• The proposed Site A development would not result in a greater amount of development (in terms of building square footage) or a greater rate of construction when compared to the APP full project buildout scenario analyzed in the APP EIR. In addition, the amount of development anticipated under each of the three phases of the proposed project, and the rate of construction of each of these phases, would not be greater than the analysis in the APP EIR (see discussion under Impacts 4.F-1, 4.F-2, 4.F-3, 4.F-4, 4.F-5, 4.F-7, 4.F-8, 4.F-10, and 4.F-11, below). • The proposed Site A development would not result in greater toxic air contaminant (TAC) sources and odor sources, and would not locate these sources closer to existing sensitive receptors when compared to the APP full project buildout scenario analyzed in the APP EIR (see discussion under Impacts 4.F-3, 4.F-4, 4.F-5, 4.F-6, and 4.F-9, below). • The proposed Site A development would not locate new sensitive receptors that are substantially closer to TAC emission sources or odor sources compared to the APP full project buildout scenario analyzed in the APP EIR (see discussion under Impacts 4.F-4 and 4.F-9, below).
Impact 4.F-1: Development facilitated by proposed project could potentially result in air quality impacts due to construction activities. (Significant and Unavoidable) The proposed Site A development would not result in more intense construction activities than those analyzed in the APP EIR. The EIR estimated construction emissions assuming a development scenario of 150 dwelling units and 205,000 square feet of industrial and commercial uses per year (total of 355,000 square feet of buildings per year), 3,4 The analysis also assumed that approximately 80,000 cubic yards of soil would be imported per year, and 225,000 square feet of existing buildings would be demolished per year. Buildout of the proposed Site A project would result in up to 800 residential units and up to 600,000 square feet of retail, commercial, and hotel uses, consisting of 200,000 square feet of new buildings, and up to 400,000 square feet of existing buildings to be repurposed. The total number of residential units and commercial/retail/hotel square footages are an estimated maximum; the square footage of actual constructed uses may be slightly less. Based on the maximum 20-year development duration, the proposed Site A project would be expected to have an average development rate of 40 dwelling units and 38,200 square feet of industrial and commercial uses per year (total of 70,000 square feet of buildings per year); and would involve approximately 5,000 cubic yards of soil import per year and demolition of 13,971 square feet of existing buildings per year. Evaluated as a whole, the build-out development scenario for Site A is less intense than the project analyzed in the EIR.
3 ESA, 2013. Alameda Point Project Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2013012043. Certified February 4, 2014.
4 ESA, 2013. Draft Alameda Point Project EIR, SCH No. 2013012043 - Appendix I: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases. Draft September 2013 and Final December 2013.
This estimate is based on the assumption used in the Alameda Point Project EIR analysis of 1,000 square feet per dwelling unit.
AECOM Technical Memorandum
April 14, 2015
However, the proposed project would likely be developed and constructed in three distinct phases, with varying numbers of residential units and amounts of commercial/retail square footage in each phase. Phase 1 would result in the most intensive construction and the greatest number of units; and Phases 2 and 3 would result in less development, as explained below. Under Phase 1, anticipated from 2016 through 2019 (3-year duration), Phase 1 buildout would result in 669 residential units and 96,000 square feet of retail. This construction scenario would result in 223 dwelling units and approximately 32,000 square feet of industrial and commercial uses per year (total of 255,000 square feet of buildings per year), and would involve importing approximately 33,300 cubic yards of soil per year® and demolition of approximately 38,467 square feet of existing buildings per year.
Under Phase 2,anticipated anticipated to occur from through through (3-year duration), total buildout would result in 133 residential units, 100,000 square feet of hotel uses (up to 150 rooms), 59,000 square feet of retail, and a parking structure with up to 560 spaces. This construction scenario would result in 44 dwelling units and approximately 127,677 square feet of industrial and commercial uses per year (total of 172,000 square feet of buildings per year), and would involve demolition of approximately 35,676 square feet of existing buildings per year.
Under Phase 3, anticipated to occur from 2026 through 2029(3-year duration), total buildout would result in 309,650 square feet of commercial uses and a parking structure with up to 670 spaces. This scenario would result in construction of approximately 192,550 square feet of industrial and commercial uses per year (total of 192,550 square feet of buildings per year), and would involve demolition of approximately 19,000 square feet of existing buildings per year.
Hence, pursuant to the proposed Site A development phasing plan, the rate of development of Site A in each phase is less intense than the scenario analyzed in the APP EIR.
