HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix A_OMP Water Capture_Public Review Draft IS-MND
Public Review Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ORANGE MEMORIAL PARK
WATER CAPTURE PROJECT
Prepared for:
City of South San Francisco
Engineering Division
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Contact: Bianca Liu, P.E.
Associate Engineer/Project Manager
Prepared by:
Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions
10940 White Rock Road, Suite 190
Rancho Cordova, California 95670
Contact: Juliana Prosperi, AICP
Project Manager
June 2019
This page intentionally left blank.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration i June 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.............................................................................................. iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................ 2
1. Project Title: ..................................................................................................................... 2
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: .............................................................................. 2
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: ........................................................................ 2
4. Project Location: ............................................................................................................. 2
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: .................................................................... 2
6. General Plan Designation: ........................................................................................... 2
7. Zoning: ................................................................................................................................ 2
8. Project Background: ...................................................................................................... 4
9. Project Goals and Objectives: ..................................................................................... 5
10. Description of Project: .................................................................................................. 6
11. Project Construction and Schedule: ....................................................................... 11
12. Operations and Maintenance: .................................................................................. 14
13. Public Outreach Process: ........................................................................................... 14
14. Existing Setting: ............................................................................................................ 15
15. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: ..................................................................... 16
16. Other Public Agencies whose Approval is Required:....................................... 17
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ............................................................................................. 18
I. AESTHETICS .................................................................................................................... 22
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES ............................................................ 26
III. AIR QUALITY .................................................................................................................. 28
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................... 37
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................. 46
VI. ENERGY ............................................................................................................................ 50
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................... 51
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................. 57
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................................ 61
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ...................................................................... 68
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING ......................................................................................... 73
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................. 74
XIII. NOISE ................................................................................................................................ 75
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................... 83
IV. PUBLIC SERVICES .......................................................................................................... 84
XVI. RECREATION .................................................................................................................. 87
XVII. TRANSPORTATION ...................................................................................................... 90
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES .............................................................................. 99
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ...................................................................... 101
XX. WILDFIRE ..................................................................................................................... 104
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ....................................................... 106
4.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 110
5.0 REPORT PREPARATION ....................................................................................................... 117
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 ii Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location and Park Facilities ......................................................................................... 3
Figure 2. Project Details ................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 3. Conceptual Profile Diagram .......................................................................................................10
Figure 4. Transportation Network .............................................................................................................92
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of Performance for the Two Proposed Cistern/Infiltration Systems ........11
Table 2. BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance ..........................................................................................29
Table 3. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards .....................................................31
Table 4. Maximum Daily Project Construction Emissions (pounds per day) ..............................33
Table 5. Annual Project Operational Emissions (tons per year) ......................................................33
Table 6. Typical Noise Levels from Construction Equipment ............................................................79
Table 7. Vibration Levels for Varying Construction Equipment .......................................................82
Table 8. Recreational Facilities Within 1 mile of the Project Site ....................................................88
Table 9. Approximate Trips Generated ......................................................................................................96
APPENDICES
Appendix A : Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emission Calculations
Appendix B: Biological Evaluation and Wetland Delineation Technical Memorandum
Appendix C: Extended Phase 1 Archaeological Survey Report (CONFIDENTIAL: Only
available at City offices)
Appendix D: Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Study (Furgo Consultants, Inc. 2016)
Appendix E: Geotechnical Investigation (Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc. 2018)
Appendix F: Noise Technical Memorandum
Appendix G: Focused Traffic Impact Analysis
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration iii June 2019
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AAQS Ambient Air Quality Standard
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
AB Assembly Bill
ADT Average Daily Trip
AIA Airport Influence Area
ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
APE Area of Potential Effect
APCO Air Pollution Control Officer
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
bgs below ground surface
BMP Best Management Practices
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Office Association
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
C/CAG City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFC Chloroflurocarbons
cfs cubic feet per second
CGS California Geological Survey
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System
CH4 Methane Gas
CHP California Highway Patrol
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CMP Congestion Management Plan
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 iv Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CO Carbon Monoxide
CRHR California Register Historical Resources
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
dbh diameter breast height
DDE dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene
DDT dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
District San Mateo County Flood Control District
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EOP Emergency Operation Plan
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESL Environmental Screening Levels
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
FTA Federal Transit Authority
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GSRD Gross Solid Removal Device
HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbons
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HMCP Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan
IPAC Information Planning and Consultation System
IS Initial Study
IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
JPB Joint Powers Board
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard
LRA Local Responsibility Area
MGD Million Gallons per Day
MM Mitigation Measure
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration v June 2019
MRP Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
MT CO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOx oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NWIC Northwest Information Center
O3 Ozone
OES Office of Emergency Services
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Pb Lead
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls
PCE Peninsula Clean Energy
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric
PM10 respirable particulate matter
PM2.5 fine particulate matter
ppb parts per billion
PRC Public Resources Code
RECP Regional Emergency Coordination Plan
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SFO San Francisco Airport
SFPUC San Francisco Public Utility Commission
SF RWS San Francisco Regional Water System
SMCTA San Mateo County Transportation Authority
SMCWPPP San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 vi Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
SMP Site Management Plan
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SRP Stormwater Resource Plan
SSC Species of Special Concern
SSFFD South San Francisco Fire Department
SSFMC South San Francisco Municipal Code
SSFPD South San Francisco Police Department
SSFUSD South San Francisco Unified School District
SSFWQCP South San Francisco Water Quality Control Plant
SSMP Sewer System Management Plan
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC Toxic Air Contaminants
TDM Travel Demand Management
TMDL Total Maximum Discharge Load
TNW Traditional Navigable Water
TTLC Total Threshold Limit Concentrations
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
UV Ultraviolet
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
VdB Vibration Decibels
VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WMP Waste Management Plan
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 June 2019
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) identifies and analyzes the
potential environmental impacts of the Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
(proposed project). The information and analysis presented in this document is organized
in accordance with the order of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
Appendix G, CEQA Environmental Checklist. If the analysis provided in this document
identifies potentially significant environmental effects of the project, required project
mitigation measures are identified. The required mitigation measures would be
implemented in conjunction with the project, as required by CEQA as project conditions of
approval. The City would adopt findings and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) for the project in conjunction with project approval.
The City of South San Francisco adopted their General Plan and associated Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) in October 1999. The General Plan EIR is a Program EIR, prepared
pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations,
Sections 15000 et seq.), and includes an examination of the potential wide-ranging effects
resulting from buildout of General Plan land use designations. Measures to mitigate the
significant adverse project and cumulative impacts associated with potential General Plan
buildout were identified in the General Plan EIR.
The environmental setting of each section of this IS/MND is based on information in the
City’s General Plan and Program EIR, and multiple site visits conducted by Wood
Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. staff. Several project-specific technical
reports used in the preparation of this IS/MND have been prepared by Wood Environment
& Infrastructure Solutions, Inc., Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc., and Fugro Consultants,
Inc. They are included in associated appendices.
Document Organization
This IS/MND is organized as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction provides an introduction to the environmental review process. It
describes the purpose and organization of this document and presents a summary of
findings.
Chapter 2: Project Description and Background describes the purpose of and need for
the project, identifies project goals and objectives, and provides a detailed description of
the project.
Chapter 3: Environmental Checklist presents an analysis of a range of environmental
issues identified in the CEQA Environmental Checklist and determines if project actions
would result in no impact, a less than significant impact, a less than significant impact with
mitigation incorporated, or a potentially significant impact. If any impacts were determined
to be potentially significant and not feasibly mitigated to less than significant, an EIR would
be required. None of the proposed project impacts were determined to be significant,
however, after implementation of feasible mitigation measures.
Chapter 4: References lists the references used in preparation of this IS/MND.
Chapter 5: List of Preparers identifies report preparers.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 2 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Project Title:
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of South San Francisco
Engineering Division
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94083
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Bianca Lui, P.E., QSD/P, Associate Engineer/Project Manager (650) 829-6697
4. Project Location:
The proposed Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project (Project) is located along
Colma Creek within the southern half of Orange Memorial Park (Park), a 28-acre public park
located at 1 West Orange Avenue, in the City of South San Francisco, California (Figure 1).
The City of South San Francisco (City) lies within San Mateo County in the San Francisco
Bay Area. The City is located approximately three miles north of San Francisco
International Airport and the City of San Bruno in a small valley south of Daly City, Colma
and San Bruno Mountain. The City is located approximately six miles east of Pacifica and
the hills of the Coast Range, and west of the waters of San Francisco Bay.
The Project would be entirely confined within the Park, which supports a range of
recreational facilities including two formal ball fields. The limits of the proposed Project
water capture facilities would extend approximately 1,000 feet from the upstream and
western end of Colma Creek to the southeast corner of the Park near the two ballfields
located along West Orange Avenue (Figure 2).
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
City of South San Francisco
City Manager
400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
6. General Plan Designation:
The proposed Project site, including the Colma Creek channel, is designated for “Park and
Recreation” land uses in the City of South San Francisco General Plan (1999). Land use to
the north of the Project site is designated as “Low Density Residential”. Land uses to the east
are designated as “Medium Density Residential” and “Low Density Residential”. Land uses to the
south of the Project site are designated as “Park and Recreation” and “Medium Density
Residential”. Land use to the west consists of “High Density Residential”.
7. Zoning:
The Project site and Colma Creek channel are zoned as “PR – Parks and Recreation”
pursuant to the City of South San Francisco Zoning Map and Ordinance.
