 7 years with contributions made by a number of entities including the San Francisco Water Department, Daly City, San Bruno and San Mateo County. Currently, groundwater provides 12.8 percent of the total water supply to the South San Francisco District, with SFPUC waters making up the rest of the supply. The overall objective is to reduce the quantity of water required from the SFPUC by developing local groundwater sources and utilizing reclaimed wastewater in lieu of SFPUC water for irrigation of parks, cemeteries and other open spaces. The goal is to have 20 percent of South San Francisco District supply be from local groundwater and reclaimed wastewater within 5 to 6 years. To that end, a Westside basin groundwater model is being developed. It will be used to test feasible sites and estimate recommended extraction rates, the optimum number of wells and well locations.

Based on existing data, the Bear Gulch District has the best aquifers in terms of potential water yield and water quality in the peninsula area. Currently, ten percent of the district's water is provided by surface water, and Cal Water aims to increase its use of local water supplies (groundwater and surface water) to 16 percent of the total supply within the next five years. Cal Water plans to conduct a study in 2005 to determine the best locations for new production wells to serve its customers. Cal Water also plans to conduct a feasibility study in 2005 as to how to maximize yield from its existing surface water treatment plant at the Bear Gulch reservoir. Finally, Cal Water has initiated discussions with the City of Menlo Park about co-jointly developing a groundwater supply system.

The total local supplies that Cal Water plans on using in its three peninsula districts in the next five years is 3,353 AFY (1,865 AFY for Mid-Peninsula, 681 AFY for South San Francisco, and 807 AFY for Bear Gulch). That means in the absence of the implementation of BMPs, Cal Water’s average annual demand for SFPUC water would be 36,103 AFY (39,456 AFY average annual demand – 3,353 AFY local supply), which would be 3,539 AFY (3,353 + 186) less than its current SAA (39,642 AFY or 3.16 mgpd. Cal Water's 2023 total local water supplies are anticipated to be 5,648 AFY, comprised of 4,377 AFY of groundwater and 1,271 AFY of surface water.

With the implementation of BMPs, Cal Water’s average annual demand for SFPUC water would be 4,723 ac- ft/yr (3,539 + 1,184 = 4,723) or 4.21 mgpd less than its current SAA. In other words, it would be about 11.9 percent ((4,723/39,642)*100) lower than its current SAA. This means that in the event of a dry period where cut backs in water supplied by the SFPUC are required, Cal Water for its 20 year average demand forecast for the three districts could absorb a 11.9 percent reduction and still be within its current SAA.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-21 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Since Cal Water makes the decision as to how to allocate its SAA among its three peninsula districts, a reduction in demand associated with the implementation of BMPs in its other two districts makes that conserved water available to the Mid-Peninsula District if needed.

For a single dry year, SFPUC projects the supply will be 90 percent of normal or average. If BAWSCA users were required to reduce their SAA by that amount, Cal Water’s reduction for its three peninsula districts would be 3,964 AFY (10% of 39,642). Of the estimated 2023 total local water supplies of 5,648 AFY, 4,377 AFY are groundwater and 1,271 AFY are surface water. It is assumed that all the groundwater would be pumped and that there might be a 15 percent reduction in the local surface supply which would be 191 AFY. Assuming the worst-case scenario, i.e., that the dry year occurred at the end of the 20 year planning period or 2023, and that Corridor Plan Scenario Z was built, that would leave Cal Water with a total supply of 41,131 AFY (3,964 + 191 = 4,155; 45,286 – 4,155 = 41,131) for its three peninsula districts compared with a net total demand forecast of 41,065 (see Table 14 of the revised Water Supply Assessment), or with a surplus of 66 AFY. The assumption with respect to demand for a single dry year is that it will be the same as a normal year. Some customers may increase lawn irrigation during a year of reduced precipitation while others based on water use advice and information from Cal Water may voluntarily reduce consumption.

For multiple dry years, SFPUC projects 90 percent of supply for the first year and 80 percent for each subsequent year. If BAWSCA users are required to reduce to their use of SAA by 20 percent for the second, third and fourth year, Cal Water’s reduction for its three peninsula districts would be 7,928 AFY (20% of 39,642). Of the estimated total local water supplies of 5,648 AFY (4,377 AFY are groundwater and 1,271 AFY), it is assumed that all groundwater would be pumped and that there would be a 40 percent reduction in the local surface supply which would be 508 AFY. Hence, total supply would be reduced by 8,436 AFY (7,928 + 508 AFY) or total supply would be 36,850 AFY (45,286 – 8,436 AFY).

The assumption with respect to demand for the second, third and fourth years is that it will achieve a 15 percent reduction based on a voluntary reduction program and 20 percent if a mandatory program is required. Assuming a voluntary program, the reduction in demand in 2023 for the three peninsula districts would be 6,160 AFY (15% of 41,065) or total demand would be 34,905 AFY (41,065 – 6,160 AFY).

In summary, assuming that years 2, 3 or 4 of a multiple dry year period occurs on 2023, and that Corridor Plan Scenario Z is built, Cal Water would have a total supply of 36,850 AFY for its three peninsula districts compared with a net total demand forecast 34,905 AFY or a surplus of 1,945 AFY as a cushion against the uncertainties inherent in these estimates.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-22 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS changes in the water table for the groundwater systems in the Mid-Peninsula and Bear Gulch districts are not available at this time. Data and modeling tools for the Westside Basin underlying the South San Francisco District have been developed to a stage where they will be able to provide credible forecasts of groundwater impacts associated with different use scenarios and hydrologic conditions by the end of 2004. These will be presented in Cal Water’s Master Water Supply and Facilities Plan report in 2005.

