La Palma Subdivision Project Final Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration

Transcription

1 Final Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road Redwood City, California December 2014

2 This page is intentionally left blank.

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 Mitigated Negative Declaration... 3 Initial Study Project Description Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Environmental Impact Checklist Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation and Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance All Sources Consulted Lead Agency and Report Preparers Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location Map Figure 2: Project Site Plan i

4 Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Project Approvals Table 2: Summary of Protected Trees and Tree Removal Table 3: Redwood City Noise Guidelines for Residential Uses Table 4: Construction Equipment Noise Table 5: Project Trip Generation Table 6: Current and Planned Water Supplies LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Tree Survey/Arborist Report Historic Evaluation Report Geotechnical Investigation and Pavement Design Report Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Hydrology Study Kentfield Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum ii

5 INTRODUCTION The City of Redwood City is the Lead Agency for the located at 1675, 1679, and 1685 Kentfield Avenue. On October 15, 2014, the City of Redwood City Planning Services published a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) that analyzed the potential impacts of the, and a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a MND. The City made a preliminary finding that, although the proposed project has the potential to result in significant effects on the environment, there will not be any significant effects in this case because mitigating measures will be incorporated into the project, effectively reducing the impacts to less-than-significant levels. Pursuant to Section of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Draft IS/MND included a 20-day public review period, ending on November 3, Copies of the Draft IS/MND and all documents referenced therein were available at the City of Redwood City Planning Services Office, the San Mateo County Clerk s Office, the Redwood City Main Library, and at the City s website during the public-review period. Further, pursuant to Section of CEQA, the City also gave notice through direct mailings to owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project site. During this time, the City received no written comments from the public. This document includes the following information: Final IS/MND: no changes to the document were made a result of the public review period Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: a copy of the mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the project This document constitutes the Final IS/MND for the project. The City of Redwood City will consider this environmental record prior to taking action on the project as a whole. 1

6 Introduction This page is intentionally left blank. 2

7 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO CEQA DIVISION 13, PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE City of Redwood City Community Development Department 1017 Middlefield Road Redwood City, California PROJECT DESCRIPTION La Palma Development, LLC proposes to demolish three existing single-family residences at 1675, 1679, and 1685 Kentfield Avenue and construct 12 two-story detached, single-family homes. The project site consists of three parcels to be merged into one lot and then subdivided into 13 individual lots, with 12 parcels for each of the single-family dwelling units and one common space parcel for the road and open space. The development would be served by a privately owned and maintained road with driveway access provided from Kentfield Avenue. The private road would be covered by a Public Access Easement (PAE) to provide public access to the project s subdivision lots and a Public Service Easement (PSE) to allow the City access to the proposed public water main for maintenance purposes. The proposed single-family residences would be two-stories tall, with an average size ranging from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet with three bedrooms, three baths, and two covered parking spaces. A total of 33 parking spaces are provided, including 24 garage parking spaces and 9 onsite guest parking spaces. DETERMINATION The City of Redwood City (City) gave notice to interested agencies and the public that it intended to adopt a MND for this project, pursuant to CEQA. During the 20-day public review period, the City received no written comments from the public. The IS prepared by the City is attached. On the basis of the IS, it is determined that the proposed action would not have a significant effect on the environment with the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures. MND MITIGATION MEASURES Aesthetics Mitigation Measure AES-1: Prior to Building Permit issuance, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan, including a photometric site plan that shows shielding of any exterior lights such that the lighting does not extend beyond the site. This requirement can be accomplished through the use of downward facing and shielded fixtures for exterior buildings and street illumination. The plan shall also identify the type and position of up lighting for signature trees. Up lights on signature trees shall not direct 3

8 Mitigated Negative Declaration light or create light spill past the tree canopy. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Engineering and Transportation Services. Air Quality Mitigation Measure AIR-1: The following basic measures shall be implemented during all project construction activities. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved areas) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, and other loose material off-site shall be covered. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweepers is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as feasible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall be responsible and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Demolition of the existing homes and buildings shall be performed consistent with District Regulation 11, Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. Mitigation Measure AIR-3: Only one phase of construction shall occur at a time (e.g., paving would occur prior to development of the homes). Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO-1: A qualified biologist, hired by the City but at the cost of the applicant, shall survey the project site to identify the presence of nesting birds prior to removal of onsite vegetation and trees and general construction, if the tree removal or project construction is to occur during the nesting season. If an active nest is found, an avoidance buffer shall be established by the qualified biologist based on the type of bird, 4

