WORKSHOP PROGRAM & VIDEOS

TOPICS

Regional Government and Regulatory Agencies – Is This Going to Work for the Business Community? BAAQMD, BCDC, ABAG and MTC, it is more than alphabet soup. How do we assure that our business community can thrive with conflicting regulatory guidelines and rules? What are our rights?

Revised BAAQMD CEQA guidelines and the challenges posed for urban in-fill projects and development.

How the proposed Bay Plan amendments addressing Climate Change & Sea Level Rise will affect projects in the near and long term.

Update on California’s “anti-sprawl” legislation (SB 375) and how its centerpiece, the Sustainable Communities Strategy (“SCS”), is being rolled out.

Panel 1 CEQA: Practical Impacts of the Revised BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines

Over the past eighteen months or so, lead agencies and project applicants have had to assess air quality impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) using the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) revised CEQA guidelines as part of permitting for new projects.   The implementation of these new guidelines has presented new challenges, especially for in-fill projects in urban parts of the Bay Area.  Meanwhile, implementation of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy under SB 375, which emphasizes in-fill development, is also moving forward.  This portion of the workshop aims to provide a discussion of the experience gain to date in implementing the revised CEQA guidelines and the practical impacts and challenges presented to new development and businesses moving into existing urban centers around the Bay because of this new guidance and any potential solutions to date.

Topics that could be discussed

• Guidelines analysis approach versus development of best practices
  • Paralysis through analysis or more practical approach needed?
  • Recognition that technology may not exist to mitigate all risks so does that mean a project is not desirable?
  • Cat-ex and NegDecs no longer possible?
  • Infill (local need) helps reduce GHGs (regional/global need) but is closer to sources of air toxics (local impact). 
    • Is it possible to meet both?
    • Has implementation of the guidelines hampered infill development?
    • Do air toxics requirements (local impacts) conflict with SB375 (regional) goals?

Speakers:

City Planner:  Bill Wycko, SF Environmental Planning Division

BAAQMD:  Henry Hilken, Director of Planning, Rules & Research

BAAQMD Board of Directors:  John Gioia, Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County, District 1

Job and Housing Coalition:  Greg McConnell, President and CEO

ABAG, Ken Kirkey, Planning Director

Panel 2 BCDC: Proposed Bay Plan Amendments Addressing Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

Proposed Bay Plan Amendments Addressing Climate Change & Sea Level Rise:

In 2009, BCDC staff released a report indicating that sea level rise in San Francisco Bay could be as much as 16 inches by mid-century and 55 inches by the end of the century.  The report indicated that the area vulnerable to inundation with a 16-inch sea level rise roughly corresponds to today’s 100-year floodplain.  In response to concerns over sea level rise, BCDC staff has been working on Bay Plan Amendment No. 1-08 for the past three years.  Following significant input and public participation by local environmental groups, business community representatives, and development interests, BCDC and multiple draft recommendations, BCDC staff released the latest draft of the proposed Bay Plan Amendments on July 29, 2011.  A public hearing on the latest draft was held September 1, 2011.  The Commission is poised to vote on Bay Plan Amendment 1-08 on October 6, 2011.  

The panel will address which components of the Plan Amendment have proven most controversial, how the controversies have been resolved, and how BCDC staff anticipates the proposed Plan Amendment would be implemented in both the near term and the long term.

Specific discussion topics will include:

• Overview of the two year Plan Amendment process:
  • What are implications of its adoption; how does SCS integrate with local planning?
  • What are incentives for compliance by local agencies?
  • Highlights from the current draft of the proposed Plan Amendments.  What has changed and how?
  • How will the Plan Amendments affect projects in the near term?
    • Will sea level rise be considered in reviewing applications?
    • What factors will be relevant to BCDC in weighing sea level rise considerations?
    • What will be the local agencies role, if any, in helping to apply the Plan Amendments?
    • Upcoming actions
      • Timeline for proposed approval by Commission.
      • Timing and process for future Joint Policy Committee participation and action.

Speakers:

Joe LaClair, San Francisco Bay Conservation Development Commission

Paul Campos, Senior Vice President, BIA of the Bay Area

Ian Wren, Staff Scientist, San Francisco Baykeeper

Jay Ach, Manager of Regulatory & Environmental Affairs, Port of San Francisco

Case Study Speakers:

Robert Freed, President and CEO, & Katia Kamangar, Senior Vice President, Managing Director, SummerHill Homes

Tiffany Bohee, Project Manager, San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development

Panel 3 SB 375: Update on SB 375 and Development of Regional Land Use Plan

In 2008, the Legislature passed California’s “anti-sprawl” legislation, also known as Senate Bill (“SB”) 375.  This legislation seeks to curb leapfrog development by creating incentives and disincentives for cities and counties to establish complementary land uses in closer proximity to one another, such as residential homes and job centers.  The thought is that this land use blueprint would minimize vehicle miles traveled, and thereby minimize environmental impacts to air quality and traffic congestion.  The centerpiece of the legislation is the Sustainable Communities Strategy (“SCS”), which was envisioned as a regional development pattern that integrated land use designations with the regional transportation network—i.e., a regionally-sized general plan, of sorts.  In the San Francisco Bay Area, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has been tasked with developing the SCS.  This workshop will provide an update on the planning process, who has been influencing the process, and how it is shaping up.