With implementation of these mitigation measures, the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Significance After Mitigation: Less than significant.

Page 4.8-16, the last paragraph (extending to page 4.8-17, 1st paragraph) is revised as follows: The City uses the following wastewater generation rates for land uses within the City: 210 gpd for single- family residential uses; 180 gpd for multi-family residential uses; and 0.1 gpd per square foot for non- residential uses (Montgomery Watson Harza, 2001). The flow capacity of the Southern Trunk System and SMWTP is currently adequate during times of dry weather. Based on the wastewater generation rates stated above, buildout of the Corridor Plan would result in an increase in wastewater of approximately 1.01 million gpd, an increase of more than 8.4 percent.1 This would result in a total of 13.11 million gpd of wastewater requiring treatment in the City at SMWTP, of which 10.4 million gpd would be generated within the City of San Mateo. The Southern Trunk System and SMWTP would have adequate capacity during times of dry weather to convey and treat the increased wastewater generated by the Corridor Plan. The addition of 1.01 million gpd generated by the Corridor Plan would not exceed the 11.4 million gpd average daily flow allocated to the City through the Joint Powers Agreement between the City of San Mateo and EIMD.

Page 4.8-17, the 4th paragraph is revised as follows: Improvements would increase the capacity of the system allowing adequate conveyance of wastewater flows to the SMWTP. As described in the City’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule, the Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Impact Fee and a Sewer Connection Charge is imposed on all development that will contribute sewage to the SMWTP. In addition, the City imposes a Development Impact Fee on all development that adds sewage flow to the City’s sewer collection system west of Highway 101. The fees help fund projects on the City’s 5-year capital improvement list, which is updated regularly by the City in coordination with the Planning Division and anticipated projects so the infrastructure is in place ahead of demand. These fees are collected to pay for a SMWTP upgrade completed in 1996, maintenance of current system improvements, and to fund a new sewer undercrossing of Highway 101. Individual projects within the Corridor Plan Area would be assessed these fees to cover the costs of improvements.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-23 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Pages 4.8-18 through 4.8-22, Impact Utilities-BM1 is revised as follows: Water Supply Impact Utilities-BM1: Implementation of the proposed Bay Meadows project would increase residential and commercial land uses in the project area, resulting in an increase in demand for water. This would be a less than significant impact.

The proposed project includes the development of a maximum of 1,500 new housing units, which would potentially result in an increase to the City’s population of 3,720 people by 2020. In addition, the project includes the development of 2.1 million gsf of office space, 100,000 gsf of retail space and approximately 15 acres of park. The increase in residential units and commercial space would generate increased numbers of people within the City boundaries and would increase demand for water supply.

Cal Water prepared a Water Supply Assessment for the Bay Meadows project on December 18, 2003 (see Appendix E).2003, and to respond to public comments, Cal Water prepared a revised Water Supply Assessment on November 12, 2004. Metered sales records for the Bay Meadows project site show that historic water demand on the site totals 176.5 AFY. Using standardized and approved water use factors historical data from the first phase of Bay Meadows and other existing uses, Cal Water calculated the water demand for the Bay Meadows project. Based on these factors, estimated water demand for the Bay Meadows project would total 351.3 228.53 AFY, which represents a net increase of approximately 175 52.23 AFY compared to current water use. By itself, the Bay Meadows project would increase existing demand for the Mid-Peninsula District to 18,825 18,702 AFY (18,650 AFY[existing average demand] + 175 52 AFY[net increase in demand associated with Bay Meadows project]). Current water demand at Bay Meadows is accounted for in Cal Water’s Urban Water Management Plan.

The Bay Meadows project would increase Cal Water's annual purchases from the SFPUC by 175 52.23 AFY, or one 0.3 percent. Contractually the water is available for the anticipated increase in demand for the Bay Meadows project, if the demand for each category of customer (the demand per service) can be reduced to the historical average demand level for each of Cal Water's San Francisco Peninsula Districts. Projected demand for 2023 at average demand per service levels is 38,931 AFY (see Attachment 7 of the Water Supply Assessment in Appendix E) 39,456 AFY. Consequently, about 711 186 AFY (39,642 AFY[SFPUC SAA] – 38,931 39,456 AFY [2023 projected average demand] = 711 186 AFY) would be available for the proposed project provided that the demand per service does not increase above the average. Under the Bay Meadows project, which would result in a net increase in demand of 175 52 AFY, there would be a surplus supply of 536 134 AFY (711 186 AFY – 175 52 AFY = 536 134 AFY) in 2023.

However, in the recent past few years, demand has escalated above the average demand per service value, and Cal Water has consumed more than its SAA. If this condition continues, insufficient SFPUC water would be available within Cal Water’s SAA for these projects.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-24 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

During single dry years, projected demand in 2023 would not be met by the anticipated supply available from Cal Water. With Cal Water's anticipated allocation reduced by 10% percent during a single dry year, Cal Water is anticipated to be approximately 3,253 have 35,678 AFY available from the SFPUC, which is 3,778 AFY short on meeting its anticipated demands ((39,642 AFY [SFPUC SAA] x 90%) – 38,931 39,456 AFY[2023 projected average demand] = 3,253 3,778 AFY). The Bay Meadows project would incrementally contribute to this shortage by 175 52 AFY. The total demand, with the Bay Meadows project, would be 39,106 39,508 AFY (38,931 39,456 AFY + 175 52 AFY). Cal Water's total deficit in a single dry year is anticipated to be 3,428 3,830 AFY (35,678 AFY – 39,106 39,508 AFY).