9 Mitigated Negative Declaration existing noise disturbance, and other relevant factors. Monitoring of the nest by the qualified biologist shall be required during project construction. Construction, including tree removal, within the avoidance buffer shall be prohibited until the qualified biologist has determined that the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. The biologist shall have the authority to halt or divert construction if necessary to ensure compliance with state or federal regulatory laws. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: The applicant shall be required to submit a final landscape plan to the Planning Services for review and approval prior to issuance of the Grading Permit. The landscape plan shall identify the protected trees for removal and the replacement trees proposed, in accordance with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 35 of the Redwood City Municipal Code. The number, species, size, and location of replacement trees shall be based on a value assessment prepared by a certified arborist and agreed upon by the City s Landscape Architect. Trees shall be replaced at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio, and shall be at least 24-inch box specimens. Approval of the landscape plan maybe by means of a signed and stamped signature block on the plan set or by separate signed letter, either of which is approved by the City s Landscape Architect. Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the applicant shall be required to submit a Tree Protection Plan incorporating the specific measures included in the project s Tree Survey/Arborist Report to protect the coast live oaks and redwood tree on the project site. The Tree Protection Plan shall include fencing details, fertilization and pruning methods, and buffer work areas during construction. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect. It shall consider the potential impacts and construction practices for all structures, including main buildings and accessory structures such as fences or walls. Loss of any of these trees within 2 years of construction shall be subject to Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which requires full replacement value. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CULT-1: Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the applicant shall incorporate a note on the first page of the construction plans, that should cultural resources be encountered during site grading or other site work, such work shall immediately be halted in the area of discovery and the applicant shall immediately notify the Planning Manager or designee of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to retain the services of a qualified archaeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting, or curating the discovery as appropriate. The cost of the qualified archaeologist and of any recording, protecting, or curating shall be borne solely by the applicant. The archaeologist shall be required to submit a Cultural Resources Management Plan, per City Requirements, to the Planning Manager or designee for review and approval that outlines the findings and mitigation methods of curation and/or protection of the resources. No further grading or site work within the area of discovery shall be allowed until the preceding has occurred. Disposition of Native 5

10 Mitigated Negative Declaration American remains shall comply with CEQA Guidelines Section (e). The note on the plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Services. Geology and Soils Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of project Building Permits, the applicant shall submit plans and specifications complying with all of the recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation and Pavement Design Report (September 2012) prepared for the project. At a minimum, the plans shall specifically include the following measures to address the impacts from native surface soils with high expansion potential: 1. Mat foundations shall have a minimum thickness of 12 inches and be properly steel reinforced. 2. Building pads shall be underlain with a minimum of 12 inches non-expansive fill layer or 12 inches of lime-treated native soil material. This layer shall be compacted to at least 90 percent relative maximum density. 3. When continuous perimeter and isolated interior spread footings are used, they must be founded at a minimum depth of 24 inches below rough soil pad. Both interior and perimeter foundations should be founded at the same elevation below pad grade with the exception of any soil retaining structure foundations. 4. Footing excavation shall be saturated with water (but not overly saturated) and continue to be periodically saturated after footing excavation and prior to concrete placement. 5. Prior to the issuance of project Grading and Encroachment Permits, the applicant shall submit a supplementary letter from the Geotechnical Engineer regarding the recommended pavement section(s) for permeable pavement. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to demolition, a complete asbestos survey shall be conducted in accordance with National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines. All suspect asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) shall be sampled to determine the presence or absence of asbestos prior to building demolition activities. If ACMs are found, a licensed asbestos abatement contractor shall be retained to abate the identified ACMs. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Prior to demolition, a comprehensive lead based paint (LBP) survey shall be conducted. If any LBP is identified, it shall be removed from the site in accordance with all applicable regulations, including California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) Lead in Construction Standard, as included in California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section , during demolition activities. These requirements include employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. If lead paint is peeling, flaking or blistered, it shall be removed prior to demolition. It is assumed that such paint will become separated from the building 6