Topics that could be discussed

• Quick overview of the SCS
  • What are implications of its adoption; how does SCS integrate with local planning?
  • What are incentives for compliance by local agencies?
  • What are disincentives for compliance by local agencies?
  • The Bay Area SCS workshops 
    • Participation levels;
    • Interest groups exercising most influence;
    • What form is the SCS currently taking, and how does it affect member interests?
    • Next steps
      • Timeline
      • How you can get involved

Speakers:

Ezra Rapport, Executive Director,  Association of Bay Area Governments

Bobby Glover, Executive Director, California Building Industry Association

Stephanie Reyes, Policy Director, Greenbelt Alliance

David Greensfelder, Director, LandMark Retail Group’s Northern California Division

WORKSHOP PROGRAM & VIDEOS

TOPICS

How prepared is the business community and government to deal with a major earthquake and tsunami?

Realistic expectations of seismic activity on major faults and consequences.

Realistic probabilities of tsunami action impacting coastal in bay communities

What does California need to do NOW to be prepared for the major earthquake and Tsunami?

Opening Remarks and Morning Keynote (8:30 am – 8:45 am)

• San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee

Panel 1 (8:45 am – 9:30 am) Earthquake & Tsunami Risk to the San Francisco Bay Area – An Updated Analysis.Moderator: Richard Sinkoff, Director, Environmental Programs and Planning, Port of Oakland

• Ross Stein, Geophysicist, USGS – Menlo Park
• Jeremy Bricker, URS
• Chuck Real, California Geological Survey

Keynote Speakers (9:30 am -10:15 am)

• Deputy Consul General Michio Harada, Deputy Consulate-General of Japan in San Francisco
• Richard McCarthy, Executive Director for the California Seismic Safety Commission
• Manuel Cunha, Jr., President, Nisei Farmers League
• Captain Cynthia Stowe, Commander Sector San Francisco, US Coast Guard

Panel 2 (10:40 am – 11:40 am) Earthquake & Tsunami Preparedness. Moderator, Louis Armstrong, Senior Vice President, URS Corporation

• Xavier Irias, Director of Engineering and Construction, EBMUD
• Jeff Jones, Environmental Compliance Supervisor, Port of Oakland
• Kevin Miller, Tsunami Program Lead California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA)
• John Egan, Principal, AMEC Geomatrix, Inc. – Hospital Board
• Kent Ferre, SE, Geosciences Department, Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

Panel 3 (11:40 am – 12:25 pm ) Economic Impact and Planning. Moderator, Scott Warner, Principal Hydrogeologist and Vice President, AMEC Geomatrix, Inc.

• Sean Randolph, President, Bay Area Economic Institute
• Thomas Horton, Group Manager, BART Seismic Safety Program
• Janiele Maffei, Chief Mitigation Officer, California Earthquake Authorit
• Danielle Hutchings, Earthquake and Hazards Program Director, ABAG

Workshop 1: Thursday, July 21, 2011 - Is California Prepared for the next Big Earthquake or Tsunami?

An in-depth discussion whether our state is prepared, if not, what are the economic impacts. How do we prepare for the unknown?

Workshop 3: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - LTMS and Nutrients: What Are The Implications for the Bay’s Future?

Is there a nutrient problem or is there likely to be in the near future?  If so, what are the issues or concerns? How do we develop disposal and reuse options to make dredging projects more efficient and cost-effective?  How do we address the impacts of changing regulations – National Marine Fisheries Service and Essential Fish Habitat?

Workshop 3 Sponsors: Briscoe Ivester & Bazel LLP, Miller Starr Regalia, Port of Oakland, AMEC, Cargill, EBMUD, ESA, The Dutra Group, DMB, Chevron, Weston Solutions, Arcadis US, Moffatt & Nichol, Port of Redwood City, Santa Clara Water Authority, Great Lakes Dredging

WORKSHOP 2: Economic Recovery, Infrastructure Funding, and Air Quality: Progress or Impasse?