COLMA CREEK CHANNELCOLMA CREEK CHANNELPENINSULA PINESPENINSULA PINESAPARTMENTSAPARTMENTSPARK LANEPARK LANEAPARTMENTSAPARTMENTSSAFEWAYSAFEWAYCENTENNIALCENTENNIALDOG PARKDOG PARKLOS CERRITOSLOS CERRITOSELEMENTARY SCHOOLELEMENTARY SCHOOLBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBOF SOUTHOF SOUTHSAN FRANCISCOSAN FRANCISCOMAYFA I R A V E N UEMEM
O
RI
A
L
D
RI
V
E
MEMORIAL DRIV
E
C ST
R
E
E
T
C ST
R
E
E
T
B ST
R
E
E
T
B S TREE
T
A STR
E
E
T 2ND STREET2ND STREET1ST STREET1ST STREETORANGE AVENUEORANGE AVENUENORTH CANAL STREETNORTH CANAL STREETRAILROAD AVENUERAILROAD AVENUEIDLEWOOD DRIVEIDLEWOOD DRIVEAMBERWOOD CIRCLEAMBERWOOD CIRCLEANTOI
NETT
E LA
NE
ANTOI
NETT
E LA
NE
STAT
E
R
O
U
T
E
8
2TENNIS DRIVETENNIS DRIVECIRCLE COURTCIRCLE COURTCOMMERCIAL AVENUECOMMERCIAL AVENUEEUCALYPTUS AVENUEEUCALYPTUS AVENUECENTE N N IA L W A Y TRAILMEMORIAL DRIVEMEMORIAL DRIVECOLMA CREEK CHANNELPENINSULA PINESAPARTMENTSPARK LANEAPARTMENTSSAFEWAYCENTENNIALDOG PARKBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBOF SOUTHSAN FRANCISCOLOS CERRITOSELEMENTARY SCHOOLMAYFA I R A V E N UEMEM
O
RI
A
L
D
RI
V
E
C ST
R
E
E
T
B ST
R
E
E
T
A STR
E
E
T 2ND STREET1ST STREETORANGE AVENUENORTH CANAL STREETRAILROAD AVENUEIDLEWOOD DRIVEAMBERWOOD CIRCLEANTOI
NETT
E LA
NE
STAT
E
R
O
U
T
E
8
2TENNIS DRIVECIRCLE COURTCOMMERCIAL AVENUEEUCALYPTUS AVENUECENTE N N IA L W A Y TRAILMEMORIAL DRIVE101398766543211211COLMA CREEKCOLMA CREEKORANGEORANGEMEMORIALMEMORIALPARKPARKORANGEMEMORIALPARK2803803510182COLMA CREEKSAN FRANCISCOBAYCOLMACOLMADALYDALYCITYCITYPACIFICAPACIFICASAN BRUNOSAN BRUNOCOLMADALYCITYPACIFICASAN BRUNOSOUTHSOUTHSAN FRANCISCOSAN FRANCISCOSOUTHSAN FRANCISCOLEGENDCity of South San FranciscoPark/Open SpaceA STR
E
ET
A STR
E
E
T
STAT
E
R
O
U
T
E
8
2
STAT
E
R
O
U
T
E
8
20250MILESNSouthSouthSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSouthSan Francisco★★CALIFORNIASan MateoCountyLEGENDPark Facilities#Orange Memorial ParkProject SiteResidential AreaPicnic Shelter/Open Picnic AreaBaseball/Softball FieldBasketball CourtsJoseph A FernekesRecreation BuildingSoccer FieldChildren’s PlaygroundIndoor PoolTennis CourtsBocce Ball CourtsSkate ParkCommunity Art StudiosStaging Area at AbandonedGreenhouse ParcelStaging Area alongMemorial Drive123456789101112130325SCALE IN FEETN1FIGUREProject Site and Park FacilitiesAerial Source: Google 2018.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 4 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
8. Project Background:
Several waterbodies in San Mateo County have been identified as “impaired” as not
meeting state or federal water quality standards, and are listed in Section 303(d) of the
Clean Water Act (CWA). A water body is included on the Section 303(d) list when the
receiving water does not meet applicable water quality standards listed in the Basin Plan
(Water Quality Control Plan) and does not support the beneficial uses associated with the
applicable water quality standard. Once included on the 303(d) list, the water body is
subject to the development of a Total Maximum Discharge Load (TMDL), a plan for
restoring impaired waters that identifies the maximum amount of a pollutant that a body of
water can receive while still meeting water quality standards.
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has developed
TMDLs for several pollutants originating from urban and stormwater runoff in the
watersheds throughout San Mateo County. Colma Creek is among the impaired water
bodies with TMDLs for Polychlorinated Biphenyl’s (PCBs), mercury, and trash reductions.
In accordance with the terms of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP), Colma
Creek has been identified for water quality improvements in the San Mateo County
Stormwater Resource Plan (SRP).
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB administers the MRP requirements and the San Mateo
Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP). The SMCWPPP is
implemented through a partnership of the City/County Association of Governments
(C/CAG) of San Mateo County, who share the responsibility of complying with the MRP
requirements. These requirements focus on the implementation of green infrastructure
and stormwater planning, and PCB/mercury and trash load reductions.
Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit
In 2015 the San Francisco RWQCB issued the county-wide MRP (CAS612008) to regulate
stormwater discharges in San Mateo County. The MRP requires San Mateo County
permittees (the County and its 20 cities) to reduce PCBs by 370 grams per year by June 30,
2020. A minimum 15 grams per year of this total must be achieved via green infrastructure,
such as water capture facility improvements. San Mateo County permittees need to
demonstrate cumulative mercury reduction by six grams per year by implementing green
infrastructure improvements by June 30, 2020. These reduction rates are required by the
MRP to achieve compliance with mercury and the PCBs TMDLs for San Francisco Bay. San
Mateo County permittees are also required to reduce trash discharges to the Bay from
municipal storm drain systems. Under the current MRP term, an 80 percent reduction is
required in 2019 and zero impact on receiving waters from trash by 2022. According to the
MRP, these reductions would be accomplished through the implementation of stormwater
capture, treatment, and infiltration projects and associated green infrastructure
improvements.
Stormwater Resource Plan
Under Senate Bill 985, a Stormwater Resource Plan (SRP) is required for municipalities to
receive funding for stormwater and dry weather runoff capture projects. The San Mateo
County SRP is a comprehensive water resource planning and stormwater runoff
management document developed by the C/CAG and its SMCWPPP. It identifies and
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 5 June 2019
prioritizes opportunities to utilize stormwater as a resource in San Mateo County through a
detailed analysis of watershed processes, surface and groundwater resources, public and
stakeholder input, and an analysis of multiple benefits that can be achieved through
strategically planned stormwater management projects. These projects are designed to
capture and manage stormwater more sustainably; reduce flooding and pollution
associated with runoff; improve biological function of plants, soils, and natural
infrastructure; and provide community benefits.
The proposed Project was identified in the San Mateo County SRP as a high-priority
regional project that can capture water from a large multi-jurisdictional drainage area. The
Project has the potential to co-locate stormwater diversion from Colma Creek and storage
and treatment in Orange Memorial Park with other planned and future capital
improvement projects (CIP) in the Park, while also providing community benefits. It is one
of 22 project concepts developed in conjunction with the San Mateo County SRP and the
C/CAG agencies, three of which are large-scale regional project concepts and the other 19
smaller green streets or parking lots. The Project was also one of four concepts
recommended by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to receive Proposition
1 stormwater grant funding.
Colma Creek Channel
Colma Creek is a perennial drainage that flows for approximately 8 miles from its
headwaters in San Bruno Mountain State and County Park. It runs through the cities of Daly
City, Colma, and South San Francisco where it eventually discharges into San Francisco Bay.
A 5.4-mile long segment of Colma Creek consists of a concrete-lined drainage channel with
varying channel dimensions. Portions of the channel include earthen channels, channels
with concrete walls and earthen beds, and fully concrete lined channels with box culverts.
The 5.4-mile long Colma Creek drainage channel is owned and operated by the San Mateo
County Flood Control District (District), a Countywide Special District created to finance
flood control projects in the region.
Colma Creek has a history of persistent flooding. The industrial area of South San Francisco
near Colma Creek was constructed on a historic flood plain, making the businesses and
buildings in this area susceptible to flooding. As a result, in 1964 the District established
the Colma Creek Flood Control Zone that extends from San Francisco Bay to the City of Daly
City and provides flood control protection for the surrounding region. In 1974, the District
subsequently established the Colma Creek Flood Control Project that involved the
completion of several channel improvements including the construction of vertical
concrete channel walls, transition structures between channel segments, and bridge
crossings. A segment of the Colma Creek drainage channel runs through Orange Memorial
Park. The reach of the Colma Creek drainage channel that bisects the Park consists of
vertical and trapezoidal-shaped concrete channel walls and bed.
9. Project Goals and Objectives:
The primary goals of this regional water capture project are summarized below.
• Achieve load reductions in discharges of PCBs and mercury to San Francisco Bay for
compliance with TMDL requirements;
• Reduce trash discharges to the Bay; and
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 6 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Fulfill the Cooperative Implementation Agreement with Caltrans (project funder)
with optimal cost effectiveness.
Additional goals and objectives also include:
• Implement green infrastructure improvements to capture and treat flows from Colma
Creek, and utilize treated water for beneficial uses such as irrigation and infiltration;
• Alleviate localized flooding in lower reaches of Colma Creek;
• Support the vision of the Orange Memorial Park Master Plan; and
• Implement solutions that minimize long-term operations and maintenance
requirements and short-term construction impacts to park users.
10. Description of Project:
The Project would provide water quality improvements to meet the National Pollutant
Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) requirements of the San Francisco Bay MRP.
The MRP governs stormwater discharges to San Francisco Bay from the City of South San
Francisco and 21 other co-permittees in San Mateo County. The Project is designed to
address multiple water quality targets outlined in the MRP. These include a reduction in
pollutant discharges of PCBs and mercury to San Francisco Bay to comply with TMDL
requirements, as well as trash discharge reductions under the MRP requirements.
The Project would include construction and operation of a water capture facility through
the installation of a drop inlet, diversion channel, and pretreament structure (trash screen
and sediment removal chamber) in the upper and western end of the Colma Creek channel
and Park boundary (Figure 2). Pretreated water would then enter into a diversion pipe
leading to an underground stormwater storage reservoir in the southeastern corner of the
Park. A portion of the storage would function as a cistern holding water for eventual non-
potable irrigation use in and around the Park, and the remainder would function as an
infiltration chamber. These storage facilities would be constructed underneath a portion of
the Park’s two existing ballfields. When storage capacity is exceeded, treated overflow
would be discharged back into the channel. This regional Project would have multiple
benefits in addition to water quality improvements, including reducing localized flooding
and reusing treated water for irrigation and groundwater recharge. The Project would
capture and treat 8 to 16 percent of the annual drainage from approximately 6,500 acres of
land in the City of South San Francisco, Town of Colma, the City of Daly City, and a portion
of unincorporated San Mateo County.