11 Mitigated Negative Declaration components during demolition activities and could become air-borne; therefore, it shall be managed and disposed as a separate waste stream. Any debris or soil containing lead paint or coat shall be disposed at landfills that are permitted to accept the waste being disposed. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation Measure HYD-1: All project grading, construction, and subsequent operations shall comply with the provision of the City of Redwood City s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) outlining construction phase and post-construction phase measures to reduce pollutant discharge from the site shall be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering and Transportation Services prior to the issuance of Grading and Building Permits. Mitigation Measure HYD-2: If the project is constructed during the wet season (October through May), an erosion and sediment control plan, compliant with the City s NPDES (stormwater control) requirements, shall be prepared and implemented, to the satisfaction of Engineering and Transportation Services, prior to the onset of the wet season, and shall be maintained throughout the construction period. Mitigation Measure HYD-3: A Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) shall be prepared to detail the permanent stormwater management facilities that shall be incorporated into the project to treat stormwater runoff and to control runoff rates and volumes after the construction process. The facilities shall, at a minimum, incorporate the following features and techniques: minimizing impervious surfaces, implementing the use of permeable pavers, leading drain rooftops downspouts to bio-retention basins, and using landscape swales, area drains, and a stormwater detention system on the project site. The SWCP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Services and Engineering and Transportation Services prior to the issuance of Grading and Building Permits. Mitigation Measure HYD-4: The applicant shall submit a Hydrology and Hydraulics Study for review and approval by Planning Services and Engineering and Transportation Services prior to issuance of Grading and Building Permits to confirm: 1. The permanent stormwater management facilities incorporated into the project would reduce post-development stormwater discharge to equal or less than predevelopment discharge levels; and 2. The City s existing storm drainage system in Kentfield Avenue would have adequate capacity to accommodate the project. Additional features shall be incorporated into the SWCP and the runoff estimates calculated, as needed to ensure compliance with the City s Municipal Code. 7

12 Mitigated Negative Declaration Noise Mitigation Measure NOI-1: The applicant shall be required to submit to Planning Services for review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits, a detailed analysis of noise reduction measures to be incorporated into the project. The analysis shall identify noisereducing building materials, such as windows and doors with high Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings or forced-air mechanical ventilation systems. Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The following construction noise control measures shall be implemented to limit the amount of noise generated during the construction period. These measures would mitigate the impact to a less-than-significant level: a) Limit construction to daytime hours (8 AM to 5 PM) Monday through Friday, with no construction activities on weekends or holidays per Section of the City of Redwood Municipal Code. b) Construction activities or equipment shall not generate noise levels exceeding 110 dba per Section of the City of Redwood Municipal Code. c) Utilize quiet models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. d) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e) Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. f) Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as feasible from noise sensitive receptors. g) Designate a noise disturbance coordinator who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures to correct the problem. h) Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction-site and with the City. Traffic and Transportation Mitigation Measures TRAF-1: Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit project plans to the City s Fire Marshall for review to determine that all roadway surface areas and turning radii conform to standards for emergency vehicle access. Roadways to be used for emergency vehicle access shall be marked as fire lanes and marked in accordance with Section of the California Vehicle Code. Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: Prior to the issuance of Grading and Encroachment Permits, the applicant shall prepare a Water System Study of the existing 6-inch water main in Kentfield Avenue to determine if the existing flow and pressure are adequate to serve domestic needs and fire flow requirements of the proposed project. If the Water System Study determines the existing water main is inadequate to service the project, the applicant shall upgrade the 8

13 Mitigated Negative Declaration water main to provide adequate flow and pressure to serve the project. The Water System Study and the proposed upgrade in size of the water main shall be submitted to Engineering and Transportation Services for review and approval. Mitigation Measure UTIL-2: Prior to the issuance of Grading and Encroachment Permits, the applicant shall prepare a Wastewater System Study of the existing 6-inch wastewater main in Kentfield Avenue to determine if there is adequate capacity to serve the project. The Wastewater System Study shall account for the additional wastewater flow created by the project and the contribution to Inflow and Infiltration (I/I). If the Wastewater System Study determines the existing wastewater main is inadequate to service the project, the applicant shall upgrade a specified length of the wastewater main to provide adequate capacity to serve the project or pay an established in-lieu fee. The Wastewater System Study and the proposed upgrade in size of the wastewater main shall be submitted to Engineering and Transportation Services for review and approval. 9