Based on these assumptions, the EIR adequately accounted for construction emissions impacts from the proposed Site A project. As described in the EIR, construction activities would result in a significant impact that would be partially mitigated by the mitigation measures identified in the EIR:
Mitigation Measure 4.F-1a (Fugitive Dust), Mitigation Measure 4.F-1b (Construction Exhaust), Mitigation Measure 4.F-1c (Demolition Controls), Mitigation Measure 4.F-1d (Toxic Air Contaminants and PM25), and Mitigation Measure 4.F-1e (Delayed Occupancy). After implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, some residual impacts would remain, and the impact will remain significant and unavoidable. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-2: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially generate operational emissions that would result in a considerable net increase of criteria pollutants and precursors for which the air basin is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. (Significant and Unavoidable) The proposed Site A development would not result in more residential, industrial, and commercial development than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. The EIR analyzed operational emissions from full APP buildout in 2035. Operational emissions such as energy, area, and mobile sources are based on measures of operational activity, which are approximately proportional to the number of dwelling units, building square footage, population, and employment. The APP EIR estimated that 6 The anticipated import of soil for development of Site A is conservatively assumed to occur entirely during Phase 1.
AECOM Technical Memorandum
April 14, 2015
buildout of the APP would result in approximately 5.5 million square feet of developed space consisting of: 3,060,500 square feet of manufacturing/warehouse uses; 1,627,500 square feet of office/business park/institutional uses; 812,000 square feet of retail/commercial uses; 1,425 residential units; 291 acres of parks and open space; and 530 marina slips. The APP would include a total household population of approximately 3,240 persons and about 8,909 jobs; and would generate approximately 33,429 daily vehicle trips, of which approximately 2,928 would be weekday morning (a.m.) peak-hour trips and 3,294 would be weekday evening (p.m.) peak-hour trips? The proposed Site A development would result in 800 residential dwelling units, 200,000 square feet of new retail, and up to 400,000 square feet of existing buildings to be repurposed for retail/ commercial uses. Buildout of Site A would result in a total household population of 1,816 and approximately 971 jobs. The proposed Site A development at buildout would not exceed the amount of development at buildout of the APP analyzed in the EIR, nor would it result in more trips than anticipated in the EIR. Therefore, the proposed Site A project would not result in more intense operational emissions than the scenario analyzed in the EIR. Based on these assumptions, the EIR adequately accounted for operational emissions impacts from the proposed Site A project.
Operational activities would result in significant impacts that would be partially mitigated by Mitigation Measure 4.F-2 (Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures). However, after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, some residual impacts would remain and the impact will remain significant and unavoidable. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-3: Operation of the development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of toxic air contaminants or respirable particulate matter (PM2.s). (Less than Significant) The proposed Site A development would not result in substantially greater or different sources of TACs or emissions of particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. The EIR analyzed localized health impacts from diesel particulate matter (DPM) and PM2.5 from full project buildout in 2035. The DPM and PM2.s project sources considered included increased motor vehicle traffic on surface streets from project operations. These mobile source emissions are based on measures of operational activity, which are approximately amount of development analyzed in the APP EIR full buildout scenario. Therefore, the proposed Site A project would not result in higher potential exposure of sensitive receptors to DPM and PM2.5 than the scenario analyzed in the EIR. Impacts would be less than significant. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-4: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially expose persons (new receptors) to substantial levels of TACs, which may lead to adverse health. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
The proposed Site A development would not result in substantially different new receptors, and would not result in substantially greater or different sources of TACs compared to the project analyzed in the ESA, 2013. Alameda Point Project Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2013012043. Certified February 4, 2014. Table 4.C-3, page 4.C-23.