Following construction of the proposed Project, the open picnic areas would be graded and
restored and the two ballfields would be restored with new turf. Also, a separate and
subsequent project would be completed by the City of South San Francisco Parks &
Recreation Department, which involves additional improvements to the ballfields. These
improvements include the installation of new dugouts, bleachers, lighting, and a
scoreboard. These improvements are outlined to occur in two phases under the Orange
Memorial Park Sports Field Renovation project summarized in the City’s 2018-2019 Capital
Improvement Program.
24" SDCONC.18" SDCONC.SD8" SDSTEEL
SDICVICVICVICVICVGRIT CHAMBERGRIT CHAMBER24” SD PIPE INSTALLED VIA24” SD PIPE INSTALLED VIATRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGYTRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGYTO WATER REUSETO WATER REUSEFLOW SPLITTERFLOW SPLITTERBAFFLEBAFFLEBOXBOXOVERFLOW PIPE BACKOVERFLOW PIPE BACKTO COLMA CREEKTO COLMA CREEKWATER QUALITY POLISHING ANDWATER QUALITY POLISHING ANDDISINFECTION EQUIPMENT SHEDDISINFECTION EQUIPMENT SHEDIRRIGATIONIRRIGATIONPUMPPUMPCISTERNCISTERNINFILTRATIONINFILTRATIONCHAMBERCHAMBERPOTENTIAL LOCATION OFPOTENTIAL LOCATION OFUNDERGROUND STORAGEUNDERGROUND STORAGERESERVOIRRESERVOIRTO WATERTO WATERREUSEREUSETO WATERTO WATERREUSEREUSEDROP INLETDROP INLETINLETINLETJUNCTIONJUNCTIONSTRUCTURESTRUCTUREMEMORIAL DRIVEMEMORIAL DRIVEWEST ORANGE AVENUEWEST ORANGE AVENUECOLMA CREEK CHANNELCOLMA CREEK CHANNELGRIT CHAMBER24” SD PIPE INSTALLED VIATRENCHLESS TECHNOLOGYTO WATER REUSEFLOW SPLITTERBAFFLEBOXOVERFLOW PIPE BACKTO COLMA CREEKWATER QUALITY POLISHING ANDDISINFECTION EQUIPMENT SHEDIRRIGATIONPUMPCISTERN INFILTRATIONCHAMBERPOTENTIAL LOCATION OFUNDERGROUND STORAGERESERVOIRTO WATERREUSETO WATERREUSEDROP INLETINLETJUNCTIONSTRUCTUREMEMORIAL DRIVEWEST ORANGE AVENUECOLMA CREEK CHANNEL0115SCALE IN FEETN2FIGUREProject DetailsSource: Lotus Water 2019.Note: This figure characterizes the major Project components. For simplicity, some of the smaller Project components are not denoted.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 8 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Caltrans is funding the Project through a Cooperative Implementation Agreement, and the
City of South San Francisco is the Lead Agency hosting the Project on its land within Orange
Memorial Park.
Proposed Design for Stormwater Capture and Diversion
The proposed Project would capture and divert water flows from Colma Creek to new
water quality facilities that would be constructed beneath the two existing ballfields for
treatment and reuse of surface water to help meet local irrigation demands (Figure 2).
Flows from Colma Creek channel would be diverted into a drop inlet that would route flows
into a pretreatment structure (trash screen, baffle, and sediment removal chamber) that
would remove trash, floatables and settleables. Water would then flow south and east of
the channel into a 24-inch storm drain pipe. The diversion and pretreatment structures
would be installed approximately 10 feet underground and parallel to the Colma Creek
channel in the northeast corner of a City-owned lot, adjacent to and west of the Park, that
has not yet been developed and is fenced off to public access. The pretreament structure is
designed to screen out trash down to five millimeters, capture debris to prevent the
downstream diversion pipe from clogging, use a baffle to hold back oil and grease, and
settle out sediment to protect the downstream water treatment and infiltration systems
(Figure 3).
The diversion pipe would run east to a flow splitter located underneath a plaza area just
north of the baseball diamond. The diversion pipe would have an initial depth of
approximately 11 feet below the ground surface (bgs) leaving the pretreatment structure,
and it would gradually decrease in depth relative to ground surface in order to maintain a
gravity-fed diversion (i.e. no pump station). As the diversion pipe reaches the flow splitter
it would be about 7 feet bgs. The treatment systems would be designed to treat 10 cubic
feet per second (cfs) of diverted water flows up to a maximum storage capacity of up to 7.5
acre-feet. Capacity in the subsurface reservoir is restored through non-potable irrigation
use and infiltration with a 0.5-inch per hour design drawdown rate. The combination of
these facilities is designed to effectively remove PCBs and mercury. Once storage in the
cistern and infiltration chamber is full, excess pretreated water flow would discharge from
the flow splitter back to Colma Creek via an overflow weir and pipe.
The top of the infiltration chamber and cistern would be approximately 6 to 8 feet deep
beneath the ballfields. The total storage and treatment capacity of the infiltration chamber
and cistern would potentially vary as engineering and design plans are finalized.
Approximately 80 percent of the underground storage reservoir would contain an
infiltration chamber for groundwater recharge, and the other 20 percent would contain a
cistern to store water for irrigation. Currently, the system would have approximately 4
acre-feet (1,300,000 gallons) of storage capacity with a 1-acre footprint. If additional
funding is obtained, the system could be enlarged to have up to approximately 7.5 acre-feet
(2,300,000 gallons) storage capacity with a maximum 2.5-acre footprint. Both underground
storage reservoir systems are described below.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 9 June 2019
4 Acre-Feet Cistern/Infiltration Chamber Storage System
The smaller storage reservoir would underlie approximately one acre of the two ballfields
located south of Colma Creek and provide 4 acre-feet of storage capacity. A 0.2-acre portion
of the storage reservoir would be used as an underground cistern (water storage tank) to
store water exclusively for irrigation, and an 0.8-acre portion of the reservoir would be an
infiltration chamber to recharge groundwater (resulting in a 1.0-acre footprint). A
maximum of 15 cfs of stormwater would be diverted to the storage reservoir under the
ballfields. Once storage is full, pretreated flows would be discharged from the flow splitter
back to Colma Creek.
Once operational, the system would provide treatment to an estimated 320 acre-feet of
stormwater runoff. Infiltration and non-potable use would effectively provide 100 percent
water quality treatment to those flows. Overflow from the storage system routed through
the filtration chamber would remove approximately 70 percent of sediment. Since both
mercury and PCBs are sediment associated, filtered flows would remove about 70 percent
of those constituents as well. In addition to reducing the transport of mercury, PCBs, and
trash, the proposed Project would also help alleviate local flooding in the surrounding
neighborhood and recharge the groundwater.
7.5 Acre-Feet Cistern/Infiltration Chamber Storage System
A larger system would almost double the treatment capacity of the project. The largest
system conceptualized would underlie 2.5 acres of the two ballfields and have 7.5 acre-feet
of storage capacity (and similar cistern and infiltration chamber portions being dedicated
for irrigation and groundwater recharge). As a larger system, it would be designed to treat
up to 30 cfs of stormwater diverted through the underground storage reservoir. The larger
system would potentially also include the installation of a gross solids removal device
(GSRD) complex. This system would contain similar storage and treatment elements as the
smaller system, but at a larger scale.
INFILTRATION CHAMBERCISTERNUNDERGROUNDSTORAGERESERVOIR3FIGUREOrange Memorial ParkWater Capture Profile DiagramDisclaimer: Profile schematic is not to scale.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 11 June 2019
Below is a summary of the projected performance of the Project based on the volume of
surface water treated (acre-feet), sediment removed (tons), and PCB and mercury
reductions (g). It summarizes the two underground storage reservoir systems: the 3.0 acre-
feet cistern/infiltration chamber system; and the 7.5 acre-feet cistern/infiltration chamber
system.
Table 1. Summary of Performance for the Two Proposed Cistern/Infiltration Systems
Two Proposed
Cistern/Infiltration Chamber
Systems
Volume (acre-feet) Sediment (tons) PCB (g) Hg (g)
4,003 1,105 106 354
Volume
Treated % Sediment
Removed % PCBs
Removed % Hg
Removed %
3.0 Acre-Feet Cistern/Infiltration
Chamber System
322 8.0% 55.7 5.0% 5.14 4.8% 15.5 4.4%
7.5 Acre-Feet Cistern/Infiltration
Chamber System
564 14.1% 101 9.1% 10.2 9.5% 30.6 8.6%
Source: Lotus Water 2018.
After pretreatment and storage in the cistern, water would be pumped from the cistern on
an as-needed basis for additional carbon filtration and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection. The
additional filtration and UV disinfection would occur inside a water quality polishing and
disinfection shed before being distributed throughout the Park and along a portion of
Centennial Trail to satisfy irrigation demands. The dedicated equipment shed would
measure approximately 15 feet by 20 feet and one-story high would house the carbon and
UV treatment and distribution equipment and a control panel (Figure 3). The irrigation
pump and equipment shed would be located along the western boundary of the ballfields
and to the northeast of the large covered picnic area.
Installation of the pretreatment structure and diversion pipe near the open picnic area
would involve excavation and trenching that would occur up to one month. Excavation and
installation of the underground storage reservoir would require the temporary closure of
the baseball fields for between 9 to 12 months. During construction, the two ballfields
would be secured with construction fencing and closed to the public. Construction of the
entire proposed Project is anticipated to last 12 to 18 months.
11. Project Construction and Schedule:
Project construction would involve mobilization, clearing, excavation, ground disturbance,
and installation of water capture and treatment structures; heavy equipment operation;
staging areas for equipment parking and material storage; and truck traffic on haul routes.