Similarly, during multiple-dry years, projected demand in 2023 would not be met by the anticipated supply available from Cal Water under existing contracts. With Cal Water's anticipated allocation reduced by 20% percent during a multiple-dry year, Cal Water is anticipated to be approximately 7,217 have 31,714 AFY available from the SFPUC, which is 7,742 AFY short on meeting its anticipated demands ((39,642 AFY [SFPUC SAA] x 80%) – 38,931 39,456 AFY [2023 projected average demand] = 7,217 7,742 AFY). The Bay Meadows project would incrementally contribute to this shortage by 175 52 AFY. The total demand in 2023, including the Bay Meadows project, would be 39,106 39,508 AFY (38,931 39,456 AFY + 175 52 AFY). Cal Water's total anticipated deficit in 2023 in multiple-dry years is anticipated to be 7,392 7,794 AFY (31,714 AFY – 39,106 39,508 AFY).

The effects of the Bay Meadows project could be significant during single dry years, or multiple-dry years, unless Cal Water can obtain additional water to serve existing and planned demand, or reduce demand through implementation of demand management practices. Cal Water’s supply is subject to cutbacks during dry years. Those dry-year cutbacks could result in shortages to current residential, commercial and industrial users. During water shortages, the increment of water provided for the Bay Meadows project would be considered to be a significant adverse effect of the project, both individually and through its contribution to cumulative water demands.

It should be noted that while the incremental increase in demand associated with the Bay Meadows project, together with cumulative water demand, would exceed Cal Water’s SAA in single dry and multiple-dry years, additional water in excess of the SAA could be purchased from the SFPUC at a substantially higher cost (an estimated $800 per acre-foot, compared to the current rate of $479 per acre-foot) (Cal Water, 2004a).

Mitigation measures would be needed to increase water supplies so the supply would be reliable and sufficient for the Corridor Plan Bay Meadows project without affecting other uses. Demand side management and development of a additional local water supply supplies are two potential solutions to this situation. These two methods are addressed separately under Mitigation Measures Utilities-BM1a and BM1b.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-25 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Mitigation Measure Utilities-BM1a: Cal Water and the City shall implement demand side management practices to reduce water demand.

With this reduced demand, projected demand in 2023 would be met by the anticipated supply. In a single dry year, and assuming a 10 percent reduction in demand due to the BMPs, the total Mid-Peninsula District demand would be 35,195 AFY (39,106 AFY x 90%). In multiple-dry years, and assuming a 20 percent reduction in demand due to the BMPs, the total Mid-Peninsula District demand would be 31,285 AFY (39,106 AFY x 80%). This leads to a surplus in a single dry year of 483 AFY (35,678 AFY – 35,195 AFY). The surplus in multiple-dry years would be 429 AFY (31,714 AFY – 31,285 AFY).

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-26 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS conservation programs, the total reduction in demand due to BMPs is estimated to be 1,184 AFY (39,456 x 0.03=1,184).

In the prior drought of the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Mid-Peninsula District demonstrated its ability to conserve water at a high rate. From 1987 to 1991, the Mid-Peninsula District reduced its water purchases from 19,998 AFY to 14,376 AFY, which represents a 28 percent reduction in water use (See Figure 1 of the revised Water Assessment [Appendix C of the Response to Comments Document]). This reduction occurred even with the growth of 455 new services during that period. During the same period, Cal Water's combined purchases from SFPUC were reduced by 29 percent. (See Attachment 7 of the initial Water Supply Assessment in Appendix E.) This proven ability to substantially reduce demand during Reduction in use occurred after the public was informed of the seriousness of water supply conditions, which required implementation of a 25 percent mandatory rationing program. With the conclusion of drought constraints, total demand has gradually increased to pre-drought levels. It is expected, however, that per capita demand will remain below pre-drought levels due to installation of water conserving fixtures and controls.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-27 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Mitigation Measure Utilities-BM1b: Cal Water shall continue to pursue development of a local water supply Cal Water shall continue to pursue development of local water supplies as identified in the Water Supply Assessment and the UWMP. Cal Water is investigating the development of local

Cal Water is investigating the development of additional local groundwater and other resources to supplemental supplement existing supply. A Additional local supply supplies would reduce Cal Water's reliance on SFPUC supplies and help provide supply for the Bay Meadows project Corridor Plan and other redevelopment projects. Moreover, developing a local supply supplies would cost much less than paying to develop additional imported supplies.

As detailed in the Mid-Peninsula UWMP, Cal Water is investigating the development of local groundwater resources to supplement supply. Cal Water intends to develop sufficient local sources in the Mid-Peninsula District to generate an amount of water equal to 10 percent of the total system district demand, which would amount to approximately 1,900 1,865 AFY (Cal Water, 2004b). To this purpose Cal Water has budgeted the drilling of a test well in the Mid-Peninsula system District service area. The assessment of the planned test well will take nearly one year to conclude complete. If a sufficient groundwater supply is detected, then it would take another year to drill, develop and equip the well, with an additional year required for constructing any necessary water treatment facilities. In total, an additional water supply could be provided within two to three years (Cal Water, 2004a). Since one well would not likely supply ten percent of the total district demand, it is anticipated that Cal Water will need to develop two more wells to meet the ten percent goal. These two wells could be constructed in areas identified in a report prepared for Cal Water as potentially being suitable to meet production yields, water quality and availability requirements (2004b).