ASCOM Technical Memorandum
April 14, 2015
APP EIR. The EIR analyzed health impacts on new receptors (from APP project buildout) from local sources, including project construction. Consistent with the EIR, the proposed Site A project would locate new receptors in the project area. As discussed in Impact 4.F-1, construction of the proposed Site A development would not be more intense than that analyzed in the APP EIR, and TAC emissions would also not be more intense than those analyzed in the APP EIR. Therefore, the proposed Site A project would not result in higher potential exposure of new sensitive receptors to TACs compared to the scenario analyzed in the EIR. Based on these assumptions, the EIR adequately accounted for potential exposure of new sensitive receptors at Site A to TACs. As identified in the EIR, impacts would be significant, but incorporation of Mitigation Measure 4.F-4 (Implement Mitigation Measures 4.F-1a, 4.F-1b, and 4.F-1e) would reduce impacts to less-than- significant levels. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-5: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial carbon monoxide concentrations. (Less than Significant) The proposed Site A development would not result in more residential, industrial, and commercial development than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. The EIR stated that the project would not exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) carbon monoxide hotspot screening criteria for traffic volumes, and would be consistent with the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency standards. As discussed in Impact 4.F-2, the proposed Site A project would result in less operational activity and generate less traffic volume than the APP EIR scenario, and would comply with applicable congestion management standards. Therefore, the proposed Site A project would not result in higher potential exposure of sensitive receptors to carbon monoxide hotspots compared to the scenario analyzed in the EIR. The EIR adequately accounted for potential exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial carbon monoxide concentrations. As identified in the EIR, the impacts would be less than significant. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-6: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. (Less than Significant) The proposed Site A development would not result in greater or substantially different residential, industrial, and commercial development (including potential odor sources) than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. Regarding odor sources, the proposed Site A project would not differ substantially from the EIR project analyzed. The EIR adequately accounted for the potential of the proposed Site A project to create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. As identified in the EIR, the impacts would be less than significant. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-7: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. (Significant) The proposed Site A development would not result in more residential, industrial, and commercial development than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. As discussed in Impact 4.F-2, the proposed Site A development at full buildout would not exceed the amount of development analyzed in the APP EIR full buildout scenario. The proposed Site A project would be similar to the project analyzed in the EIR with regard to support of the primary goals of the 2010 Clean Air Plan, consistency with Clean Air Plan control measures, and potential disruption of applicable control measures. The EIR adequately AECOM Technical Memorandum
April 14, 2015
accounted for the proposed Site A project's potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. As identified in the EIR, impacts would be significant, but implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.F-7a (Implement Mitigation Measure 4.F-2), Mitigation Measure 4.F-7b (Fuel- Efficient Vehicles) would reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Cumulative Impacts
Impact 4.F-8: Development facilitated by the proposed, when combined with past, present, and other reasonably foreseeable development in the vicinity, could potentially result in cumulative criteria air pollutant air quality impacts. (Significant and Unavoidable) The proposed Site A development would not result in more residential, industrial, and commercial development than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. As discussed in Impact 4.F-2, the proposed Site A development at full buildout would not exceed the amount of development analyzed in the APP EIR full buildout scenario. The EIR adequately accounted for cumulative criteria air pollutant impacts for the proposed Site A project. Significant impacts would be partially mitigated by Mitigation Measure 4.F-8 (Implement Mitigation Measures 4.F-2 and 4.F-7b). However, as described in the EIR, after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, some residual impacts would remain and the impact will remain significant and unavoidable. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-9: Development facilitated by the proposed project could cumulatively expose persons to substantial levels of TACs, which may lead to adverse health effects. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Site A development would not result in substantially different new receptors, and would not result in substantially greater or different sources of TACs compared to the project analyzed in the APP EIR. As discussed in Impact 4.F-4, the proposed Site A development would locate new receptors within the APP project area analyzed in the APP EIR, and would not result in substantially more intense construction activities that could generate TAC emissions. The EIR adequately accounted for the potential cumulative exposure of new sensitive receptors at Site A to TACs.
Cumulative impacts would be less than significant. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-10: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Site A development would not result in more residential, industrial, and commercial development than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. The APP EIR considered the following activities in analyzing the project's potential to contribute to the generation of GHG emissions:
construction activities; solid waste disposal; gas, electricity, and water use; motor vehicle use; and stationary sources. As discussed in Impact 4.F-1 and Impact 4.F-2, the construction activities for the proposed Site A development and operations at full buildout would not exceed the amount of development analyzed in the APP EIR construction and full buildout operations scenario. The land use types would be similar to those analyzed and described in the EIR, and the project would not result in a substantial difference of the GHG efficiency for the APP EIR. Based on the assumptions listed below, the EIR adequately accounted for the GHG emissions of the proposed Site A project.
AECOM Technical Memorandum
April 14, 2015
As described in the EIR, impacts would be less than significant. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Impact 4.F-11: Development facilitated by the proposed project could potentially conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Site A development would not result in more residential, industrial, and commercial development than the project analyzed in the APP EIR. As discussed in Impact 4.F-1 and Impact 4.F-2, the construction activities for the proposed Site A development and operations at full buildout would not exceed the amount of development analyzed in the APP EIR construction and full buildout operations scenario. The EIR adequately accounted for the proposed Site A project's potential to conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The project analyzed in the EIR would be consistent with GHG reduction initiatives in the 2008 Local Action Plan for Climate Protection and, as discussed in Impact 4.F-10, would not exceed the BAAQMD GHG efficiency threshold. As described in the EIR, impacts would be less than significant. The Site A development would not substantially increase the severity of this impact or create new impacts.
Exhibit E
List of Impact Fees
The fees listed below are the impact fees in place in the City of Alameda as of the date of the Development Agreement.