Project implementation and phasing schedule is summarized below.
Grading and Ground Disturbance
The proposed Project would involve mobilization and clearing and grubbing (removing
parts of the ballfield amenities and re-routing any existing irrigation piping). It would also
involve excavation and trenching activities associated with the construction of the water
infiltration, cistern, storage, and reuse systems. Excavation would encompass
approximately 1.0 to 2.5 acres (maximum scenario) beneath the two ballfields, not
including the excavation for the drop inlet and pretreatment structure near the western
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 12 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
end of the Park, which would require excavation. The diversion pipe would be trenched
through the open picnic area closest to Colma Creek. Most excavation would be needed to
install the underground storage reservoir (i.e. infiltration chamber and cistern system)
approximately 6 to 8 feet bgs of the two ballfields. Dewatering is unlikely during
installation of the underground storage reservoir, as groundwater was encountered at a
depth of 18 feet bgs in the ballfields (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). If dewatering
were necessary, this water would be discharged into the Colma Creek Channel.
Given the amount of soils that would be excavated for the underground storage reservoir,
excavated materials would be managed off site. Also, depending on the cistern/infiltration
chamber storage system selected during final design, 4,800 to 12,000 cubic yards of soil
would potentially be exported during construction activities, requiring approximately 350
to 700 total truck trips, depending on the size of haul truck used (e.g., capacity of 10 cubic
yards to 15 cubic yards). For soil removal, the City estimates up to 30 to 40 trucks trips
would potentially occur per day to remove at most 600 cubic yards per day of soil over an
approximate one month period. Export of excavated soil would also occur between 10:00
a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to avoid peak transportation periods.
Excess soils designated non-hazardous would be staged for future reuse at an abandoned
and vacant parcel located in the northwest portion of the Park. The vacant parcel is
accessed via Eucalyptus Avenue and Tennis Drive and contains approximately 2.5 acres for
storage for staging construction equipment, materials, and excavated soil. Soils requiring
offsite disposal would be transported and disposed pursuant to applicable laws and
regulations. Other onsite Project activities would include installing and connecting the
storm water diversion pipe needed to convey stormwater to and from the main
underground storage reservoir and construction of necessary diversion, the pipe inlet
structure, baffle box, flow splitter, and irrigation structures. These installations would
involve the excavation and removal of an additional 1,000 cubic yards of soil near the
western end of the Park and near the open picnic area. Approximately 3 to 5 truck trips
would potentially occur per day to remove up to 100 cubic yards of soil per day over a one
month period.
Construction Equipment and Staging Areas
The proposed Project would require the use of construction equipment such as excavators,
bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders, single- or double-axle dump trucks, concrete
ready-mix trucks, concrete pump trucks, flat-bed semi-tractor/trailers, and cranes. This
equipment, along with other construction contractor vehicles, would be staged in the paved
Park parking lots accessible from Memorial Drive or within the immediate vicinity of the
two ballfields within the Park property. All work shall be conducted such that construction
activities would not interfere unnecessarily with other areas of the Park. This equipment
would be delivered and staged along Memorial Drive for approximately 12 months. Project
materials and underground storage reservoir components would also be delivered to the
site over a two-month period.
Memorial Drive and West Orange Avenue would not be closed or partially closed to traffic
except for a lane closure adjacent to the Park on a few occasions. At a minimum, one-way
traffic would also be maintained along Memorial Drive to ensure the multi-family residents
can access the Park Lane Apartment complex. The construction contractor would make its
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 13 June 2019
own arrangement for off-site storage of equipment and worker parking, if necessary.
Currently, most construction contractor equipment and parking would occur on the City-
owned and fenced off vacant parcel located in the northwest portion of the Park, and
limited parking for contractor workers and equipment would occur along Memorial Drive
near the southern portion of the Park near the two ballfields.
Construction Haul Routes
The proposed Project would require the delivery and removal of materials at the
construction staging areas. Materials delivery and concrete trucks supporting construction
activities at the Park would access the Project site either: via Interstate 280 (I-280) to
Westborough Boulevard to El Camino Real to West Orange Avenue to Memorial Drive; or
via Interstate 380 (I-380) to El Camino Real to West Orange Avenue to Memorial Drive. The
parking spaces along Memorial Drive immediately adjacent to the two ballfields would
potentially be temporarily displaced as they would be used to store a crane pad or as a
location for construction equipment staging. Materials delivery trucks and other heavy
construction equipment supporting the Project would access the construction staging areas
via Memorial Drive. No improvements to Memorial Drive or other access roads are
proposed following construction. However, if Memorial Drive or West Orange Avenue are
damaged due to construction equipment and the haul trucks needed to remove the
excavated soil, road repairs would be required.
Construction Schedule
Construction of the proposed Project is anticipated to begin in early 2020 and would
continue for approximately 12 to 14 months. The excavation, construction, and installation
of the underground storage reservoir, diversion channel, and pipe inlet structure would
occur first followed by the installation of the drop inlet.
Approximately 25 to 30 construction workers would work during project construction. All
construction activities would occur between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Monday through Friday; 9
a.m. and 8 p.m. on Saturdays; and 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays and Holidays; consistent
with the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) Chapter 8.32, Noise
Regulations, unless alternate schedules are approved by the City.
The proposed Project would be constructed in six phases:
• Phase 1: Staging, clearing and grubbing, and mobilization
• Phase 2: Excavation and export of excess soil
• Phase 3: Installation of large underground storage reservoir (cistern and infiltration
system)
• Phase 4: Installation of the diversion pipe , pretreatment structure, and flow splitter
• Phase 5: Installation of cistern and infiltration reservoirs (subgrade installations)
and construction of water quality polishing and disinfection shed (aboveground
construction)
• Phase 6: Restoration of ballfields (backfilling/grading/installation of new turf)
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 14 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The precise construction schedule depends on the timing of project entitlements and
approvals. Once Project construction is complete, the two ballfields would be restored with
new turf fields.
12. Operations and Maintenance:
Operations and maintenance of the Project would include cleaning out the grit
chamber/trash screen and the baffle box up to four times annually; filtration and
disinfection equipment maintenance annually; and weekly checks on the irrigation reuse
system. Even with the grit chamber and baffle box, small amounts of suspended sediment
would potentially settle out over time inside the cistern. The cistern would have two access
hatches, one on either end of its rectangular configuration that would allow for sediment to
be rinsed and vacuumed out every five to 10 years. Proposed maintenance activities
involve:
• Removal of debris and other obstructions from the diversion, as needed;
• Maintain fences on channel banks; and
• Graffiti abatement, as needed.
The City of South San Francisco is in the process of developing an Operations and
Maintenance Plan with the San Mateo County Flood Control District for the proposed
Project improvements.
13. Public Outreach Process:
The proposed Project has involved a robust outreach process. An Outreach Plan was
prepared and implemented to engage the community and stakeholders and to build
consensus for stormwater capture and treatment improvements within Orange Memorial
Park that meet or exceed the goals established by funding and oversight agencies. The
outreach process explored alternatives for potential park enhancements, including water
reuse, while also minimizing recreation impacts within the Park.
Five outreach meetings were also held to gather feedback and prioritize stakeholder goals
and concerns. Outreach included the formation of a Steering Committee comprised of staff
from the City of South San Francisco Parks & Recreation Department, San Mateo County
Flood Control District, and two adjacent land owners. Once the three different project
alternatives were developed, the outreach meetings were held to introduce the concepts to
a Steering Committee, Environmental Subcommittee, Colma Creek Citizens Advisory
Committee, Parks & Recreation Committee, and the public. The selection of the in-park
water reuse system alternative was accepted by the City Council in November 2018.
Based on the outreach process, City staff recommended selection of the in-park water reuse
system alternative with cisterns constructed under the softball and baseball fields. This
alternative selection was presented to the Steering Committee and the Environmental
Subcommittee in October 2018. During this time, the Steering Committee requested
additional Park recreational improvements including new dugouts, bleachers, lighting, and
a scoreboard.
These additional recreation improvements are outlined to be constructed in two phases
under a separate and subsequent project referred to as the Orange Memorial Park Sports
Field Renovation project summarized in the City’s 2018-2019 Capital Improvement
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 15 June 2019
Program. The City proposes to provide the recreation and ballfield renovation
improvements as part of a separate project that would occur after completion and
implementation of the Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project given the ballfield
improvements project has separate funding, recreation improvements, and design
components.
14. Existing Setting:
The Project site covers approximately 1.5 acres
within the 28-acre Orange Memorial Park.
Project access is provided via Memorial Drive to
the south. Existing development consists of park
facilities including two ballfields (i.e. one
baseball field, one softball field), tennis courts, a
playground, recreation center, pool, and open
picnic areas. The Project site is surrounded by
urban residential development in all directions.
Colma Creek is a concrete-lined channel that
traverses the southern half of Orange Memorial
Park near two ballfields (Photo 1). Land use near
Colma Creek is largely comprised of urban,
industrial, and residential development. The
nearest sensitive receptors consist of single-
family residences situated approximately 70 feet to the east on the other side of West
Orange Avenue and multi-family residences at Park Lane Apartments to the west of the
Park and south of Colma Creek channel. Centennial Dog Park and Boys and Girls Club of
South San Francisco are located to the south on the opposite side of Memorial Drive. Los
Cerritos Elementary School is located southeast of West Orange Avenue.
Centennial Way Trail runs along the south side of the Park. The overall site topography is
level, and the surface water flows generally from west to east. The Project site also has
exterior lighting throughout the Park and sports field nighttime lighting around the softball
field located in the southeast corner of the Park.
Orange Memorial Park
Orange Memorial Park is owned and operated by
the South San Francisco Recreation & Parks
Department. At approximately 28 acres, it is the
largest developed park in the City of South San
Francisco and contains a full range of active and
passive recreation uses (Photo 2). The existing
Park is roughly bisected by the Colma Creek
drainage channel; the north and south portions
of the Park are connected via two pedestrian
bridge crossings. Park facilities on the north side
include: the Joseph A. Fernekes Recreation
Building; a soccer field; two basketball courts; six
Photo 2. Orange Memorial Park contains a
variety of active and passive recreational
amenities, including an open picnic area
with grass lawn.