A typical municipal supply groundwater well can produce approximately 1,600 AFY if operated 24 hours per day. This is about nine times the amount of water needed to supply the additional demand that would be placed on Cal Water from the Bay Meadows project. The actual capacity of any well will depend on the hydrologic nature of the aquifers from which the well pumps, and cannot be determined until testing has been completed.

To accomplish this local water supply, Cal Water will need assistance from the Cities of San Carlos and San Mateo, and the project sponsor property developers in obtaining property and permits, as well as regulatory approvals from the California Public Utility Utilities Commission. The permits that would be required to drill a new well include a system amendment permit from California Department of Health Services, a well construction permit from the County, a conditional use permit and a construction/building permit from the relevant city, an air quality permit from the local air quality management district (if an emergency generator is used), and well installation records from the California Department of Water Resources (Cal Water, 2004a;

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-28 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Cal Water, 2004b). All discretionary permits would also be accompanied by appropriate environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. With implementation of this mitigation measure

Cal Water and the City of San Mateo also intend to explore the feasibility of developing reclaimed water from the City of San Mateo's wastewater treatment plant for landscape irrigation and appropriate industrial needs. Initially, this will require that a consulting engineering firm be retained to prepare a study indicating what customers in San Mateo, Foster City, Belmont and Burlingame might be candidates for using reclaimed water, the costs for constructing and operating a reclamation treatment plant and related pumping and conveyance facilities and whether these costs could be recovered at rates acceptable to the users.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-29 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

For a single dry year, SFPUC projects the supply will be 90 percent of normal or average. If BAWSCA users were required to reduce their SAA by that amount, Cal Water’s reduction for its three peninsula districts would be 3,964 AFY (10% of 39,642). Of the estimated 2023 total local water supplies of 5,648 AFY, 4,377 AFY are groundwater and 1,271 AFY are surface water. It is assumed that all the groundwater would be pumped and that there might be a 15 percent reduction in the local surface supply which would be 191 AFY. Assuming the worst-case scenario, i.e., that the dry year occurred at the end of the 20 year planning period or 2023, and that Corridor Plan Scenario Z was built, that would leave Cal Water with a total supply of 41,131 AFY (3,964 + 191 = 4,155; 45,286 – 4,155 = 41,131) for its three peninsula districts compared with a net total demand forecast of 41,065 (see Table 14 of the revised Water Supply Assessment) or with a surplus of 66 AFY. The assumption with respect to demand for a single dry year is that it will be the same as a normal year. Some customers may increase lawn irrigation during a year of reduced precipitation while others based on water use advice and information from Cal Water may voluntarily reduce consumption.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-30 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

With respect to the question of what effect continuing to pump groundwater at levels consistent with average demand during a dry period, it is likely that there would be a temporary decline in those levels. During ensuing wet periods, there likely would be recovery of the groundwater table providing extraction rates do not exceed total recharge. Cal Water has observed this cycle in hundreds of wells throughout its districts in California over the past 70 years. The data and modeling tools to develop highly probable estimates of the changes in the water table for the groundwater systems in the Mid-Peninsula and Bear Gulch districts are not available at this time. Data and modeling tools for the Westside Basin underlying the South San Francisco District have been developed to a stage where they will be able to provide credible forecasts of groundwater impacts associated with different use scenarios and hydrologic conditions by the end of 2004. These will be presented in Cal Water’s Master Water Supply and Facilities Plan report in 2005.

With implementation of these mitigation measures, the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Significance After Mitigation: Less than significant.

Page 4.8-23, the last paragraph is revised as follows: As described in the City’s Development Fee Calculator, the Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Impact Fee and Sewer Connection Charge are imposed on all development that will contribute sewage to the SMWTP. In addition, the City imposes a fee on all development that adds sewage flow to the City’s sewer collection system west of Highway 101. The fees help fund projects on the City’s 5-year capital improvement list, which is updated regularly by the City in coordination with the Planning Division and anticipated projects so the infrastructure is in place ahead of demand. These fees are collected to pay for a SMWTP upgrade completed in 1996, current system improvements, and to fund a new sewer undercrossing of Highway 101. Development within the Bay Meadows Plan area would be assessed these fees to cover the costs of improvements. Improvements to the Norfolk Street system are partially funded. These funds would also be used to complete the necessary upgrades to the Norfolk Street system.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-31 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.8-26, the references are revised as follows: California Water Service Company (Cal Water), 2004, 2004a, Personal communications with S. Scott, City of San Mateo.

California Water Service Company (Cal Water), 2004b, Water Supply Assessment for the Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows II Specific Plan, City of San Mateo, November 12, 2004.

Page 4.9-7, the last paragraph is revised as follows: Currently, all district schools with the exception of Burlingame Capuchino, Hillsdale and San Mateo High Schools are operating at over capacity. Table 4.9-2 shows the district schools’ enrollment and capacities for the 2001-2002 school year.

Page 4.9-8, Table 4.9-2 is revised as follows:

Table 4.9-2 SMUHSD 2001-2002 Enrollments and Capacities CURRENT BOARD APPROVED SCHOOL DISTRICT/SCHOOL ENROLLMENT CAPACITY (2002- SPACE REMAINING (2003-2004) 2003) San Mateo Union High School District (9-12) Aragon High School (SM) * 1,520 1,485 -35 Burlingame High School (B) 1,338 1,255 83 -83 Capuchino High School (SB) 1,149 1,300 -151 151 Hillsdale High School (SM) * 1,254 1,340 -86 86 Mills High School (M) 1,501 1,500 -1 San Mateo High School (SM) * 1,354 1,495 141 *Schools located closest to the project area Source: San Mateo Union High School District, 2003.