Impact. Fee Name Alameda Municipal Code
Sewer Connection AMC Section 18.3
Improvement Tax AMC Section 3-62
Non-Residential Affordable AMC Section 27-1
Housing Fee
Alameda Point Development AMC Section 27.4
Impact Fee
Public Art AMC Section 30.65
Exhibit F
Phasing Plan
990000 PHASE THREE
(17)
(16) (15)
E) BLDG 40 (E) BLDG 41
1/-50%
4/- 60*
(14) *
G STREET
PHASE ONEL
F STREET
PHASE TWO (10) *STREET 8109)
(12a)
PHASE THREE
U PHASE TWO
SEAPLANE LAGOON 000000080
(01b)
-P*
EXISTING CARTWRIGHT SUESTATION
20000008
PHASE THREE
LEGEND
(E) EXISTING BUILDING
*THIS SITE PLAN & BUILDING CONFIGURATIONS ARE
(##) BLOCK NUMBER ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY. ALL IMPROVEMENTS SUBJECT TO DESIGN
REVIEW APPROVAL
P SURFACE PARKING *EXISTING BUILDINGS AND/OR SITES MAY BE OCCUPIED WITH * POTENTIAL PARKING GARAGE USES CONSISTENT WITH THIS PLAN DURING ANY PHASE
ALAMEDA POINT ALAMEDA, CA
PHASING DIAGRAM
BARarchitects SRMERNST
901 Battery Street, Suite 300 | San Francisco, CA 94111 | 415 293 5700 | www.bararch.com 3 MadisonMarquette LANGAN 14072 MAY 27, 2015
Phasing Plan - Alameda Point Site A
Proposed Buildings and Uses
Project Parcel Proposed Use/Building Building Square Footage, Units, or Phase Number Acres
Type Acres/Parking Spaces
la ₺0.85 Residential/Townhomes t15 units/ up to 30 spaces $2.83 Residential/Townhomes 164 units/ up to 128 spaces =2.43 Residential/Townhomes 260 units/up to 120 spaces
Residential/Podium
8 #1.73 Very-Low and Low *128 units/up to 192 spaces
Income Affordable
Housing Project
12.42 Residential/Podium t182 units/up to 273 spaces
Phase 1
10 Open Space *3.05 acres
₺4.08
Retail / 46,000 square feet/50 spaces
Residential:
=220 units/up to 330 spaces
=2.58 Mixed Use
Retail:
+50,000 square feet/24 spaces
$1.35 Open Space =1.92 acres
Residential: 669 units/upto 1,073 parking spaces
₺16.92 | Retail: +96,000 square feet/+74 parking spaces Phase 1 Subtotal
Open Space: t4.97 acres
1 Phasing Plan - Alameda Point Site A
Proposed Buildings and Uses
Project Parcel Building Square Footage, Units, or
Phase Number Acres Proposed Use/Building Type
: Acres/Parking Spaces
lb #4.24 Residential/Townhomes +27 units/up to 54 spaces 2 #1.15 Open Space =1.15 acres
3 =2.09 Residential/Podium/surface lot #106 units/up to 159 spaces Hotel: #100,000 s quare feet (+150 rooms)+112
parking spaces
Retail:+6,000 square feet
4 $2.15 Mixed Use/Parking
Phase 2
Parking Structure: up to 560 parking spaces
5 $3.49 Open Space *3.10 acres
12(a) 40.6 /Retail ₺20,000 square feet
12(b) t0.54 Open Space ₺0.54 acre
13 +0.4 Retail $13.000 square feet
Residential: ‡133 units/up to 213 parking spaces
Hotel: #100,000 square feet (*150 rooms)/+112 parking spaces Phase 2 Subtotal $14.26 Retail: $59,000 square feet
Parking Structure: upto 560 parking spaces
Open Space: ‡4.79 acres
14 +0.84 Parking LUp to 670 parking spaces
15 $7.53 Commercial =161,700/up to 243 spaces
Phase 3
16 €3.7 Commercial #90,950/up to 100 spaces
17. =2.73 Commercial =57,000/up to 110 spaces
19 #3.59 Open Space ₺3.59 acres
Commercial: +309,650 square feet/up to 453 spaces
Phase 3 Subtotal +18.39 Parking Structure: upto 670 parking spaces Open Space: +3.59 acres
Residential: 800 units/up to 1,200 parking spaces
Hotel: +100,000 square feet (=150 rooms)/+112 parking spaces Total +68 Retail: +155,000 s quare feet/#74 spaces
Commercíal: +309,650 square feet/up to 453 spaces
Parking Structures and lots: up to 1,230 s paces
Open Space: *13.35 acres
2