Evaluate progress towards economic recovery in the Bay Area based on the extent of construction of selected Bay Area infrastructure projects (e.g. those funded by Proposition 1B and 1E, federal ARRA, TIGER, other)

Assess the challenges of compliance with state air quality regulations, e.g. diesel emission reduction, AB 32, SB 375, and the most recent changes to the CEQA guidelines adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District

Identify strategies to address the economic feasibility and environmental challenges in order to keep projects moving forward with “simultaneous and continuous improvement”

***2007 State Goods Movement Action Plan

Panel #1: (8:30 a.m. — 9:30 a.m.)

Setting the stage (5 min)

Welcome and Overview: Ellen Johnck, Bay Planning Coalition, and Louis Armstrong, URS Corporation

Infrastructure Projects Review: Evaluating Progress Towards Economic Recovery (55 min)

Karen Engel, East Bay Economic Development Alliance (invited) (8 min)

Maura Twomey, California Transportation Commission – Proposition 1B (8 min)

Katherine Oven, Santa Clara Valley Water District – ARRA status update (8 min)

Major David Kaulfers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District – ARRA status update (8 min)

Q&A and Discussion 23 min.

Panel #2: (9:30 a.m. — 10:45 a.m.) Perspectives on the challenges of compliance with state and regional air quality legislation /regulation

Moderator: Sean Marciniak, Miller Starr & Regalia

Ted Droettboom, ABAG JPC (8 min)

Richard Sinkoff, Port of Oakland (8 min)

Paul Campos, BIA of the Bay Area (8 min)

Q&A and Discussion: 43 min.

Break 10:45 a.m. to 11:05 a.m.

Damian Breen, BAAQMD (8 min)

Ginny Hessenauer, Starcrest Consulting (8 min)

Doug Daugherty, ENVIRON Corp. (8 min)

Jay Ach, Port of San Francisco (8 min)

Cynthia Marvin, California Air Resources Board (CARB) (8 min)

Discussion: 45 min.

Background

Three years have passed since the adoption of the California’s Goods Movement Action Plan (2007) to encourage more integrated planning and improve the performance and cost-effectiveness for all transportation modes moving goods through California. A key principle embedded in the Plan, is that with expanded and reengineered goods movement facilities, we will be able to clean up the air and achieve “simultaneous and continuous improvement”*** in both the intermodal system for the transport of goods and air quality. In a related action, in 2006, the California Air Resources Board, adopted additional regulations to reduce diesel emissions from goods movement sources, e.g. trucks, ocean-going vessels, and cargo handling equipment as an expanded effort to achieve the goal of removing those sources’ diesel-related human health effects.

There have been major economic, legislative, and further regulatory changes since then affecting how programs and projects, identified in the Goods Movement Action Plan, and the State’s clean air regulations are being implemented: 1) The global, national and state economic recession, which has been drastic and continues to adversely effect livelihoods, revenues and earnings; 2) The California voter-approved expenditure of monies (e.g.2006, Propositions 1B, 1E) through the sale of state bonds to fund infrastructure projects (Transportation Corridor Infrastructure Fund-TCIF). However, only a percentage of the funds is available due to the State’s budget problems; 3) the U. S. Congress-approved American Resources and Recovery Act in 2009, the stimulus program, the purpose of which was to build needed infrastructure supplying jobs and moving us towards economic recovery; 4) the State legislature’s adoption of two landmark GHG emission reduction bills, AB 32 and SB 375; and, 5) the BAAQMD Board of Directors’ recent adoption of new stringent CEQA air quality guidelines for construction projects.

Are we making progress towards constructing needed goods movement infrastructure and other facilities fostering economic development or are we at an impasse in the Bay Area? What are the issues and obstacles which are impeding progress and how can we work together to figure out how can we move beyond obstacles towards solutions.

The three panels at this workshop are structured to inform, educate, assess the obstacles, and inspire creative solutions so that the business of moving freight and people, supplying jobs and housing, and cleaning up the air can be achieved to fulfill the mandate in the Goods Movement Action Plan for “simultaneous and continuous improvement.”