Page 4.9-14, the 2nd paragraph is revised as follows: Population growth under the Corridor Plan would be incremental and would occur gradually as projects receive approval. Police staffing requirements are based on a minimum of 1.25 officers per 1,000 residents. In order to maintain existing service levels, population increase under Corridor Plan Z necessitate hiring 16.6 12.5 additional sworn positions, or would result in a workload increase of 11% on existing staff. and necessitate deployment of 13 additional officers per shift. Corridor Plan A would require the deployment hiring of 5 additional sworn officers, or would result in a workload increase of 4% on existing staff. per shift. Staffing costs for the additional officers would be funded by the Police Department’s share of the general fund, which would receive general tax contributions from the new housing and commercial space.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-32 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 4.9-18, the 1st paragraph is revised as follows: Students in the Corridor Plan Area would attend Aragon, Hillsdale, and San Mateo High Schools. Aragon and Hillsdale High Schools are is currently at overcapacity and would be impacted by the addition of students. Hillsdale and San Mateo High Schools has have excess capacity; Hillsdale High School could accommodate up to approximately 86 additional students and San Mateo High School could accommodate up to approximately 141 additional students. This capacity would be adequate under Corridor Plan A, but would not be adequate under Corridor Plan Z. As such, the addition of 263 students under Corridor Plan Z would result in a significant impact to SMUHSD schools.

Page 4.9-22, the 2nd paragraph is revised as follows: Population and employment growth under the Bay Meadows project would occur over a period of time. Police staffing requirements are based on 1.25 officers per 1,000 residents. In order to maintain existing service levels, the population increase would necessitate hiring 4.6 additional sworn positions, or would result in a workload increase of 4% on existing staff.

Page 4.9-25, the 6th paragraph is revised as follows: The high school closest to the Bay Meadows project is Hillsdale High. Hillsdale High would be able to accommodate 86 additional students generated by the proposed project, however Hillsdale High and Aragon High, the second closest high school, are is over capacity. San Mateo High School, with an excess capacity of 141 students, would be able to accommodate the 98 additional students generated by the proposed project. However, because neither of the two closest high schools would not be able to accommodate all of the students from the proposed project without expansion of additional classrooms, this would be considered a significant impact.

Page 4.10-14, the 4th paragraph is revised as follows: In addition, as the majority of the Corridor Plan Area is currently developed, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a significant net increase in impervious surfaces in the project area that would alter groundwater recharge to the point where it would make dewatering during excavation and construction result in a significant impact to groundwater supplies. and would not in any other way significantly alter groundwater recharge. Impacts to groundwater supply as a result of construction activities within the Corridor Plan Area would therefore be less than significant.

Page 4.11-15, the 2nd paragraph is revised as follows: Hazards-CP1b: An historical review of past use(s) shall be completed as part of each site-specific environmental review in order to determine whether hazardous substances may have been released into the soil and/or groundwater at each site. Based on this information, and where determined appropriate by the

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-33 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

City, particularly for sites with facilities that used to or currently use substantial quantities of hazardous materials, a project applicant shall be required to perform a Phase I Environmental Assessment and follow its recommendations for additional assessments of contamination (e.g., sampling, risk assessments) prior to approval of the project. If hazardous substances have been released, they shall be addressed as part of each site-specific project. An evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of the remediation activities (e.g., air and noise impacts associated with excavation activities) shall be conducted and appropriate mitigation measures included in the CEQA compliance documentation.

Chapter 5: Alternatives

Page 5-7, the 1st and 2nd paragraphs are revised as follows: Four Three additional alternatives capable of achieving most of the project’s goals and objectives are also considered in this section. The Reduced Office Alternative is designed with a mix of land uses similar to the proposed project, only with less office development (1.8 million sq. ft. versus the project’s 2.1 million sq. ft.). The Increased Housing Alternative would include no office space, an additional 400 residential units (1,900 versus the project’s 1,500), and half as much retail space (50,000 sq. ft. versus the project’s 100,000 sq. ft.). The third alternative, the Increased Office/Reduced Housing Alternative, would include an increase in the amount of office space to 2.3 million sq. ft., a reduction in the amount of housing units to 1,250 (versus 1,500), and the same amount of retail space as the project (100,000 sq. ft.). The Revised Design – Reduced Office/Reduced Housing/Increased Retail Alternative would include a reduced amount of office space (1.25 million sq. ft. from 2.1 million sq. ft. in the proposed project), 250 fewer housing units (1,250 versus the project’s 1,500) and a 50,000 sq. ft. increase in retail space (150,000 sq. ft. versus the project’s 100,000 sq. ft.). This alternative would also provide a slightly different arrangement of streets, blocks, and land uses than the proposed project.

