Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSSF Complete Streets GPA Intial Study/Mitigated Neg Dec DRAFTISP NITIAL TUDY AND ROPOSED MND ITIGATED EGATIVE ECLARATION CSSF ITY OF OUTH AN RANCISCO CS OMPLETE TREETS GPA ENERAL LAN MENDMENT PCSSF REPARED BY ITY OF OUTH AN RANCISCO 315MA APLE VENUE SSF,CA94080 OUTH AN RANCISCO O14,2014 CTOBER SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY TC ABLE OF ONTENTS Environmental Checklist Form ......................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................................................................ 3 Determination .................................................................................................................................................... 4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................................... 5 I. Aesthetics .............................................................................................................................................. 7 II. Agriculture Resources ......................................................................................................................... 8 III. Air Quality .............................................................................................................................................. 9 IV. Biological Resources. ........................................................................................................................ 13 V. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................. 15 VI. Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................................. 17 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................................................. 19 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................................. 20 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ......................................................................................................... 23 X. Land Use and Planning .................................................................................................................... 26 XI. Mineral Resources.............................................................................................................................. 28 XII. Noise ..................................................................................................................................................... 29 XIII. Population and Housing ................................................................................................................... 31 XIV. Public Services .................................................................................................................................... 32 XV. Recreation .......................................................................................................................................... 33 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ........................................................................................................................ 34 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................................. 36 XVIII. Mandatory Findings Of Significance ............................................................................................. 38 References........................................................................................................................................................ 40 City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendments October 2014 Initial Study i SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY ECF NVIRONMENTAL HECKLIST ORM 1.Project title: City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment 2.Lead agency name and address: City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department, Planning Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 3.Contact person and phone number: Billy Gross, Senior Planner 650-877-8535 4.Project location: The City of South San Francisco is located on the San Francisco peninsula in San Mateo County, California. The City is bounded on the north by Colma, Brisbane, and San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, on the west by Pacifica, on the south by San Bruno and the San Francisco International Airport, and on the east by the San Francisco Bay. 5.Project sponsor's name and address: City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department, Planning Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 6.General Plan designation: Not applicable; Project is citywide 7.Zoning: Not applicable; Project is citywide 8.Description of Project: PD ROJECT ESCRIPTION I NTRODUCTION The proposed Project consists of an update to the South San Francisco Element. The proposed update includes a revision of goals, prin provide safe, comfortable, and convenient travel along and across streets (including streets, roads, highways, br transportation system) through a comprehensive, integrated trans City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendments October 2014 Initial Study 1 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY categories of users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motoris commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, Project components are described below. This Initial Study (IS) provides programmatic-level analysis of the proposed amendment. The Complete Streets policies do not include any development proposals and would not directly result in physi environmental effects due to the construction and operation of fojects that would be implemented consistent with these plans would be subjec City. Complete Streets General Plan Amendments The proposed Complete Streets General Plan Amendments (GPA) provide recommended policy updates to th Complete Streets GPA would include edits and additions to existing text and policies sections of the Transportation Element. Together, these amendmengrate the objectives of the Complete Streets GPA -term planning framework. The amendments provide a policy framework designed to support implementation of Complete integrating Complete Streets infrastructure and design features into street design and construction operations. The proposed amendments to the General Plan text and policies ar Appendix A of this Initial Study. 9.Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the Project's surroundings: The Complete Streets policies would be implemented citywide. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits,or participation agreement.) The proposed Project would not require action by any other agencies. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 2 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY EFPA: NVIRONMENTAL ACTORS OTENTIALLY FFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affProject, involving at least one as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils Hazards & Hazardous Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hydrology/Water Quality Materials Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services Recreation Mandatory Findings of Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Significance City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 3 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY D: (To be completed by the lead agency) ETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant ef environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significa environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case 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 o and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that t potential impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant e environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) hav adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Susy Kalkin Chief Planner___________ Printed name Title Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 4 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY EEI: VALUATION OF NVIRONMENTAL MPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the question. A answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sou show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the ou answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical i checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially s with mitigat is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. Potentially Significant Impact entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significa applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has Less Than Significant Impact. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than signifant level (mitigation measures as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, pro an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or nega Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are availab b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the ab the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursu standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by miti the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refi earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sour for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). or outside document should, where appropriate, include a referenhere the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checkli environmental effects in whatever format is selected. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 5 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact t. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 6 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: 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? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ad) Less Than Significant Impact The Complete Streets General Plan Amendment (GPA) is a policy-level amendment; it does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does it grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential to degrade the aesthetic quality of the visual resources. The Complete Streets GPA does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning and anticipates that land uses will be consistent with the designations est General Plan Land Use Element. As a policy document, the Complete Streets GPA would have no direct impact on visual resources, but future activities could chetics. Improvements related to Complete Streets policies would be locatently developed areas and would generally rely on the use of existing lighting sourcesny future development project that would implement Complete Streets measures and actions would be subject to applicable City regulations and requirements, as well as be subject to further C-specific impacts. Continued implementation of City General Plan policy provisions and the South San Francisco Zoning Regulations would manage the appearance of structural development in the City, including scenic corridors, to ensure impacts to scenic vistas and the existing visual character of th City would be less than significant. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 7 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are sig environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Californiaal Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. I forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestrythe land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the orest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodo Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. 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, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forestland to non-forest use? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ae) No Impact The City is built out and contains no important farmland, land zoned for agricultural use, or land subject to a Williamson Act contract. Similarly, the City does not contain any forestland or timberland or any land zoned for such uses. The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any development proposals or requests to rezone land or that would result in the conversion of agricultural or forestland to another use. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact on agriculture or forest resources. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 8 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the ap management or air pollution control district may be relied upon determinations. Would the project: 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? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a) Less Than Significant Impact The City is located within the Bay Area Air Quality Management Distri, which has prepared with the national 1-hour ozone standard and the California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS). The emissions inventories contained in these plans are based on proj miles traveled (VMT) for the region. Projects that result in an increase in population or employment growth beyond that identified in regional or community plans cou subsequently increase mobile source emissions, which could planning efforts. The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals or grant any entitlements for development and does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning. The proposed Complete Streets GPA is a key strategy within intended to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Similarly, the (PMP) and Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) provide concept plans for pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements intended to serve as guidance for the City in implementing these types of improvements in the future. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 9 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Future implementing actions of the Complete Streets GPA would not include any new housing or employment centers and would not result in population or employment growth beyond that identified in regional or community plans. Implementation of the Complete Streets GPA in conjunction with t CAP, PMP and BMP would assist in reducing GHGs and would help to reduce criteria air pollutants. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with the , and this impact would be less than significant. bd) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated Construction Emissions 405.001 2332082.1 (2:57 PM) The quantity of daily emissions, particularly ROG and NO emissions, generated by construction x equipment used to implement Complete Streets GPA measures would depend on the number of vehicles used and the hours of operation. The significance of PM emissions would vary widely and would depend on a number of factors, including the size of the disturbance area and whether excavations or material transport would be necessary. Although individual improvements may not generate significant short-term emissions, it is possible that several improvements would be under construction simultaneously in the City and would generate cumulative construction emissions that could affect air quality. Future actions implementing proposed Complete Streets GPA measures and policies would include construction activities that would result in short-term construction emissions. Localized concentrations of construction-generated emissions can adversely impact nearby sensitive land u could include diesel PM, which was identified as a toxic air contaminant (TAC) by the California Air Resources Board in 1998. Diesel PM emissions could be generated by off-road diesel equipment during site grading and excavation, paving, and other construction acti are exposed (a function of concentration and duration of exposure) is the prima determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emissions Health-related risks associated with diesel-exhaust emissions are primarily linked to long-term exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer. Cancer risk assoc based on calculations over a 70-year period of exposure. The use of diesel-powered construction equipment, however, would be temporary and episodic and would occur over a relat For these reasons, diesel PM generated by construction activitie to create conditions where the probability of contracting cancer greater than 10 in 1 million for nearby receptors. To assist local jurisdictions in the analysis of pote-term construction projects, the BAAQMD has developed screening critered at the project level (BAAQMD 2011). The BAAQMD Construction Risk Calculator model provides di construction site, based on user-provided project data, where the risk impacts are estimated to b than significant; sensitive receptors located within these distances would be considered to have potentially significant risk impacts from construction. The BAAQ environmentally conservative guidance. Quantification of air quality impacts from short-term, temporary construction activities is not possible due to project-level variability and uncertainties related to future individual construction projects can produce ozone precursors, diesel PM, aThe BAAQMD has identified basic construction mitigation measures to reduce construction-generated air pollutants. This impact would be less than significant with incorporation of measures. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 10 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Mitigation Measures The City shall require that projects implementing Complete Streets measures are AQ-1 analyzed as part of project review in accordance with BAAQMD-recommended methodologies and significance thresholds and shall require that mitigation measures are incorporated to reduce short-term construction emissions attributable to individual measures. Such mitigation measures ma not limited to, the following: Water all active construction areas at least twice daily as requ Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all truck to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard. Sweep daily, as required, all paved access roads, parking areas, areas at construction sites. Sweep streets daily as required if visible soil material is carr public streets. Reduce unnecessary idling of truck equipment in proximity to sen (i.e., idle time of 5 minutes or less). Where possible, use newer, cleaner-burning diesel-powered construction equipment. Properly maintain construction equipment per manufacturer specifications. Designate a disturbance coordinator responsible for ensuring tha measures to reduce air quality impacts from construction are pro implemented. Timing/Implementation: During construction Enforcement/Monitoring: City of South San Francisco Planning Division In addition, each future implementing action would be subject to- specific impacts. At the time of specific project-level environment review, the City will ensure compliance with BAAQMD-recommended mitigation measures such as those listed in mitigati measure AQ-1, as well as through the placement of conditions of approval on individual projects, to reduce impacts. Implementation of the above measures would substduce construction- related emissions. Operational Emissions As described above, the proposed Complete Streets GPA contains measures that support alternative transportation, which would help to reduce adverse air quality effects through the redsil fuel consumption and use of private motor vehicles. Therefore, tProject would not contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation,e criteria pollutants during operational activities. This impact would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 11 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing landFuture implementing actions of the Complete Streets GPA would include the construction of facilities that serve all categories of users, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, which would not create objectionable odors. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 12 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal wetlands, etc.), through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ad) Less Than Significant Impact The Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does it grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential to adversely affect any candidate, sensitive, or special-status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural comm protected wetlands or interfere substantially with the movement The GPA City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 13 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY does not propose to change existing land use designations or zonticipates that land uses will be consistent with the designations established by the General Pl document, the GPA would have no direct impact on biological resources, but could have indirect impacts on such resources through future activities to implement the GPA. Future transportation improvement projects will require compliance with General Plan p.1-G-1, 7.1-G- 2, 7.1-I-1, and 7.1-I-4), as well as compliance with applicable existing regulations, iuding but not limited to the federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, and Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Future development projects would also be subject t-specific CEQA analysis of project-level impacts. Such measures would ensure impacts to biological resources in the City would be less than significant. e,f) Less Than Significant Impact South San Francisco contains two areas set aside as habitat for endangered species: the southern base of San Bruno Mountain within the City limits, and the portion of Sign Hill currently designated as parkland by the City (see General Plan Figure 7-2). These areas are designated by the General Plan as parkland, but some limited development is permitted. As discussed above, the proposed Complete Streets GPA would have no direct impact on biological resources. The GPA does not identify future improvements within the habitat conservation areas. However, such facilities are consistent with parkland and could e constructed in these areas in the future. General Plan Policy 7.1-I-1 would require the preparation of biological resource assessmenand cooperation with state and federal agencies prior to the development of any improvements in these areas in order to ensure that development does not substantially affect special-status species. Furthermore, all future improvement projects that would implement the Complete Streets GPA would be subject to further CEQA analysis of project-specific impacts. Continued implementation of City General Plan policy provisions and consultation with applicable less than significant. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 14 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a,d) Less Than Significant Impact Cultural resources include historic buildings and structures, hitricts, historic sites, prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, and other prehistoric and histori The proposed Complete Streets GPA is a policy document that does not include proposals for development projects and would not grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential to adversely affect cultural resources. Further, the GPA does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning and anticipates that land uses wgnations GPA would have no direct impact on cultural resources, but future activities could adversely affect However, General Plan Policy 7.5-I-4 requires a records review for any development proposed in areas of known resources, and Policy 7.5-I-5 requires preparation of a resource mitigation plan and monitor archaeologist in the event that resources are uncovered. In addition, Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code specifies protocol when human remains are discovered that requires consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission and appropriate Native Americans, if appropriate, to ensure proper handling of the remains. Finally, all future development projects that would implement Complete Streets GPA measures and actions would be subject to further CEQA analysis of project-specific impacts. This impact would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated Archaeological resources include prehistoric and historic archae and historic objects and artifacts. As discussed above, the proposed Complete Streets GPA would have resources, including archaeological resources. However, improvem City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 15 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Streets GPA could adversely affect these resources. This impact mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measure If archaeological resources are encountered during future grading or excav CUL-1 activities associated with Complete Streets-related activities, work shall avoid altering the resource and its stratigraphic context until a qualarchaeologist has evaluated, recorded, and determined appropriate treatment of the resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in consultation with the City. Project personnel shall not collect cultural resources. Impacts to any significant resources shall be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through methods determined adequate by the archaeologist as approved by the City. Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval, and implemented during construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of South San Francisco Planning Division c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated Paleontological resources include fossil remains, as well as fossil localities and rock or soil formations that have produced fossil material. Fossils are the remains or t As discussed above, the proposed Complete Streets GPA would have no direct impact on cultural resources, including paleontological resources. However, improvements to implement the Complete Streets GPA could adversely affect these resources. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measure If paleontological resources are encountered during future grading or ex CUL-2 activities associated with Complete Streets-related activities, work shall avoid altering the resource and its stratigraphic context until a qual evaluated, recorded, and determined appropriate treatment of the resource, in consultation with the City. Project personnel shall not collect cultural resources. Appropriate treatment may include standard samples by a qualified paleontologist to recover microvertebrate fossils; preparing significant fossils to a reasonable point of identification; and depositing museum repository for permanent curation and storage, together w inventory of the specimens. Timing/Implementation: As a condition of project approval, and implemented during construction activities Enforcement/Monitoring: City of South San Francisco Planning Division Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 16 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death, involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a, ce) Less Than Significant Impact South San Francisco is located in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. There are approximately 30 known faults in the San Francisco Bay Area, 11 of which are within 40 miles of the City that are considered capable of generating earthquakes (City of South San Francisco 1999). City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 17 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does itgrant any entitlements for development. Further, the GPA does not propose to change existing land use designations or zoning and anticipates that land uses will b Land Use Element. As a policy document, the GPA would not directly result in the exposure of people or structures to hazards associated with ctivity or soil instability. Future projects that would implement the proposed GPA would not include any habitable structures. The design-controllable aspects of protection from seismic ground motion and soi are governed by existing regulations of the State of California (California Building Code, California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 24, Part 2) or the City of South San Francisco (South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 15). These regulations require that project designs reduce potentia geology, and seismicity effects to less than significant levels. Compliance with these regulations is required, not optional. Compliance must be demonstrated by a project applicant to have been . Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, landslides, unstable soils, expansive so septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. b) Less Than Significant Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include proposals for development projects, would not grant any entitlements for development, and does not propose to or zoning. Therefore, the GPA would not directly result in any soil erosion. However, ground disturbance during construction of facilities associated with the Complete Streets GPA would have the potential to result in soil erosion and loss of topsoil. Existing state law and General Plan Policy 7.2-I-1 require future development projects to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) statewide General Construction permit. The NPDES program regulates point source discharges caused by general construction activities and the general qualital stormwater systems. As part of the permit application process, projects would require a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), which would include a list of best management practices (BMPs) to be implemented on the site both during and post-construction to minimize erosion and sedimentation. City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 14.04.180 pro with requirements for implementation of BMPs. Continued implemen and compliance with state law would minimize potential soil erosion impac. This impact would be less than significant. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 18 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ab) No Impact Implementation of the Complete Streets GPA in conjunction with the Pedes Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) and Climate Action Plan (CAP) would pradditional opportunities for non-vehicular methods of transportation, reducing the number of vehile trips. Therefore, the Complete Streets The proposed Complete Streets GPA would be consistent with AB 32, which requires California to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as the GPA would support the implementation would achieve a 15 percent reduction below baseline (2005) levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would be consistent with state goals to reduce GHG emissions, and the proposed Project would have no impact on GHG emissions. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 19 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or a public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ac) Less Than Significant Impact Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 20 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or change any land use designations or zoning and would have no potential to directly result in the routine handling, generation, transportation, emission, or accidental release of hazardous materials or otherwise expose the public to hazardous substances. Any improvements developed to implement the Complete Streets GPA would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, including but California Code of Regulations (CCR), the Uniform Fire Code, andornia Health and Safety Code. Compliance with these laws would limit use of hazardous materials during construction and operation (i.e., fuels, solvents, pesticides, e and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. This impact would be less than significant. d) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA are policy-level documents that do not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or change any land use designations o zoning. Therefore, they would have no potential to directly result in development of a known hazardous release site. Future activities could involve development and/or expansion of transportation facilities, including pedestrian and bicycle facilities. According to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (2013) Envirostor database of hazardous materials release sites, ther numerous hazardous materials release sites in the City. Because specific improvement projects are not known at this time, it cannot be determined if they would be constructed on or near hazardous release site. However, any future development project that would implement Complete Streets GPA measures would be subject to future environmental review, which would include a search of appropriate databases to determine whether the site is a list status of the site at the time improvements are proposed (e.g., her evaluation or cleanup action is required or if the case is closed). If improvements would occur on a listed hazardous materials site, the project would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations related to hazardous materials, which would ensure there would be minimal risk of significant hazard to the public or the environment. e,f) No Impact The City is located immediately north of San Francisco International According to the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International (C/CAG 2012), all but the north and west sides of the City are located within Airport Influence Airport Area B. Within Area B, real estate disclosures are required and ission must review proposed land use policy actions and land development pro There are no private airstrips in the City. The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or change any land use designations or zoning. As a policy document, the Complete Streets GPA would not directly result in the exposure of people or structure associated with airport operations. Implementation of the Complete Streets GPA would not result in the construction of any habitable structures, and any improvements developed to implement the Complete Streets GPA would be required to comply with the safety and compatibility pothe Continued implementation of City General Plan policy provisions such as Policy 8.7-I-1, which restricts land uses in the vicinity of San Francisco International Airport, as , would minimize potential hazards related to airport operations. Therefore, there would be no impact. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 21 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY g) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA is a policy document that does not include any development proposals or changes to existing land use designations. Implemenctions that implement the policies of the Complete Streets GPA could require temporary road closures during construction phases. However, any closures would be short-term, and alternative routes would be provided as necessary. It is unlikely that these actions would significantly interfere with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. Further, all future improvement pr CEQA analysis of project-specific impacts. Therefore, there would be no impact. h) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include improvements that would expose people or structures to significant risk of wildland fires. There would be no impact. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 22 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 23 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a, f) Less Than Significant Impact The Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does it grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential to degrade water quality or violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. As a policy document, the Complete Streets GPA would have no direct impact on water quality, but future activities could introduce pollutants into stormwater runoff, which could potentially degrade downstream water quality. Improvements developed as part of the Complete Streets GPA implementation could result in soil erosion and sedimentation and result in pollutants entering stormwater runoff during rain events (i.e., fuels, oil, solvents, paints, trash). In addition, operation of these facilities could also introduce limited amounts of pollutants into stormwater runoff, such as pesticides used in landscaped areas. However, future development projects would be required to comply with Regional Water Quality Control standards for site drainage. Existing state law and General Plan Policy 7.2-I-1 require future development projects to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) statewide General Construction permit. The NPDES program regulates point source discharges caused by general construction activities and the general quality of stormwater in. As part of the permit application process, projects would require a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), which would include a list of best management practices (BMPs) to be implemented on the site both during and after construction to minimize erosion and sedimentation. Post-construction urban stormwater runoff measures would require the City to implement structural and non-structural BMPs that would mimic or improve predevelopment quantity and quality runoff conditions from new development and redevelopment areas. City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 14.04.180 provides further protection from erosion with requirements for implementation of BMPs. Continued implementation of the City Municipal Code and complianminimize potential soil erosion impacts. This impact would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact The City has two water suppliers. The California Water Service Company, Peninsula District (CWSC) serves the portion of the City east of Interstate 280 (I-280), which represents the majority of the area. The CWSC also serves San Carlos and San Mateo, with no restrictions on water allocation among these communities. The South San Francisco Water Department entitles the City to 42.3 million gallons per day (mgd). An additional 1.4 mgd can be pumped from groundwater. The Westborough County Water District serves the area west of I-280. The Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does it grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential tdeplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Future improvements would include development of complete streets related facilities such as sidewalks, medians, signals, and signage with for irrigation of landscaped areas and little potential to deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Continued implementation of City General P South San Francisco Zoning Regulations would minimize impacts togroundwater. This impact would be less than significant. ce) Less Than Significant Impact The Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does it grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential t Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 24 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY increase the rate or amount of surface runoff. Improvements associated with the Complete Streets GPA would be located in currently developed areas, such as existing transit centers, to improve the use of transportation facilities for all categories of users. Any new facilities would be required to be designed to accommodate stormwater colle into approved facilities. This impact would be less than significant. g,h) Less Than Significant Impact The proposed Project would not directly or indirectly result in the construction of any housing. Because specific improvement projects are not known at this time, the precise location of these improvements cannot be determined. Should improvements be proposed for develoecial flood hazard area, they would require issuance of a development permit by the City , which is intended to promote the public safety and minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions. This impact would be less than significant. i,j) No Impact Tsunamis, or seismically generated sea waves, are rare in Califo earthquake faults. However, due to its proximity to the Pacific Ocean, the San Francisco Bay, and the hillsides within San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, the City is subject to risk of inundation from tsunami, seiche, and mudflow. However, the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly result in the construction of any housing or other habitable structures anpopulation growth. Therefore, the Project would not increase exposure of persons to the risk of inundation tsunami, seiche, or mudflow. There would be no impact. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 25 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not propose any changes to existing land use designations or zoning and anticipates that land uses will be consistent with the designations established by the . Future development projects that would implement the Complete Streets GPA would include new and expanded pedestrian and bicycle facilities that would provide safer and more convenient connections within and between areas of the City and would not divide the community. There would be no impact. b) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA is a policy-level document that does not include any changes to existing land use designations or zoning. zoning ordinance, or other land use planning documents. There would be no impact. c) Less Than Significant Impact South San Francisco contains two areas set aside as habitat for the conservation of threatened and endangered species: the southern base of San Bruno Mountain withCity limits, and the portion of Sign Hill currently designated as parkland by the City (see General Plan Figure 7-2). These areas are designated by the General Plan as parkland, but some limited dev As discussed above, the proposed Complete Streets GPA would have no direct impact on biological resources. The Complete Streets GPA does not identify future improvements within the habitat conservation areas. However, such facilities are consistent with these areas in the future. General Plan Policy 7.1-I-1 would require the preparation of biological resource assessmen cooperation with state and federal agencies prior to the develop areas in order to ensure that development does not substantially-status species. Furthermore, all future improvement projects that would implement the Complete Streets GPA would Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 26 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY be subject to further CEQA analysis of project-specific impacts. Continued implementation of City General Plan policy provisions and consultation with applicable would ensure no confli less than significant. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 27 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XI. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a,b) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not propose improvements that would have the potential to result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource o recovery site. Further, future activities would occur within the City, which is an urbanized area that contains no known significant mineral resources or resource recovery sites. Therefore, there would be no impact. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 28 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XII. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or of applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or a public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ac) Less Than Significant Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing landAs a policy document, the Complete Streets GPA would have no direct impacts related to noise. Future transportation improvement projects, which could include expansion of pedestrian and bicycle facilities, Plan Noise Element, including Policy 9-I-8 which requires the control of noise at the source through site design, building design, landscaping, hours of operation, and other techniques, as well as compliance with applicable existing regulations, including but not limited to South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 8. Noise Regulations, which regulates noise activities within the C. Compliance with these policies and regulations would ensure this impact is less than significant. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 29 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY d) Less Than Significant Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing land Construction of facilities associated with the Complete Streets GPA could exceed noise standards. Because construction is a necessary activity in maintaining and frequently include special provisions related to construction noSouth San Francisco Municipal Code includes special provisions in Section 8.32, which allows construction activities on weekdays between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., on Saturdays between the hours of 9 a.m. and 8 p.m., and on Sundays and holidays between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m., or at such other hours as may be authorized by the permit, if construction meets at least one of No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exc90 dB at a distance of 25 feet. If the device is housed within a structure or trailer on the property, the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to 25 feet from the equipment as possible. The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of th 90 dB. Compliance with the limitations of Municipal Code Section 8.3 wo levels would not exceed noise limitations established by the Cit This would be a less than significant impact. e,f) Less Than Significant Impact The City is located immediately north of San Francisco International Airport. According to the Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Airport (C/CAG 2012), much of the City is located in Airport Influence Area B,within which real estate disclosures are required notifying buyers of potential aircraft noise. The proposed Project would not, directly or indirectly, result in the construction of Compliance with General Plan policies would ensure that this impact would be less than significant. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 30 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing land use designations or zoning. Future improvements would not include the development of any new housing or employme that would increase the population directly or induce population. There would be no impact. b,c) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does itgrant any entitlements for development. Any physical improvements associated with these transportation improvement strategies would likely be constructed within existing or planned road rights of way. Accordingly, this would not change from the existing conditions, and the Complete Streets GPA would not displace housing or people or require the construction of housing elsewhere. There would be no impact. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 31 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altere governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause s order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ae) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing land Therefore, the proposed Project would have no direct impact on public services. Future implement actions of the Complete Streets GPA would not include any residential uses or employment centers that would generate demand for public services. Therefore, there would be no impact. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 32 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XV. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities, or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a,b) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA would not increase population or the demand for park facilities. With no changes to residential or nonresidential uses in the City, the Complete Streets GPA would not result in physical deterioration of park facilities or require nk facilities, the construction of which could cause physical environmental impacts. Therefore, there would be no impact related to parks and recreation. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 33 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a,b) Less Than Significant Impact Implementation of the Complete Streets GPA, in conjunction with Bicycle Master Plan (BMP) and Climate Action Plan (CAP), is inte automobiles and promote use of alternative traffic modes and by expanding the existing pedestrian and bicycle networks and providing enhanced connectivity within Implementation of these policy provisions has the potential to reduce the number of vehicle trips and redu within the City. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. c) No Impact Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 34 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY The City is located immediately north of San Francisco International Airport. The Complete Streets GPA would not result in development that would change air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks related to air traffic patterns. All future implementing actions would also be required to comply (C/CAP 2012) and would not affect the location of air traffic patterns in the region. There would be no traffic patterns. d,e) Less Than Significant Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing land use designations or zonFuture improvements developed to implement the Complete Streets GPA would be designed to increase safety and access and would be reviewed by the City to ensure they would not results on emergency access. This impact would be less than significant. f) No Impact The Complete Streets GPA is intended to support implementation e bicycle, and related transit network improvements. As such, the GPA would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances supporting multim transportation. In addition, the policy provisions are intended to increase the of complete streets-related facilities in the City. There would be no impact. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 35 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significan Impact Incorporated t Impact No Impact XVII. UTILITIESANDSERVICESYSTEMS.Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to acc disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS ac, eg) No Impact The proposed Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, grant any entitlements for development, or propose to change existing landdesignations or zoning. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no direct impact on public utilities. Future implemen actions of the Complete Streets GPA would not include any residential uses or employment centers that would generate demand for public services. Therefore, there would be no impact. d) Less Than Significant Impact The City has two water suppliers. The California Water Service C serves the portion of the City east of Interstate 280 (I-280), which repres area. The CWSC also serves San Carlos and San Mateo, with no res Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 36 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY entitles the City to 42.3 million gallons per day (mgd). An additional 1.4 mgd can be pumped fr groundwater. The Westborough County Water District serves the ar-280. The Complete Streets GPA does not include any site-specific designs or proposals, nor does it grant any entitlements for development that would have the potential to depl interfere with groundwater recharge. Future improvements would ifacilities such as sidewalks, sidewalk bulb-outs, medians, signals, and signage with minimal water demand for irrigation of landscaped areas and little potential to deplete g groundwater recharge. Continued implementation of City General Plan policy provisions Regulations would minimize impacts to groundwater. Future implementing actions of the Complete Streets GPA would not increase water demand in the City. This impact would be less than significant. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 37 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVIII. MANDATORYFINDINGSOFSIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? AC NALYSIS AND ONCLUSIONS a) Less Than Significant Impact As described in Section IV, the proposed Project would have no direct impact on biological resources, and future implementing actions would be subject to applicable f, and local regulations that protect such resources, policy provisions. Compliance with these existing regulations woProject would have a less than significant impact on plant and wildlife species and their hab. Similarly, as described in Section V, the proposed Project would have no direct impact on prehistoric and historic resources, and future implementing actions would be subject to General Plan regulations that protect such resources. Continued compliance with these policies and existing regulations would ensure that the Project would have a less than significant impact on prehistoric and historic resources. Furthermore, future implementing actions would be subject to fur analysis of project-specific impacts. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated The impacts of the proposed Project Although incremental changes in certain areas can be expected as a result of the future implementing actions, all environmental impacts that coul Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 38 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY Project would be considered less than significant or would be reduced to through implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in this Initial Study, which would also ensure that any contribution to cumulative impacts would be. c) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated Construction of future improvements would produce ozone precursors, diesel PM, a which could affect human beings. Mitigation measure AQ-1 requires implementation of basic construction mitigation measures to reduce construction-generated air pollutants, which would reduce the potential impact to less than significant. Therefore, with incorporation of the mitigation measures recommended in this Initial Study, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings. City of South San Francisco Complete Streets General Plan Amendment October 2014 Initial Study 39 SSFCSGPAIS OMPLETE TREETS ENERAL LAN MENDMENT NITIAL TUDY R EFERENCES BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality Management District). 2011. . CEQA Air Quality Guidelines C/CAG (City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County). 2012. Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco In City of South San Francisco. 2013a. . City of South San Francisco Climate Action Plan _____. 1999. . City of South San Francisco General Plan _____. 2011. . City of South San Francisco Bikeways Master Plan _____. 2013b. City of South San Francisco Pedestrian Master Plan. DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2013. September 26. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Complete Streets General Plan Amendment City of South San Francisco Initial Study October 2014 40