Workshop Series 2010 Media Partner:

WORKSHOP 3 DETAILS

1. Update on local and regional activities addressing sea level change since BPC’s April, 2010 Annual Decisionmakers Conference
2. Discuss recommendations on BCDC’s Climate Change Bay Plan Amendments and regional strategy process
3. Identify sea level change decision-making tools involving adaptive management strategies (i.e., land use planning and engineering design that accommodates sea level change over specified planning horizons/scenarios)
4. Presentation of case studies applying an adaptive management approach (e.g., Hayward shoreline, Candlestick Point)
5. Evaluate usefulness of adaptive management strategies for multiple benefits (e.g., dredged material management, wetland restoration, TMDL compliance)

Welcome and setting the stage: Ellen Joslin Johnck, Executive Director, Bay Planning Coalition, and Louis Armstrong, Vice President and Manager, URS Corporation

Local and Regional Activities; BCDC Bay Plan Amendments on Climate Change

Kristina Lawson, Land Use & Environmental Shareholder, Miller Starr Regalia—Moderator

Abe Doherty, Project Specialist, California Ocean Protection Council, California State Coastal Conservancy—California’s Climate Change Action Team

Will Travis, Executive Director, BCDC—BCDC’s Bay Plan Amendments

Joan Lundstrom, Mayor, City of Larkspur

Adaptation Management Strategies

Dilip Trivedi, Supervisory Engineer, Moffatt & Nichol—Moderator

Erik Pearson, Senior Planner, City of Hayward—Hayward shoreline study

Steven Messner, Principal, ENVIRON Corp.—Case study

Craig Conner, Program Manager, Flood Risk Management, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—Scenario: Planning in the Delta

Peggy Lobnitz, President, Pika Environmental LLC—Decision-making tools, Port of LA and other

Len Cardoza, Senior Technical Advisor, Weston Solutions—South Bay Shoreline Study

Feedback and Perspectives from Business and Local Government

Tara Castro Narayanan, Litigation Shareholder, Miller Starr Regalia—Moderator

Armin Munévar, CH2M HILL—Case study presentation

Speaker TBA, Oakland Airport

Sean Marciniak, Associate, Miller Starr Regalia—Insurance issues

It’s been six months since BPC’s Annual San Francisco Bay Decisionmakers Conference, “Climate Change 3.0: Policies and Decisions for a Changing Landscape.”  At that conference, we took an in-depth look at both carbon management and sea level change as faces of climate change caused by global warming.  We agreed we must become more engaged in developing innovative ideas and strategic solutions in both areas.  On sea level change, we have since been very involved in the BCDC Climate Change Bay Plan amendment process and tracking, coordinating and developing policy and guidance for shoreline facility protection and land use planning.

WORKSHOP 1: Dredging Disposal Options for Today

Workshop Goals

1. Assess the current status of disposal practices for bay dredging projects.

2. Identify and discuss impediments and solutions to meeting the LTMS goals with disposal practices that allow for an efficient regulatory review process and are cost-effective for dredging sponsors.

3. Ensure maximum disposal flexibility is maintained for all dredgers

Panel #1: Current Disposal Practices (8:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.)

Setting the stage (15 min)

Overview of current situation—history of the LTMS (Ellen Johnck)

What is today’s state of disposal practices? (Rick Rhoads)
What has changed since 2002? (1 hr 15 min)

Brian Ross, EPA, Emerging Issues on 40-40-20 (10 min)

Steve Goldbeck, BCDC, Regional Sediment Management Planning (10 min)

Mike Connor, East Bay Area Dischargers Authority, Thoughts on toxicity, mass balance and climate change (10 min)

David Woodbury, NOAA Fisheries, Green Sturgeon Critical Habitat and the ESA 4-D Rule (10 min)

Jake Jacobson, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Scott Bodensteiner, Weston Solutions, Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP) (15 min)

Lester McKee, San Francisco Estuary Institute, Bay sediment dynamics (15 Min)

Rick Rhoads, Moffat & Nichol, Snapshot of Pricing (5 min)

Break 10:00 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.

Panel #2: Challenges for Upland Disposal (10:15 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.)

Perspectives on Disposal Practices (8-10 min each)

Steve Chesser, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Download presentation

Mike Giari, Port of Redwood City

Greg Gibeson, Pacific Inter Club Yacht Association

Brian Hubinger, Chevron

Diane Isley, Emery Cove Harbormaster

Jim McNally, Manson Construction

Break 11:30 a.m. to 11:45 a.m.

Panel #3: Challenges for Upland Disposal (11:45 a.m. – 12:15 p.m.)

Issues to be addressed:

Cost of Upland Disposal vs. Volume of In-Bay Disposal

Lack of Contractor Competition

Challenges for Developing Additional Upland Sites

Need for Balanced Disposal Options

Emerging Opportunities

Speakers:

Doug Lipton, Montezuma Wetlands (7 min)

Tom Gandesbery, SCC, Hamilton/BMK Wetland Restoration (7 min)

Jake Jacobson, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, WRDA Concepts/Partnerships (7 min)

Jim McNally, Manson Construction, Dredger Contractor’s Perspective (7 min)

Summary & Wrap-Up Discussion (Rick Rhoads/Ellen Johnck) (12:15 p.m. – 12:30 p.m.)