In summary, the following alternatives to the proposed Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment have been identified for analysis in this section. A description of each alternative and a comparative environmental evaluation of the identified impacts of the Bay Meadows is provided below. See Table 5-2 for a summary of the land use and roadway network assumptions for each alternative. The alternatives discussed below include: • Alternatives considered but rejected as infeasible • No Project – No Build Alternative • No Project – Reasonably Foreseeable Future Alternative • Reduced Office Alternative • Increased Housing Alternative • Increased Office/Reduced Housing Alternative • Revised Design - Reduced Office/Reduced Housing/Increased Retail Alternative

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-34 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Page 5-8, Table 5-2 is revised as follows: Table 5-2 Comparison of Assumptions for Bay Meadows Project Alternatives

LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS NETWORK ASSUMPTIONS ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO DELAWARE RETAIL OFFICE HOUSING OTHER GRADE SEPS EXTENSION No Project – No Build ------Existing racetrack facility------No Project - Future 50,000 ------Existing racetrack facility------Reduced Office 100,000 1,800,000 1,500 0 25th, 28th 2 lane Increased Housing 50,000 0 1,900 0 25th 2 lane Increased Office/ 100,000 2,100,000 1,250 0 25th, 28th, 31st 2 lane Reduced Housing Revised Design – Reduced Office/Reduced 150,000 1,250,000 1,250 0 25th, 28th, 31st 2 lane Housing/Increased Retail

Page 5-23, the following text is added following the last paragraph: Revised Design - Reduced Office/Reduced Housing/Increased Retail Alternative Description of Alternative Under the Revised Design - Reduced Office/Reduced Housing/Increased Retail Alternative, development on the Bay Meadows project site would be identical to that of the proposed project with the following exceptions: 850,000 sq. ft. less office space (1,250,000 sq. ft. instead of 2,100,000 sq. ft.); 250 fewer dwelling units (1,500 units instead of 1,250 units); and 50,000 sq. ft. more retail space (150,000 sq. ft. instead of 100,000 sq. ft.) would be constructed. The block and street alignments and arrangement of uses would be modified from the proposed project (see Figure 5-1: Bay Meadows Revised Design Illustrative Site Plan). This alternative would also allow for the future connection linking El Camino Real to Saratoga Drive through a grade separated crossing at 31st avenue under the railroad, which may be constructed by the JPB as a future project. This alternative would have generally the same building massing and heights, site coverage and infrastructure improvements as the proposed project.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-35 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Figure 5-1: Bay Meadows Revised Design Illustrative Site Plan

Traffic Conditions under this alternative would result in minor differences in delay at local intersections, but none substantial enough to exceed the adopted level of service standard. Therefore, as with the project, this alternative would not result in significant local intersection impacts. As with the proposed project, impacts to freeway ramps would be less than significant. With significant unavoidable impacts on the eastbound SR 92 segment west of El Camino Real and the weaving section of SR 92 between El Camino Real and Delaware Street, impacts to freeway segments under this alternative would also be the same as the proposed project. Impacts related to traffic on neighborhood streets, transit service, parking, bicycle usage, and construction traffic would, like the proposed project, all be less than significant.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-36 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Fire Service Although this alternative would result in an overall reduced level of development, and different mix of uses than would be developed with the proposed project, the scale of the development would still result in a substantial enough increase in population on the project site that the expected increase in calls for fire and emergency services could require expansion or construction of new fire station facilities. As for the proposed project, this would be a potentially significant impact unless it is adequately mitigated. The proposed project would implement mitigation measures to reduce the impact to a less than significant level, and it is anticipated that the same would occur with this alternative. Therefore both the proposed project and this alternative would have a less than significant impact on fire services.

Schools This alternative would result in fewer housing units than would be developed with the proposed project analyzed in the DEIR. Since student generation is calculated based on residential units only, this alternative would be expected to generate fewer students than would the project. In contrast to the project, which would generate 126 elementary, 63 middle, and 98 high school students, this alternative would generate approximately 105 elementary, 53 middle, and 81 high school students. This alternative would require construction of five elementary school classrooms and two additional middle classrooms (approximately the same as would be required with the proposed project). However, under the revised design, the 81 high school students generated by the project could be accommodated at Hillsdale High School, the closest high school to the Bay Meadows project, and thus would not warrant expansion of existing schools as described for the proposed project. As such, this alternative would not avoid or lessen the significant impacts to project vicinity elementary and middle schools, but would lessen the significant impacts to the high schools that would occur with the project. Like the proposed project, these impacts would be mitigated through payment of fees that would provide adequate funds to construct the additional classrooms that would be needed. The developer fees paid under this alternative ($1,880,000 for SMFCSD and $1,271,000 for SMUHSD) would, however, be slightly less than the fees paid with the proposed project ($2,360,000 for SMFCSD and $1,583,200 for SMUHSD).

Chapter 6: Overview No changes are made to Chapter 6 of the DEIR.

Chapter 7: Report Preparers No changes are made to Chapter 7 of the DEIR.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-37 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

5.2 REVISED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE Pages 2-39 through 2-45, Table 2-3 is revised as shown on the following pages: (Note: revisions have only been made to the 4.11 Hazardous Materials section of the table, however the table is reproduced in its entirety).