Photo 1. The Project site is located along
Colma Creek, a concrete lined channel that
traverses the southern half of Orange
Memorial Park near two ballfields (left).
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 16 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
bocce ball courts; five tennis courts; skate park; indoor pool; two children’s playgrounds;
community art studios; and a sculpture garden. There is also an abandoned lot located in
the northeast portion of the park. Park facilities on the south side include: a baseball field;
softball field; children’s playground; and an open picnic area with a large shelter/shade
structure (see Figure 2; Photo 3). Most of the ground surface on the south side of the park
contains one to four feet of imported fill material on top of native soil. Imported fill
material was likely placed to create a level recreational surface for landscaping and the two
ballfields.
Five group picnic areas that can be reserved to accommodate 20 to 150 people are located
next to the ballfields. The Park also serves as the location for major community wide
events, including: baseball and softball games and tournaments; Farmers Markets; car
shows, and other public and private events, such as Concert in the Park, Day in the Park,
Streets Alive!; Parks Alive!; and Movie Nights in the Park. While most of these special
events occur within the northern portion of the Park at the soccer fields, Joseph A.
Fernekes Building, and basketball and tennis courts, the Concert in the Park (in September)
takes place on all of the park sport fields, and various picnic season events (March to
October) occur at the five group picnic areas in the southern portion of the Park. Parking is
provided along Tennis Drive, Memorial Drive, and within a parking lot located between the
Joseph A. Fernekes Recreation Building and tennis courts.
While the Los Cerritos Elementary School does
not regularly use the park, frequent school
pedestrian and vehicle traffic exists near the
ballfields given its proximity to the Park. The
softball field at the southern corner of the Park
near West Orange Avenue is the only field with
nighttime lighting. The basketball courts, tennis
courts, and bocce ball courts also have nighttime
lighting.
The South San Francisco Farmer’s Market is held
every Saturday from 10:00 am to 2:00pm from
May through October. It is located in the parking
lot between the tennis courts and Joseph A.
Fernekes Recreation Building. The Park also hosts
an annual family-oriented Concert in the Park, a
community event that occurs within the southern park area.
15. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
North – Low Density Residential Land Use
South – Medium Density Residential and Park and Recreation Land Use
West – High Density Residential Land Use
East – Medium and Low Density Residential Use
Photo 3. The proposed Project involves the
installation of water capture facility with
large underground storage chambers
located beneath two ballfields in the Park.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 17 June 2019
16. Other Public Agencies whose Approval is Required:
The City of South San Francisco is the Lead Agency under CEQA responsible for approving
and carrying out the proposed Project. After City approvals (certification of the MND and
MMRP, and approval of the Project), the following federal, state, and local permits and
approvals would be required.
Agency Approval Required
Federal
United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Confirmation of No Effect with United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
United States Army Corps of Engineers • Clean Water Act 404 Permit
State
San Francisco Bay RWQCB • NPDES General Construction Permit
• Dewatering Permit
• CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification
• Waste Discharge Permit
State Historic Preservation Office • Section 106 National Historic Preservation
Act
• USACE must consult with the State Historic
Preservation Officer and Native American
Tribes if prehistoric, historic, or
archaeological sites are affected
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife
• Section 1600 Notification of Streambed
Alteration Agreement
Local
San Mateo County Flood Control
District
• Plan Review for portion of the Project within
the Colma Creek Flood Control Channel (i.e.
drop inlet)
City of South San Francisco • Grading Permit
• Building Permit
• Tree Removal Permit
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 18 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This section contains the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of the
CEQA Guidelines. The environmental checklist form is used to describe the impacts of the
proposed Project. A brief summary of the environmental setting and an impact analysis
discussion follows each environmental topic identified in the checklist. Included in each
discussion are project-specific mitigation measures recommended, as appropriate, as part
of the proposed Project. The following designations are used:
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires
mitigation to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.
Less-Than-Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant
under CEQA relative to existing City of South San Francisco thresholds.
No Impact: The Project would not have any impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The proposed Project would potentially adversely affect the following six environmental
resources. These are all considered “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as
indicated by the checklist.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards / Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities / Service
Systems
Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
None None with Mitigation
Incorporated
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 20 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the
parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported
if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A
“No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors
as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive 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 impact may occur,
then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially
significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially
Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may
be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when
the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies
where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from
“Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency
must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as
described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify
the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were
incorporated or refined from the 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 sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances).
Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate,
include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 21 June 2019
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or 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 checklist
that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance.
City of South San Francisco Project Review Process
The proposed Project is identified in the City’s 2018-2019 Capital Improvement Program
(CIP). The CIP outlines the planned and needed infrastructure improvements throughout
the community. It consists of short and long-term plans for projects related to the City’s
infrastructure and projects are categorized into six areas: streets, storm drains, sanitary
sewers, public facilities, parks, and traffic improvements. The program is the result of
collaboration among various departments outlining the needed improvements and the
priority for implementation of these projects. The City’s Engineering Department, Parks &
Recreation Department, and Planning Department have helped plan, design, and
implement the proposed Project. Environmental protection measures identified through
staff review of the Project, and any additional ones identified through the public review
process, become required of the project as a matter of law pursuant to the South San
Francisco Municipal Code. The City’s Planning Commission also reviews the CIP prior to the
City Council review and makes a recommendation whether it is consistent with the General
Plan.
Prior to project approval and construction, all City departments and divisions review the
proposed Project design and engineering plans for compliance with any conditions added
pursuant to the public review process. Given the proposed Project is a City CIP, grading or
demolition permits are would be issued by the City’s Engineering Division or Planning
Department. The 15 by 20 foot, single-story water quality polishing and disinfection shed
would require a building permit (for structures larger than 10 feet by 12 feet). This process
specifically applies to CIPs, such as the Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 22 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
I. AESTHETICS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code section 21099 (where aesthetic impacts shall not be
considered significant for qualifying residential, mixed-use residential, and employment centers), 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) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project
is in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
There are no designated scenic vistas visible from
the Project site, and the surrounding vicinity does
not contain any designated historic buildings, rock
outcroppings, or scenic highways. The nearest
designated scenic highway is Interstate Route
280, which is located approximately 1.30 miles
west of the Project site (Caltrans 2018). One of the
most predominant visual features visible from the
Park is the surrounding rolling hills with native
vegetation, notably South San Francisco’s famous
Sign Hill located to the northeast (Photo 4).
Orange Memorial Park is visible from several
elevated viewing points of Sign Hill Park, as well as from neighborhoods which contain
public streets and other viewing locations situated on the slope.
Photo 4. Sign Hill Park and sparsely
vegetated hillsides serve as the scenic
surroundings of Orange Memorial Park.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 23 June 2019
Park features within the Project site include a
children’s playground, trees of various species,
an open picnic area, and two ballfields (Photo
5). Public views of the Project site are visible
from the Boys and Girls Club approximately
150 feet south of Orange Memorial Park’s ball
fields, and from Los Cerritos Elementary
School, approximately 600 feet from the Park’s
southwest edge. The Park is bordered by high,
medium, and low density single-family
neighborhoods less than 100 feet to the north,
south, east, and west.
The Project site is highly visible from the
neighborhoods that border the Park on the
southeast edge where there is less tree cover.
These neighborhoods are located along West Orange Avenue, which are situated less than
approximately 70 feet from the ball fields. The Project vicinity is also clearly visible from
the Centennial Way bicycle and pedestrian trail, which lies adjacent to the Park to the west
and south. A vacant undeveloped lot is located within the northwest side of the Park that
was formerly a greenhouse parcel used for commercially-grown carnations. Views of Colma
Creek from the Park, parking lot, residential areas, and surrounding streets are limited due
to a four- to five-foot tall chain-link fence that borders the concrete channel and the upper
edges of the concrete channel. Water is visible in the creek to viewers passing over the
concrete channel via West Orange Avenue and over the two pedestrian bridges located in
the Park.
There are many landscaped areas within the
vicinity of the Project site, including expansive
grass fields, clusters of bushes, and extensive
stands of various species of trees (Photo 6).
Eucalyptus trees ranging from 50 to 100 feet
tall surround the Park’s picnic grounds and
Colma Creek and are the largest grove of tall
trees in the Project vicinity. Linear formations
of trees extend along Memorial Drive adjacent
to the Park’s baseball fields and adjoin the
Joseph A. Fernekes Recreation building and
children’s playgrounds. A combination of
eucalyptus and palm trees line the creek
channel as well as surround the Park’s open
fields, including approximately 20 palm trees
that line nearly 400 feet of the creek from the center of the Park to its intersection with
West Orange Avenue. Trees and planting areas are also present within the Park’s three
parking lots. In particular, the parking lot accessible from Memorial Drive is lined with
sections of mature trees including clusters of eucalyptus trees that separate the western
boundary of the Park from the Park Lane Apartments. Shade structures and additional
Photo 6. Landscaped areas within the
Project site include expansive grass fields,
clusters of bushes, and stands of trees that
line the Park.
Photo 5. Park features within the Project site
include a children’s playground, trees of
various species, an open picnic area, and
two ballfields.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 24 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
trees also surrounding the picnic areas, tennis courts, and a recreational building within
the Park.