14 Mitigated Negative Declaration This page is intentionally left blank. 10

15 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 PROJECT TITLE (proposed project) 1.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Redwood City Community Development Department 1017 Middlefield Road Redwood City, CA CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Christopher Rogers, Associate Planner City of Redwood City PROJECT SPONSOR S NAME AND ADDRESS La Palma Development, LLC 1630 Oakland Road #A215 San Jose, CA APPLICATION NUMBERS EA , PD , TM PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING 1675, 1679, and 1685 Kentfield Avenue Redwood City, CA INITIAL STUDY FOR THE LA PALMA SUBDIVISION PROJECT Assessor s Parcel Numbers (APN): , , and The project site is located in the southern section of the City of Redwood City (City) in San Mateo County, west of U.S. Highway 101 and south of El Camino Real (State Route 82). As shown in Figure 1, the project site is bound by Palm Avenue to the west, Union Avenue to the north, and Woodside Road (State Route 84) to the east. The relatively flat, approximately one acre (43,475 square foot) site is located in the Palm Park Neighborhood of the City. The project site is currently developed with three single-family homes that are about 50 to 60 years in age. 11

16 1.0 Project Description Figure 1: Project Location Map 12

17 1.0 Project Description 1.7 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION The project site is designated as Medium-Density Residential in the 2010 Redwood City General Plan. This land use designation allows the development of detached and attached residential units, including small-lot subdivisions, duplexes and triplexes, townhouses with private open space, and multi-unit structures that comprise a cohesive development incorporating common open space areas. Development standards for this land use allows for densities of 7.1 to 20 dwelling units per net acre and a maximum height of three stories. The proposed project includes developing 12 dwelling units on the one acre site. 1.8 ZONING The project site is currently zoned R-2 (Residential-Duplex) which is designed to accommodate single-family dwellings, two-family duplex dwellings, three-family triplex dwellings, and multiple dwellings. The current zoning allows for 16 units per acre. The applicant is requesting a Planned Development Permit to reduce the minimum building site size and setbacks to allow for a more flexible project design to accommodate shared open space, heritage tree preservation, and an efficient site plan. 1.9 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT Project Elements Overview The applicant proposes to demolish the three existing single-family residences on-site and to construct 12, two-story detached, single-family homes. Figure 2 shows the project site plan. The project site consists of three parcels to be merged into one lot and then subdivided into 13 individual lots, with 12 parcels for each of the single-family dwelling units and one common space parcel for the road and open space. The development would be served by a privately owned and maintained road with driveway access provided from Kentfield Avenue. The private road would be covered by a Public Access Easement (PAE) to provide public access to all lots of the subdivision, in accordance with the City s Municipal Code. A Public Service Easement (PSE) would also be provided over the private road to allow the City to access and maintain the proposed public water main. Homes and Parking The proposed single-family residences would be two-stories tall, with an average size ranging from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet with three bedrooms, three baths, and two covered parking spaces. The homes would vary in façade, materials, color, trim details, window placement, and finishes and would be clustered to enhance open space. Setbacks would include 15 feet at the building from Kentfield Avenue and 20 feet at the garage. Side setbacks would be 15 feet at Kentfield Avenue and would range from 8 to 15 feet from the site perimeter for individual lots. The rear setback would be between 8 and 15 feet for individual lots. 13