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-38 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.1 Land Use Land Use Compatibility Changes to project area land uses. LTS - - X X X Plan Compatibility Changes to the City's land use policies. LTS - - X X X 4.2 Visual Quality New development that would not affect a Scenic Vista LTS - - X X X scenic vista. Scenic Highway New development visible from local highways. LTS - - X X X Additional development in an urban Visual Character LTS - - X X X environment affecting visual character. Additional light and glare that could affect Light and Glare LTS - - X X X drivers and nearby residents. 4.3 Traffic and Circulation Increased delays at intersection of El Camino Local Traffic S Implementation of TDM measures. SU X X - Real/17th Avenue/Bovet Road. Increased delays at intersection of El Camino Local Traffic S Implementation of TDM measures. SU X X - Real/Ralston Avenue. Increased delays at the intersection of El Local Traffic S Construct a grade separation at 28th Avenue. SU X - - Camino Real/20th Avenue. Intersections of Delaware/9th, Local Traffic Delaware/25th, ECR/4th, ECR/28th, SB LTS - - - - X 101/Fashion Island. Neighborhood Traffic Increased traffic on neighborhood streets. LTS - - X X X Increased traffic on eastbound SR 92 on-ramp Freeway Ramps S Rebuild SR 92/ECR interchange. SU X X - from southbound El Camino Real. Increased traffic on eastbound SR 92 on-ramp Freeway Ramps LTS - - - - X from southbound El Camino Real. Increased traffic on westbound SR 92 off- Freeway Ramps LTS - - - - X ramp to northbound El Camino Real. Notes: LTS = less than significant CPA = Corridor Plan Scenario A S = significant CPZ = Corridor Plan Scenario Z SU = significant and unavoidable BM = Bay Meadows project

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-39 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.3 Traffic and Circulation (continued) Worsening of traffic on southbound US 101, Freeway Segments S Implementation of TDM measures. SU X X - north of SR 92. Worsening of traffic on northbound US 101, Freeway Segments S Implementation of TDM measures. SU X X - south of SR 92. Worsening of traffic on southbound US 101, Freeway Segments S Implementation of TDM measures. SU X X - south of SR 92. Worsening of conditions on westbound SR 92, Freeway Segments S Construct improvements to SR 92. SU - X X west of El Camino Real. Worsening of conditions on eastbound SR 92, Freeway Segments S Construct improvements to SR 92. SU - - X west of El Camino Real. SR 92 weaving section between El Camino Freeway Segments S Rebuild SR 92 weaving section. SU X X X Real & Delaware. Transit Increase in transit ridership. LTS - - X X X Lack of a bicycle lane on the Delaware Street Ensure an appropriate alternative Class Bicycle Facilities S LTS X X X extension. bikeway or equivalent. Parking Increased demand for parking. LTS - - X X X Construction Period Additional traffic due to construction activity. LTS - - - - X Increased delays at intersection of El Camino Cumulative Local Traffic LTS - - - - X Real/17th Avenue/Bovet Road. Increased delays at intersection of El Camino Cumulative Local Traffic S Implementation of TDM measures. SU - - X Real/Ralston Avenue. Cumulative Freeway Increased traffic on eastbound SR 92 on-ramp S Rebuild SR 92/ECR interchange. SU - - X Ramps from southbound El Camino Real. Cumulative Freeway Increased traffic on westbound SR 92 off- S Rebuild SR 92/ECR interchange. SU - - X Ramps ramp to northbound El Camino Real. Cumulative Freeway Worsening of traffic on northbound US 101, S Implementation of TDM measures. SU - - X Segments south of SR 92. Cumulative Freeway Worsening of traffic on southbound US 101, S Implementation of TDM measures. SU - - X Segments south of SR 92. Cumulative Freeway SR 92 weaving section between El Camino S Rebuild SR 92 weaving section. SU - - X Segments Real & Delaware.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-40 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.3 Traffic and Circulation (continued) Cumulative Increased transit use/No bike lane on LTS - - - - X Transit/Bicycle/ Parking Delaware/Increased demand for parking. 4.4 Cultural Resources Archaeological Increased potential for adverse construction Construction monitoring and response S LTS X X X Resources effects on subsurface resources. procedure. Development along El Camino Real, a State Architectural Resources LTS - - X X - landmark, would occur. Increased probability that historic structures Consider all feasible alternatives, recordation Architectural Resources S SU X X - could be substantially altered. and acknowledgement of historic resources. Demolition of Bay Meadows Racetrack and Architectural Resources LTS - - X X X related structures. 4.5 Population, Employment and Housing Construction-Related Construction activities would temporarily LTS - LTS X X X Growth increase employment in City. Residential development would increase City Population Inducement LTS - LTS X X X population. Displacement of Development would displace worker housing LTS - LTS X X X Housing and People from the Bay Meadows site. 4.6 Air Quality Temporary air pollution emissions due to Construction Emissions S Implement BAAQMD Control Measures. LTS X X X construction activities. Regional Operational Increase in regional air pollutant emissions. S Exemption or permit from BAAQMD. LTS X X X Emissions Local Operational Increased CO concentrations at intersections LTS - - X X X Emissions due to traffic. Odors New uses could emit odors. LTS - - X X X Cumulative Opertional Increased emissions in 2020 when combined LTS - - - - X Emissions with other growth in the City.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-41 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.7 Noise Temporary increases in noise levels due to Implement construction noise control Construction Noise S LTS X X X construction activities. measures. Stationary noise sources could impact sensitive Implement operational noise control Stationary Sources S LTS X X X land uses. measures. Noise reduction measures from a detailed New sensitive land uses could be impacted by Land Use Compatibility S noise analysis shall be implemented to ensure LTS X X X existing noise. interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dba. Increased noise levels due to increases in Traffic Noise LTS - - X X - traffic. Noise reduction measures from a detailed Increased noise levels due to increases in Traffic Noise S noise analysis shall be implemented to ensure LTS - - X traffic. interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dba. Cumulative Traffic Increased noise levels due to increases in LTS - - - - X Noise traffic under 2020 conditions. New land uses would be exposed to aircraft Aircraft Noise LTS - - X X X noise. Noise reduction measures from a detailed New land uses would be exposed to train- Train-Related Noise S noise analysis shall be implemented to ensure LTS X X X related noise. interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dba. 4.8 Utilities Implementation of measures by Cal Water and Residential and commercial growth would the City to reduce demand and continued Water Supply S LTS X X X increase demand for water. pursuit by Cal Water of developing a local water supply. Increased wastewater generation due to Payment of impact development fee prior to Wastewater S LTS X X X residential and commercial growth. building permit issuance. Increased solid waste generation due to Solid Waste LTS - - X X X residential and commercial growth.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-42 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.9 Public Services Police Services Increased demand for police services LTS - - X X - (a) Taxes on new development would Increased volume of calls for fire and Fire Services S represent fair share contribution. (b) Storage LTS X X X emergency services. of 600,000 gallons on-site to supply fire flow. Developer fees would fund expansion of Increased enrollment in the San Mateo-Foster SMFCSD Schools S existing schools and construction of new LTS X X X City School District. classrooms. Developer fees would fund expansion of Increased enrollment in the San Mateo Unified SMUHSD Schools S existing schools and construction of new LTS X X X High School District. classrooms. San Mateo Community Increased enrollment in the San Mateo County LTS - - X X X College Community College District. Student Pedestrian Increased number of students crossing busy Evaluate intersections and supply crossing S LTS X X X Safety streets. guards where necessary. Increased demand for open space and Parks LTS - - X X X recreation services. Libraries Increased demand for libraries. LTS - - X X X 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality Construction Construction activities could deplete LTS - - X X X Groundwater groundwater. Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion control measures in the Construction Erosion Construction activities would increase erosion. S LTS X X X project's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Implement BMPs and SWPPP erosion control Construction Runoff Construction activities would increase runoff. S LTS X X X measures. Construction Construction activities would require Follow all RWQCB regulations related to S LTS X X X Dewatering dewatering activities. dewatering and BMPs for excavation activities Development would increase use of Groundwater LTS - - X X X groundwater supplies. Development would increase the amount of Flooding Due to Runoff LTS - - X X X runoff in the area.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-43 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.10 Hydrology (continued) Development would increase runoff in the Stormwater System area, potentially exceeding the capacity of LTS - - X X X stormwater system. Non-point Source Development could contribute to an increase Develop and implement a SWPPP and BMPs S LTS X X X Pollution in non-point source pollution. for project operation. Development would expose an increased Dam Failure number of people to inundation in the event LTS - - X X X of dam failure. 4.11 Hazardous Materials Historical review of past site uses, remove above ground hazardous materials, test for lead paint, conduct Phase I assessments and Development would potentially expose Exposure to follow their recommendations, evaluate construction workers and potential site users S LTS X X X Contaminated Soils environmental impacts of any remediation to contaminated soils. activities and include appropriate mitigation measures in project CEQA compliance documentation. Construction activities would potentially Exposure to Conduct Phase I assessment and follow its expose construction workers to contaminated S LTS X X - Groundwater recommendations. groundwater. Construction activities would potentially Exposure to expose construction workers to contaminated LTS - - - X Groundwater groundwater. Construction activities would potentially Conduct an asbestos survey and comply with Exposure to Asbestos expose construction workers to asbestos S LTS X X X NESHAP guidelines for removal of asbestos. containing materials. Comply with State and federal statutes related to the use and storage of hazardous materials. Use of Hazardous Development could increase the use of S Also, for Bay Meadows, obtain a Hazardous LTS X X X Materials hazardous chemicals in the project area. Materials Storage Permit from the San Mateo Fire Marshal.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-44 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