Land uses in the Project vicinity are predominantly residential, commercial, and
recreational. Existing nighttime light is generated from a majority of the Park’s facilities,
notably the baseball and softball fields illuminated for evening sports activity. Additional
sources of nighttime light include the Park’s five tennis courts, two basketball courts,
playground, community art studios, skate park, recreational building, and picnic areas. The
Park also contains lights to illuminate its pathways and parking lots during nighttime
hours. Existing light sources in the Project vicinity consist of streetlights that illuminate the
roads, indoor lighting from nearby residences, and light posts in parking lots of the
surrounding commercial areas.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less than Significant Impact. Project construction would involve: excavation, grading
and ground disturbance; heavy equipment operation and staging areas for equipment
parking and material storage; and additional truck traffic on haul routes. Short-term visual
impacts due to construction would occur; however, proposed Project infrastructure would
be almost entirely underground except for the 15 by 20 foot, single-story water quality
polishing and disinfection shed and irrigation pump. The shed and pump would be visible
within the southern portion of the Park near the open picnic areas and two ballfields. The
shed would be a single-story, not larger than the existing picnic structures within the Park,
similar to the architectural style and color of the adjacent picnic structures, and would be
consistent the existing visual character of the Park. Although short-term construction of the
Project would be visible from viewing points in and around Sign Hill Park, no scenic
resources or designated scenic vistas would be substantially affected by the Project. The
small shed would not block existing views of surrounding landscaping onsite or
surrounding landforms in the distance. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project
would result in a less than significant impact on scenic vistas.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no designated state scenic highways within or
adjacent to the Project site and Project construction would take place entirely within the
boundary of Orange Memorial Park. The nearest scenic highway is Interstate Route 280,
which runs approximately 1.3 miles west of the Project area (Caltrans 2018); the Project
site is not visible from Interstate Route 280. Implementation of the Project would involve
the removal of two eucalyptus trees protected by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance, as
discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources. According to the City’s Tree Preservation
Ordinance, Blue Gum (Eucalyptus globulus) with a circumference of 30 inches or more
when measured at 54 inches above natural grade are protected in the City. One of the
eucalyptus trees is located on the west end of the project area near the vacant City parcel; it
measures 42 inches diameter at breast height (dbh). The other tree is located on the east
end of the project area near the ballfield; it measures 48 inches dbh. Both trees measure
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 25 June 2019
approximately 60 to 70 feet tall. Given only two eucalyptus trees would potentially be
removed, in addition to several smaller trees (less than 4 inches dbh) and dozens of large
protected and heritage trees line Colma Creek and are planted throughout the park, this
limited tree removal would not substantially damage scenic resources within the Park.
Tree removal for the Project would be conducted pursuant to the Chapter 13.30 Tree
Preservation in the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, implementation of the Project would
result in a less than significant impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the
project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact. Project construction activities would require excavating
approximately 4,800 to 12,000 cubic yards of soil for the installation of the underground
storage reservoir, and the use of construction equipment and storage of materials on site
along Memorial Drive. These activities would introduce short-term contrasting features
into the visual landscape that would affect the visual quality of the Park and its
surroundings. Contrasting features would include excavated areas, stockpiled soils, and
other materials generated and stored on site during construction. Adverse effects to the
visual character of the Park associated with Project construction would be temporary and
the existing ballfields would be regraded and restored to existing landform topographical
contours upon Project completion. Therefore, implementation of the Project would result
in a less than significant impact on scenic quality.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. Construction activities would not occur during nighttime hours. However,
temporary security lighting would potentially be installed at the Project site during the 12-
to 18-month construction period. Any temporary security lighting, which typically operates
24 hours a day, would be directed downward and towards the site to limit spillover light
impacts on nearby residences. It would also be removed upon completion of construction.
Therefore, Project construction would not adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in
the area by introducing a substantial light source that would affect sensitive receptors. The
temporary presence of low-level security lighting also would not contribute to a significant
increase in lighting, as the level would be comparable to existing streetlights and light poles
to illuminate walkways in the vicinity. No source of glare would be introduced as a result of
construction of the proposed Project and no substantial source of light would be
introduced upon Project completion as most of the components would be buried
underground. Therefore, no impacts related to light and glare and nighttime views of the
area would occur.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 26 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as
updated) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland.
In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and
Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology
provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Would the project:
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 non-agricultural 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 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 forest land or conversion
of forest land 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 non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located within Orange Memorial Park, in an urbanized area of the City of
South San Francisco, surrounded by residential and commercial development. There are no
existing agricultural or forestry resources on the Project site or in the vicinity. Historically,
the Project vicinity supported several greenhouses utilized by carnation-growing company
Mazzanti Carnations, Inc., but operations ceased in 1996 when the land was purchased by
the City for the expansion of Park facilities (City of South San Francisco 2007). The Project
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 27 June 2019
site is designated as “Parks and Recreation” by the City’s General Plan (City of South San
Francisco 1999; City of South San Francisco Planning Division 2015). The areas
surrounding Orange Memorial Park are designated as High, Medium, or Low Density
Residential; no parcels within the Project vicinity are zoned for agricultural use (City of
South San Francisco Planning Division 2015).
The Project site is mapped under the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as “Urban and Built-Up land”. The Project site is
not under a Williamson Act contract, and no agricultural land uses are present within the
Project vicinity (California Department of Conservation 2016). The Project site does not
contain any soils that consist of farmland of statewide importance (USDA 2018)
IMPACT ANALYSIS
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 non-agricultural use?
No Impact. The proposed Project site is an urban City park, and the surrounding vicinity
is not zoned for agricultural use, nor mapped as prime, unique, or farmland of statewide
importance (Department of Conservation 2016). No impacts on agricultural resources
would occur.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act
contract?
No Impact. The proposed Project site is an urban City park, and the surrounding vicinity
is not zoned for agricultural use or under a Williamson Act contract (Department of
Conservation 2016). The Project would not convert farmland to non-agricultural uses. The
Project vicinity is not located near or within an area that is zoned for timberland
production. No impacts on agricultural resources would occur.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (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))?
No Impact. The proposed Project site is an urban City park, and the surrounding vicinity
is not zoned for agricultural use. The Project is not located near or within an area that is
zoned for timberland production. No impacts on agricultural resources would occur.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or convert
forest land to a non-forest use. The proposed Project involves the installation of a water
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 28 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
capture facility within the Park. Therefore, no impacts on agricultural resources would
occur.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not involve changes in the environment that
could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest to
non-forest use. Therefore, no impacts on agricultural resources would occur.
III. AIR QUALITY
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or
air pollution control district may be relied on to make the following determinations.
Are significance criteria established by the
applicable air district available to rely on for
significance determinations?
Yes No
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The federal and state governments have identified six criteria air pollutants and a range of
air toxics to protect the public health and welfare, and have established ambient air quality
standards (AAQS) through the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and the California Clean Air Act.
Federal and state criteria air pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen
oxides (NOx), ozone (O3), particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10), fine
particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), and sulfur dioxide (SO2).
The proposed Project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (Basin), which
includes all of Napa, Contra Costa, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, and
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 29 June 2019
Marin Counties, the southern portion of Sonoma County, and the western portion of Solano
County. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) monitors and regulates
the local air quality in the Basin through the implementation of the Bay Area 2017 Clean
Air Plan (BAAQMD 2017a). The BAAQMD operates 32 air monitoring stations over the
Basin’s nine counties. The monitoring station closest to the Project site is located in San
Francisco approximately 8.2 miles north of the Project site. The station monitors O3, NOx,
CO, PM10, and PM2.5 (BAAQMD 2018a). The BAAQMD identifies the federal and state AAQS
(NAAQS and CAAQS, respectively) as well as the Bay Area’s attainment status for each
relevant air pollutant. Areas that do not meet the NAAQS or CAAQS are known as
nonattainment areas. The region is in nonattainment for the state standards for O3, PM10,
and PM2.5, and federal standards for O3 and PM2.5. The Basin is in attainment or unclassified
for all other criteria air pollutants (BAAQMD 2018b).
The topography of the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) features coastal
mountain ranges, valleys, and bays. The air quality within the Basin is influenced by a wide
range of emission sources, such as heavy vehicular traffic, industry, weather, and dense
population centers within its cities. The City of South San Francisco is located in San Mateo
County in the Peninsula region of the San Francisco Bay Area. Sensitive receptors to air
quality conditions within the Project vicinity include single-family residences along West
Orange Avenue and at the Park Lane Apartment buildings, as well as faculty, staff and
students at the Boys and Girls Club and Los Cerritos Elementary School. The closest
sensitive receptors to air quality emissions are the single-family residences along West
Orange Avenue and the multi-family residences at the Park Lane Apartments, both of which
are located approximately 70 feet from the Project site.
Emissions Thresholds
Air quality impacts are assessed by comparing impacts to baseline air quality levels and
applicable ambient air quality standards. Federal and state air quality standards have been
established for criteria air pollutants. Standards are levels of air quality considered safe
from a regulatory perspective, including an adequate margin of safety, to protect public
health and welfare. The BAAQMD recommends that projects with construction and
operation emissions that exceed any of the following emissions thresholds outlined in
Table 2 should be considered potentially significant.
Table 2. BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant
Construction Operation
Average Daily Emissions
(lbs/day)
Average Daily
Emissions (lbs/day)
Maximum Annual
Emissions (tons/year)
ROG 54 54 10
NOx 54 54 10
PM10 82 82 15
PM2.5 54 54 10
Source: BAAQMD, CEQA Guidelines, May 2017a
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 30 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Less than Significant. The SFBAAB is currently designated as in nonattainment for
federal and state ozone, federal and state particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter
(PM2.5), and state particulate matter 10 microns in diameter (PM10) standards. The SFBAAB
is designated in attainment or is unclassified for all other AAQS, and on January 9, 2013, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued a final rule to determine that the Bay
Area has attained the 24-hour PM2.5 federal AAQS, but must continue to be designated as
nonattainment for the federal PM2.5 AAQS until the BAAQMD submits a redesignation
request and a maintenance plan to the USEPA, and the USEPA approves the proposed
redesignation.
Due to the nonattainment designations in the Bay Area, the BAAQMD periodically prepares
air quality plans that provide emission reduction strategies to achieve attainment of the
AAQS, including control strategies to reduce air pollutant emissions via regulations,
incentives, education, and agency partnerships. The most recent air quality plans were
prepared in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The latest federal ozone plan is the 2001
Ozone Attainment Plan, adopted on October 24, 2001 and approved by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) on November 1, 2001, and submitted for approval to the USEPA
on November 30, 2001 (BAAQMD 2001). The most recent state ozone plan is the 2017
Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate, adopted on April 19, 2017. The 2017 Clean
Air Plan provides a regional strategy to protect public health and protect the climate
(BAAQMD 2017a). The 2017 plan also includes a wide range of control measures designed
to decrease emissions of the air pollutants most harmful to Bay Area residents, such as
particulate matter, ozone, and toxic air contaminants (TACs), and to reduce emission of
greenhouse gases (GHGs) that are climate pollutants. While a plan for achieving the State
PM10 standard is not required, the BAAQMD has also prioritized measures to reduce
particulate matter in developing the control strategy for the 2017 Clean Air Plan and this
strategy provides the framework of the BAAQMD’s particulate matter control program.