18 1.0 Project Description Private streets and driveways would include permeable pavers to meet the standard requirements for pervious area. The total pervious area on-site would be 62 percent, where a minimum of 40 percent is required for the site. A total of 33 parking spaces are provided including 24 garage parking spaces and 9 on-site guest parking spaces. Landscaping The project includes removing 25 trees (10 protected and 15 fruit) and maintaining 10 trees (four protected oak and redwoods and six fruit trees). The entrance to the project would include four field-grown specimen accent palm trees. Up to 26 additional trees may be added for a total of 36 trees. A unified landscape maintenance program would be developed and implemented. Plants would be limited to City-preferred plant lists that include native and drought-tolerant species. Backyards would also include trees as part of the Planned Development. Project lighting would include ambient lighting throughout the project, decorative bollards along Kentfield Avenue and up-light spotlights at selected signature trees. The project would also include a small playground located off of the private entry street from Kentfield Avenue. Drainage Plan The site currently has 17,177 square feet of impervious areas. The impervious surface area would increase to 30,586 square feet post-construction, resulting in a net change increase of 13,409 square feet of impervious surfaces on the project site. A SWCP would be prepared to detail the permanent stormwater management facilities that would be incorporated into the project to treat stormwater runoff and to control runoff rates and volumes after the construction process. These designs features would include the use of permeable pavers, rooftop drain downspouts to bio-retention basins (landscape swales), area drains, and a stormwater detention system on the project site. The on-site storm drainage system would collect runoff from buildings, landscape, and hardscape areas to prevent localized ponding of storm water. Area drains would collect runoff and direct it to a new on-site below grade detention system that would be discharged into a new off-site storm drain system under Kentfield Avenue, which would connect to the City s existing storm drain system. There is currently no public storm drain system within the frontage of the project. The City s existing storm drain system is located approximately 500 feet northwest of the project site on Kentfield Avenue. As part of the project, approximately 500 feet of storm drain pipe and associated storm drain structures would be installed within Kentfield Avenue to connect the project to the City s existing storm drain system. Project Construction Project construction would last approximately 16 months. Construction of the 12 single-family residential units, associated landscaping, and driveways and walkways would require excavation and grading activities. During construction, workers are anticipated to be on-site five day a week on weekdays, as schedule requires. 14

19 1.0 Project Description Figure 2: Project Site Plan 15

20 1.0 Project Description 1.10 SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING Surrounding land uses include a mix of new and older single-family residences to the west, townhome-style buildings to the north, and multi-family residential apartment buildings to the east and south. Pacific Place, a new 21-unit single-family planned development project completed in 2013, is located two parcels west of the project site. An adjacent property to the east is developed with a commercial retail building fronting Woodside Road OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED Table 1 lists the discretionary and ministerial approvals requested for the project. Table 1: Project Approvals Agency/Provider Permit/Approval Planned Development Permit Building Permit Demolition Permit City of Redwood City Grading Permit Encroachment Permit Tree Removal Permit Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (Provision C.3) NPDES Construction General Permit 16

21 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED 2.1 INTRODUCTION This IS includes an evaluation of impacts based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist. Each checklist item is explained in the discussion following the checklist and, if necessary, mitigation measures are provided to reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level. In accordance with CEQA, all answers take into account the whole of the action, including on- and off-site effects, direct and indirect effects, and effects from both construction and operation of any new development. Each checklist criterion is marked to identify whether there is an environmental impact. No impact indicates that there is no impact. Less-than-significant impact means that while there is some impact, the impact is below the threshold of significance adopted by the City of Redwood City, or that measures required by law will reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated indicates that a potentially significant or significant impact has been identified in the course of this analysis and mitigation measures have been provided in this IS to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Cumulative impacts are discussed in Section 3.18, Mandatory Findings of Significance, of this IS. The project is considered in combination with the projected build out of the City s General Plan to determine if any cumulative impacts are significant. If a significant cumulative impact is identified, the project s contribution to the significant cumulative impact is considered. The environmental factors checked below would be affected by the project, involving at least one impact that is potentially significant, as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Mitigation measures have been provided for each potentially significant impact, reducing all impacts to a less-than-significant level. Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation and Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance 17

22 2.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a potentially significant impact or potentially significant impact unless mitigated impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 18

23 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST 3.1 AESTHETICS Would the project: Impact Less-than- Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than- Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The project site is located in the southern section of the City within the Palm Park Neighborhood. The project site is not located within, adjacent to, or within the vicinity of a scenic vista, scenic resource, or a state-designated scenic highway. Thus, neither the project construction nor long-term build out would impact such resources. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less-than- Impact. The existing visual character of the project area is urbanized and is comprised predominantly of residential structures. Properties surrounding the project site include a mix of newer and older single-family residences to the west, townhome-style buildings to the north, and multi-family residential apartment buildings to the east and south. An adjacent property to the east is developed with a commercial retail building fronting Woodside Road. The project site is currently developed with three single-family residences, ancillary structures, and yard space. The proposed project would include construction and development of 12 single-family residences. The project would have a temporary impact to the visual character of the area during construction. The visual impacts from construction would arise from the presence of bare ground, demolition activities, construction stockpiling, and views of construction equipment. The construction would be relatively short in duration at 16 months, and the views to the project site are limited in extent. It would be primarily only visible to the immediately 19