Table 2-3 Summary of Project Impacts by Environmental Topic

EIR CHAPTER / SIGNIFICANCE SIGNIFICANCE AFFECTED PROJECTS IMPACT MITIGATION ENVIRONMENTAL TOPIC LEVEL AFTER MITIGATION CPA CPZ BM 4.12 Biological Resources Development would lead to increased Disturbance of Wildlife LTS - - X X X disturbance or mortality of wildlife. Conduct wetland delineation; obtain permits from Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB; Aquatic/Riparian Development could affect aquatic and riparian S replacement of any wetland loss; LTS X X - Habitat habitat in area channels. implementation of erosion control measures during construction. Site design measures to protect trees, evaluate Development could result in the removal of Heritage Trees S and document trees to be removed, plant LTS X X X heritage trees. replacement trees. Removal of trees could affect non-listed Survey by biologist and implementation of Raptors S LTS X X X special-status nesting raptors. avoidance measures. 4.13 Geology, Soils and Seismicity Development would expose people and All development would comply with Uniform Ground Shaking S LTS X X X property to ground shaking hazards. Building Code requirements. Development would expose people and Fault Ruptures LTS - - X X X property to fault rupture. Development would expose people and Conduct design-level geotechnical study and Ground Failure S LTS X X X property to ground failure. implement measures identified in study. Loss or Erosion of Construction activities could affect topsoil, Prepare SWPPP and implement erosion S LTS X X X Topsoil which could damage structures. control measures. Development could be subject to damage Conduct design-level geotechnical study and Expansive Soils S LTS X X X from expansion of near surface soils. implement measures identified in study. Development could be damaged by Implement engineering methods to minimize Differential Settlement S LTS X X X differential compaction and settlement. the potential for damage. Development would occur in areas with Conduct design-level geotechnical study and Corrosive Soils S LTS X X X corrosive soils. implement measures identified in study.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-45 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments CHAPTER 5: DEIR REVISIONS

This page intentionally left blank.

San Mateo Corridor Plan and Bay Meadows Specific Plan Amendment EIR 5-46 EDAW, Inc Response to Comments