Adopted BAAQMD rules and regulations as well as the threshold of significance have been
developed with the intent to ensure continued attainment of AAQS, or to work towards
attainment of AAQS for which the area is currently designated nonattainment, consistent
with applicable air quality plans. The BAAQMD’s established significance thresholds
associated with development projects for emissions of the ozone precursors reactive
organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), as well as for PM10 and PM2.5, expressed
in pounds per day (lbs/day) and tons per year (tons/year) are summarized in Table 3.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 31 June 2019
Table 3. National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging Time CAAQS NAAQS
Primary Secondary
Ozone (O3) a 1-Hour 0.09 ppm (180
µg/m3)
NS NS
8-Hour 0.070 ppm (137
µg/m3)
0.075 ppm (147
µg/m3)
Same as primary
Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM10) 24-Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Same as primary
Annual 20 µg/m3 NS NS
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24-Hour No separate State
standard
35 µg/m3 Same as primary
Annual 12 µg/m3 15.0 µg/m3 Same as primary
Carbon monoxide (CO) 1-Hour 20 ppm
(23,000 µg/m3)
35 ppm
(40,000 µg/m3)
NS
8-Hour 9.0 ppm
(10,000 µg/m3)
9 ppm
(10,000 µg/m3)
NS
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) b 1-Hour 0.18 ppm
(339 µg/m3)
0.100 ppm
(189 µg/m3)
NS
Annual 0.030 ppm
(57 µg/m3)
0.053 ppm
(100 µg/m3)
Same as primary
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) c 1-Hour 0.25 ppm
(655 µg/m3)
NS NS
3-Hour NS NS 0.5 ppm
1,300 µg/m3)
24-Hour 0.04 ppm
(105 µg/m3)
0.14 ppm
(365 µg/m3)
NS
Annual NS 0.030 ppm
(80 µg/m3)
NS
Lead (Pb) d 30-Day Average 1.5 µg/m3 NS NS
Calendar Quarter NS 1.5 µg/m3 Same as primary
Rolling 3- Month
Average
NS 0.15 µg/m3 Same as primary
Source: CARB, 2010
Notes:
a On January 19, 2010, the EPA released a proposed rule to strengthen the 8-hour primary O3 NAAQS to a level within the range of
0.060 to 0.070 parts per million by volume (ppmv). It also proposed to establish a cumulative, seasonal secondary O3 NAAQS within
the range of 7 to 15 ppm-hours. (75 FR 2938)
b On February 9, 2010, the EPA finalized a rule to supplement the current annual NO2 standard by establishing a new 1-hour NO2
standard at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of the
1-hour daily maximum concentrations. (75 FR 6474)
c On June 2, 2010, the EPA finalized rule to establish a new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS of 75 parts per billion by volume, based on the 3- year
average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The EPA also revoked both the existing 24- hour and
annual primary SO2 standards. The final rule is effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
d On November 12, 2008, the EPA revised the primary lead standard to 0.15 µg/m3 and revised the averaging period to a rolling 3 -
month period with a not-to-be-exceeded form, evaluated over a 3-year period. (73 FR 66964)
Key:
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NS = no standard
ppm = parts per million
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 32 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The BAAQMD California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines (2017b) provide
thresholds of significance for construction and operation-related activities (BAAQMD
2017b). If project emissions are less than the BAAQMD emission thresholds for ROG, NOx,
or PM10, then emissions are considered to be less than significant and compliant with the
measures in the applicable air quality plans. Proposed operational activities associated
with the proposed water capture facility would not exceed the BAAQMD’s emission
thresholds. A quantitative analysis of emissions and necessary mitigation measures are
described in further detail in Section III(b). Because operational activities would not exceed
the BAAQMD’s emission thresholds, the proposed Project would not conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans, such as the federal, 2001 Ozone
Attainment Plan and the BAAQMD’s 2017 Clean Air Plan. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal
or state ambient air quality standard?
Less than Significant. As discussed above, the SFBAAB is currently designated as in
nonattainment for federal and state ozone, federal and state particulate matter 2.5 microns
in diameter (PM2.5), and the state particulate matter 10 microns in diameter (PM10)
standard. Short-term construction emissions would result from activities during site
preparation and mobilization (site clearing), grading and excavation, construction and
installation of the underground storage reservoir, and final backfilling, grading, and
irrigation installation. These emissions would be primarily from mobile on-road sources
such as worker trips, material and equipment delivery trucks, and haul truck trips, and
from mobile off-road sources, such as excavators, dozers, backhoes, cranes, water trucks,
and other equipment.
Short-term emissions resulting from construction activities were calculated based on
installation of the 7.5 acre-feet cistern/infiltration storage system (also referred to as the
underground storage reservoir; larger system) and a worse-case scenario, where
equipment runs simultaneously for 8 hours/day. This approach assumes maximum daily
operating time for all equipment assigned during each construction phase. Construction
emissions were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod®).
CalEEMod provides a uniform platform to estimate potential emissions resulting from
construction and operation activities of land use projects (California Air Pollution Control
Officer’s Association [CAPCOA] 2016). Maximum daily emissions of criteria pollutants
associated with construction activities including earthwork, haul trucks, and worker
commuting are provided in Table 4. Table 4 also summarizes emissions for total
unmitigated emission and basic mitigated emissions, including all the emission reduction
measures required by the BAAQMD. Annual operational emissions are listed in Table 5.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 33 June 2019
Table 4. Maximum Daily Project Construction Emissions (pounds per day)
Emissions Source CO NOx ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Total Unmitigated Emissions 15.5 20.4 2.0 <1 7.2 4.3
Total Basic Mitigated Emissions1 15.5 20.4 2.0 <1 3.9 2.5
BAAQMD Threshold2 N/A 54 54 N/A 82 54
Threshold Exceeded? N/A No No N/A No No
Notes:
1 Fugitive dust assumes that exposed surfaces are watered twice daily and that speed is reduced to 15 miles per hour
on unpaved surfaces. These assumptions are consistent with the BAAQMD’s basic mitigation measures that are required
on all construction projects.
2 Thresholds for PM10 and PM2.5 apply to construction equipment exhaust only.
Table 5. Annual Project Operational Emissions (tons per year)
Emissions Source CO NOx ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Total Unmitigated Emissions <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
BAAQMD Threshold N/A 10 10 N/A 15 10
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Fugitive dust assumes that exposed surfaces are watered twice daily and that speed is reduced to 15 miles per hour
on unpaved roads. These assumptions are consistent with the BAAQMD’s basic mitigation measures that are required
on all construction projects.
Key:
CO = carbon monoxide
N/A = not applicable
NOx = oxides of nitrogen
PM10 = inhalable particulate matter
PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
SO2 = oxides of sulfur
VOC = volatile organic compounds
According to the CalEEMod results, the proposed short-term Project construction and
operation emissions would be below the applicable BAAQMD thresholds of significance.
Therefore, the proposed Project would not be considered to result in a significant short-
term air quality impact during construction or operation. The BAAQMD has also
established Basic Construction Mitigation Measures that should be implemented for all
construction projects, regardless of whether emissions exceed the thresholds of
construction. The following control measures would be implemented, as required by the
BAAQMD’s California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines (2017b), during all
construction activities at the site.
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or 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
sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 34 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. 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 [CCR]). 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
mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
• A publicly visible sign shall be posted with telephone number and person to contact
at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
While the proposed Project would result in short-term construction and operation criteria
pollutant emissions below the applicable thresholds of significance, the implementation of
these BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures would further minimize emission
impacts.
Past, present and future development projects also contribute to the Bay Area’s adverse air
quality impacts on a cumulative basis, as air pollution is largely a cumulative impact and a
single project is not sufficient in size to result in nonattainment of AAQS. Instead, a project’s
individual emissions can contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality
impacts. The thresholds of significance presented in Table 4 and Table 5 represent the
levels at which a project’s individual emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursors
would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the SFBAAB’s existing air
quality conditions. If a project exceeds the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds, the proposed
Project’s emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse
cumulative air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. Given that
construction and operation emissions would be below the applicable thresholds of
significance and the Project would implement the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation
Measures, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable
contribution the region’s existing air quality conditions. As a result, air quality impacts
would be considered less than significant.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project would be constructed in a residential
neighborhood within close proximity to sensitive receptors. Sensitive land use receptors
include residences, schools, childcare centers, playgrounds, retirement homes,
convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. Sensitive receptors to air quality
conditions within the Project vicinity include residents in nearby single-family residences
along West Orange Avenue and multi-family residences at the Park Lane Apartment
buildings, as well as faculty, staff and students at the Boys and Girls Club and Los Cerritos
Elementary School. The closest sensitive receptors to air quality emissions are the single-
family residences along West Orange Avenue and the multi-family residences at the Park
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 35 June 2019
Lane Apartments, both of which are located approximately 70 feet from the Project site. As
described in previous sections, the proposed Project would not result in significant
emissions of pollutants. However, the proposed Project construction would potentially
expose sensitive receptors to other pollutant concentrations of concern, such as CO
emissions and TAC emissions.
Localized concentrations of CO are related to the levels of traffic and congestion along
streets and nearby intersections, such as West Orange Avenue and El Camino Real. High
levels of localized CO concentrations are typically expected where background levels are
high, and traffic volumes and congestion levels are high. Emissions of CO are a potential
pollutant of concern, as the pollutant is a toxic gas that results from the incomplete
combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as gasoline. In other words, CO emissions are
related to traffic levels. The BAAQMD has established screening criteria for localized CO
emissions. A proposed project would result in a less than significant impact related to
localized CO emission concentrations if the following screening criteria are met:
• The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency
plans;
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to
more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to
more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is
substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, underpass, etc.).