24 surrounding land uses due to the flat topography and the dense development in the area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Once completed, the new homes and surrounding landscaping would be developed to be consistent with the existing neighborhood. The project would include landscaping and homes designed with a consistent theme and visual variation that would have a positive overall visual impact. The project would include the removal of several existing trees. The new development, however, would include maintaining 10 existing trees and planting up to 26 additional trees, mostly along the perimeter of the project. These trees would visually shield the development from neighboring properties and would enhance the appearance of the project. The project would not cause visual degradation of the surroundings. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less-than- Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is currently developed with three single-family residences and ancillary structures and yard space. Existing lighting is limited to interior and exterior lighting on the three homes. Project construction would occur during daytime hours and would not require additional nighttime lighting. Impacts from light or glare would not occur during construction. The long-term development and occupancy of the homes may result in new sources of light and glare primarily from: Interior and exterior lights on/in the 12 new homes Street lighting and ambient lighting along the new private streets Bollard lighting along Kentfield Avenue Up light spotlights on signature trees These varied sources of lighting could impact surrounding properties, could impact individuals within the proposed development, and could contribute to an overall increase in the area s ambient lighting. The proposed project includes planting trees and shrubs along the perimeter of the project site, which would serve as a barrier to limit the amount of light that is cast on adjacent buildings as the trees and shrubs mature. However, impacts could still be potentially significant due to the use of exterior lighting and up lighting. Mitigation Measure AES-1 would ensure that the proposed project s lighting would not create a new source of substantial light or glare. Mitigation Measure AES-1: Prior to Building Permit issuance, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan, including a photometric site plan that shows shielding of any exterior lights such that the lighting does not extend beyond the site. This requirement can be accomplished through the use of downward facing and shielded fixtures for exterior buildings and street illumination. The plan shall also identify the type and position of up lighting for signature trees. Up lights on signature trees shall not direct light or create light spill past the tree canopy. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by Engineering and Transportation Services. 20

25 3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Would the project: Impact Less-than- Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than- Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public Resource Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined in Government Code Section (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to nonagricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project area does not have lands that are designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Significance. The project area is not under a Williamson Act contract or zoned for agricultural use. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. In regards to forestry resources, the City of Redwood City Zoning Map does not show any designated forest lands or timberlands in the City. The project area is developed and is not zoned for forest or timberland use. 21

26 e) Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. Given there are no farmlands or forestry resources in the project vicinity and that the project area is developed for residential uses, the project would not result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest uses. 3.3 AIR QUALITY Would the project: Impact Less-than- Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than- Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project site is located within the San Francisco Air Basin (Basin), which is regulated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). BAAQMD is required to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in non-attainment, pursuant to the Clean Air Act. The Basin is considered a non-attainment area for ground-level ozone (O3) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) under both the Federal CAA and the California Clean Air Act (CCAA). The Basin is also considered non-attainment for respirable particulate matter (PM10) under the CCAA. The Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan (CAP) was adopted by BAAQMD in September 2010 and is the current regional CAP under the federal CAA. To address the non-attainment status for ozone (O3) for the region, the CAP explains how the Basin will achieve compliance with the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for one-hour O3 and eight-hour O3, and also explains how the region will reduce transport of O3 and ozone precursors, such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) to neighboring air basins. The CAP contains mobile and stationary source controls, transportation 22

27 control measures, land use and local impact measures, and energy and climate measures to be implemented throughout the region to achieve state and federal standards. The CAP is based on regional population, housing, and employment projects through 2020 compiled by the Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG). As such, a project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the regional air quality plan if it would be inconsistent with the regional growth assumptions, in terms of population, employment, or regional growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Growth projections for the City were based on the assumptions in the City s General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). As the build out of the project site would be consistent with the City s land use designation (see Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning) and the project s generated population has been accounted for in growth projections (see Section 3.13, Population and Housing), the resulting growth would be consistent with the projections used to develop the most current regional air quality plan for the Basin. The project would not interfere with population and VMT projections used to develop the 2010 CAP planning projections. The project would have no impact on implementation of the air quality plans. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less-than- Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. In June 2010, BAAQMD adopted air quality thresholds of significance for construction-related and operational-related activities at levels that BAAQMD believed air pollution emissions from a project would cause significant environmental impacts under CEQA. In March 2012, the Alameda County Superior Court issued a judgment finding that BAAQMD failed to comply with CEQA when it adopted the air quality thresholds of significance. BAAQMD appealed and the Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District, reversed the trial court s decision. The Court of Appeal s decision was appealed to the California Supreme Court and the matter is currently pending with the California Supreme Court. In light of the pending appeal, BAAQMD defers to the lead agency for a project to determine appropriate air quality thresholds. As the lead agency for the, the City is using the May 2012 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, the 2010 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines screening criteria, and the 1999 Thresholds of Significance to determine whether a project would result in a significant impact to air quality. The 2010 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines included screening criteria to provide lead agencies and project applicants with a conservative indication of whether the proposed project could result in potentially significant air quality impacts. These screening criteria are provided in the 2010 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines but are being revised as part of the 2012 Guidelines and are not yet available. For the purpose of this analysis, the City is using the 2010 screening criteria. If all of the screening criteria are met by a proposed project, then the lead agency or applicant would not need to perform a detailed air quality assessment of their project s air pollutant emissions. These screening levels are generally representative of new development on greenfield (previously undeveloped) sites. In addition, the screening criteria do not account for project design features, attributes, or local development requirements that could also result in lower emissions. For projects that are infill and proximate to transit and local services (like the 23

28 proposed project), emissions would be less than the greenfield type project on which these screening criteria are based (BAAQMD 2011). The 2010 screening criteria for construction include: 1. The project is below the applicable screening level size (less than 114 dwelling units). 2. All Basic Construction Mitigation Measures would be included in the project design and implemented during construction. 3. Construction-related activities would not include any of the following: a. Demolition activities inconsistent with District Regulation 11, Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing; b. Simultaneous occurrence of more than two construction phases (e.g., paving and building construction would occur simultaneously); c. Simultaneous construction of more than one land use type (e.g., project would develop residential and commercial uses on the same site) (not applicable to high density infill development); d. Extensive site preparation (i.e., greater than default assumptions used by the Urban Land Use Emissions Model [URBEMIS] for grading, cut/fill, or earth movement); or e. Extensive material transport (e.g., greater than 10,000 cubic yards of soil import/export) requiring a considerable amount of haul truck activity. The screening criteria for determining if operations-related impacts are less than significant require that a project is less than 325 dwelling units and the project only has emissions sources that are included in the default assumption of the URBEMIS program (e.g., standard construction equipment and methods). Construction The project, at 12 dwelling units, is considerably under the screening criteria size of 114 dwelling units. The project site is 1.07 acres and would therefore not include extensive material transport or extensive site preparation. Only one land-use type single-family homes is proposed on the project site. To ensure that paving and building construction did not occur at the same time, and to ensure that any existing buildings are demolished in accordance with District Regulation 11, Rule 2, regarding asbestos, the following mitigation measures would be implemented, in addition to the basic construction measures identified by BAAQMD. With implementation of these measures, the project construction would have a less than significant impact on air quality. Mitigation Measure AIR-1: The following basic measures shall be implemented during all project construction activities. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved areas) shall be watered two times per day. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, and other loose material off-site shall be covered. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweepers is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. 24

29 All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as feasible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall be responsible and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Demolition of the existing homes and buildings shall be performed consistent with District Regulation 11, Rule 2: Asbestos Demolition, Renovation and Manufacturing. Mitigation Measure AIR-3: Only one phase of construction shall occur at a time (e.g., paving would occur prior to development of the homes). Operation The project meets the screening criteria for operational impacts because it is well below the screening threshold of 325 dwelling units. The project would be constructed using standard construction methods identified in the URBEMIS program. Given the small size of the project, the modest increases in traffic projected for the project, and that it is an infill project (versus a greenfield for which the screening criteria were modeled), the long-term occupancy of the homes would have a less than significant impact on air quality. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less-than- Impact. According to the 2012 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, if a project requires a General Plan Amendment (GPA) or would generate more VMT than anticipated under a previous land use designation, there could be a significant cumulative impact. The proposed project would not require a GPA because implementation of the project would be consistent with allowable development identified for the project site s land use designation. The project site is designated for medium density residential development in the City s General Plan, and regional air quality modeling has therefore already factored in the vehicle trips associated with the proposed construction and development of the project site. The project would not result in a cumulatively considerable new increase in any criteria pollutant. Impacts would be less than significant. 25