According to the Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum, as discussed in further detail in
Section XVI, Transportation, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in
any impacts related to transportation or circulation (Appendix G). The proposed Project
would not interfere with an applicable congestion management program, regional
transportation plan, or local congestion management agency plans. According to the
Traffic Impact Analysis Memorandum, the maximum traffic volume that would occur
during project construction (i.e. excavation phase) would be 725 haul and worker vehicle
trips per day (Appendix G). Therefore, Project-related traffic would not increase traffic
volumes at any affected intersection to more than 24,000 or 44,000 vehicles per hour.
Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in levels of localized CO at surrounding
intersections or generate localized concentrations of CO that would exceed standards.
For TAC emissions, BAAQMD recommends that any proposed Project that includes the
siting of a new emission source or sensitive receptor assess impacts within 1,000 feet of the
project property boundary (BAAQMD 2017a). The proposed water capture facility is not
considered a sensitive receptor that would expose on-site sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations associated with any existing uses at the Park. Typical sources of
TAC emissions include, but are not limited to, freeways and high traffic roads, distribution
centers, rail yards, and distribution centers. Also, the proposed Project would not involve
land uses or operations that would be considered major sources of TACs. As such, it would
not generate any substantial pollutant concentrations during operations. While the
proposed Project’s short-term, construction-related activities could result in the generation
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 36 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
of TACs associated with off-road equipment exhaust emissions, the construction is
temporary and would occur over a relatively short duration. In summary, the proposed
Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Therefore, air quality impacts would be less than significant.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant. Common odor-generating land uses include, but are not limited to,
wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and composting facilities. The proposed Project
would not introduce these land uses, nor is the Park located in the vicinity of any such
existing land uses. Diesel fumes associated with diesel-fueled equipment and heavy-duty
haul trucks used during construction activities, however, would potentially be
objectionable. The proposed Project would not involve any land uses that generate
substantial diesel fumes, but the proposed Project’s short-term, construction-related
activities would potentially result in the generation of objectionable odors associated with
off-road equipment exhaust emissions. Although diesel fumes from construction
equipment are sometimes found to be objectionable, construction would be temporary and
activities for the proposed Project would be minimal. Construction equipment would
operate intermittently throughout the course of a day, would be restricted to daytime
hours per Title 8, Section 8.32.050 Special Provisions, of the City’s Municipal Code, and
would likely only occur over portions of the Project area at a time (City of South San
Francisco 2018a). All construction equipment and operation would also comply with
applicable BAAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air
pollutant sources. These BAAQMD rules include Regulation 7, Odorous Substances,
however; this rule does not become applicable until the Air Pollution Control Officer
(APCO) receives ten or more odor complaints within a 90-day period. If Regulation 7 goes
into effect the APCO can place limitations on odorous substances and specific emissions
from odorous compounds. Compliance with BAAQMD rules and regulations would further
minimize air pollutant emissions, as well as any associated odors, thereby minimizing the
impacts to nearby sensitive receptors along West Orange Avenue and at the Park Lane
Apartments. Therefore, potential odor effects associated with the proposed Project would
be less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 37 June 2019
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 the U.S. 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 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site covers approximately 1.5 acres within the 28-acre Orange Memorial Park.
Existing development consists of park facilities surrounded by urban residential
development in all directions and a segment of Colma Creek runs through the Park. The
reach of Colma Creek that bisects the Park consists of a vertical and trapezoidal-shaped
concrete drainage with concrete channel walls and bed (Photo 6).
Colma Creek is a perennial drainage that flows for approximately 8 miles from its
headwaters in San Bruno Mountain State and County Park. It runs through the cities of Daly
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 38 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City, Colma, and South San Francisco where it eventually discharges into San Francisco Bay.
A 5.4-mile long segment of Colma Creek consists of a concrete-lined drainage channel with
varying channel dimensions. Portions of the channel include earthen channels, channels
with concrete walls and earthen beds, and fully concrete lined channels with box culverts.
The reach of Colma Creek adjacent to the Project site consists of a modified and
constructed concrete channel that contains previously disturbed non-tidal riverine habitat.
Varying amounts of sediment accumulate across the concrete channel bed that bisects the
Park. The concrete channel in the far western portion of the Park measures 40-feet wide by
10-feet in height and transitions to 35-feet wide near the second pedestrian bridge.
For purposes of this analysis, special-status
species are defined as any plant or wildlife species
that have been listed as threatened or endangered
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), or CDFW;
recognized as a CDFW species of special concern
(SSC); or are included in the California Rare Plant
Rank (CRPR) inventory, which is maintained by
the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Special
status plant and wildlife species with the potential
to occur in the Project area were identified
through a review of the following resources:
• California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) Query;
• USFWS Information, Planning, and Consultation System (IPaC System) Report for the
Project Area
• CNPS Inventory Database
Biological reports reviewed in preparation of this section include:
• Biological Assessment for Colma Creek Flood Control Channel Maintenance Project
(Horizon 2015a)
• Wetland Delineation for the Colma Creek Flood Control Channel Maintenance Project
(Horizon 2015b)
Biological technical memorandum referenced in this section includes:
• Environmental Evaluation Memorandum for the Orange Memorial Park Water
Capture Project (includes a Biological Resources Assessment and Wetland
Delineation) (Wood 2018) (Appendix B).
The City’s General Plan does not identify any sensitive biological habitats within the
proposed Project site (City of South San Francisco 1999).
Special-status plant, reptile, amphibian, and mammal species known to occur in the vicinity
of the Project area are included in Appendix B. These species were identified using the
CNDDB Query and the USFWS IPaC report for the Project area. All these species have either
no potential to occur or are not expected to occur in the Project area because no suitable
habitat or only marginally suitable habitat is present. Although the portion of the Colma
Creek that lies within the Park is not considered suitable for fisheries, habitat for green
Photo 6. Colma Creek consists of a
perennial and intermittent drainage within a
concrete lined channel that bisects Orange
Memorial Park.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 39 June 2019
sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) does occur in the downstream, tidally-influenced portion
of Colma Creek. Downstream habitat is also present for steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
and coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) where Colma Creek drains into San Francisco Bay.
The Project site contains habitat that could be occupied by nesting birds. The Project site
also contains native trees, including western sycamore and coast live oak. Brief summaries
of these special-status species are provided below.
Fish
Green Sturgeon
Green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) is federally listed as threatened. The Project area
does not support spawning habitat for green sturgeon. Juvenile, sub-adult, and adult fish
use San Francisco Bay for feeding and other non-reproductive purposes (Heublein et al.
2009). Green sturgeon, however, are not expected to occur in the upper reaches of Colma
Creek where the stream transitions to a concrete drainage channel.
Steelhead
Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is federally listed as threatened. Two sites in Colma Creek
were sampled in September 1981 as part of a fish distribution study (Leidy 1984). No
steelhead species were collected, and the study indicates the creek was very disturbed at
the time of this study (Leidy 1984). A similar distribution study was again conducted in
2002, and no steelhead species were observed, nor was suitable habitat present (Leidy
2002). According to those studies, it was concluded that the Colma Creek watershed does
not contain suitable habitat to support salmonids. Though not expected, adult steelhead
could stray into the Project area during migration periods (typically December – March),
but are not expected to be present in the upper reaches of Colma Creek (Moyle 2002).
Coho Salmon
Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) is federally listed as endangered and state listed as an
endangered species. Coho salmon habitat occurs near shore, bays, lagoons, river mouths,
and tidal rivers. Spawning streams are mainly in areas with redwood forests as the
dominant vegetation. There is no suitable habitat for the species near the Project area.
Longfin Smelt
Longfin Smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys) is state listed as threatened and is a federal
candidate species. Larval, juvenile, and adult longfin smelt would potentially be present in
the central portion of the San Francisco Bay Estuary, but spawning does not occur in this
portion of the estuary (Robinson and Greenfield 2011). Longfin smelt are not expected to
occur in the upper reaches of Colma Creek.
Birds
California Ridgway’s Rail
The California Ridgway’s rail (Rallus obsoletus ssp. obsoletus) is a federally and California
state listed endangered species, and an fully protected species that prefers salty and
brackish water marshes vegetated with pickleweed and cordgrass. California Ridgway’s rail
has been documented directly along San Francisco Bay where brackish marshes are
present. Although Colma Creek connects the mouth of the Bay with these marshes, there is
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 40 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
no habitat within the reach of Colma Creek near the Park, or within the Park itself. Also, no
suitable habitat is present adjacent to the site due to surrounding urbanization.
Alameda Song Sparrow
Alameda song sparrows (Melospiza melodia pusillula) are a state species of concern, and a
bird of conservation concern species endemic to tidal salt marshes on the fringes of south
San Francisco Bay. They require tidal marsh habitats that have a specific configuration of
exposed ground, water and vegetation. Nesting usually occurs within upland habitat
(Shuford and Gardali 2008). As there are no tidal marshes within the survey area, this
species is not expected to be found nesting within the Park.
American Peregrine Falcon
American peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus anatum) are a bird of conservation concern
and fully protected species at their nest sites. Nesting habitat includes coastal cliffs, desert
cliffs, bridges, skyscrapers and other large buildings. Peregrine falcons are not found
nesting in trees and are not typically observed in parks. However, they prefer wide-open
spaces for foraging. There are no tidal marshes or suitable nest habitats within the site and
therefore this species is not expected to be found nesting on site.
Native Trees
Western Sycamore
Western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) is a deciduous tree that grows between 50 to 80
feet high; massive trunks can grow straight and erect but are more commonly irregular.
This species is native to California and is common along streams, in canyons, and in arroyos
in northern California. Western sycamores are used in landscaped areas such as parks as
they provide ample shade and are appealing trees. One mature western sycamore tree was
mapped within the survey area along the edge of the eucalyptus trees that are growing
along Colma Creek (Appendix B).
Coast Live Oak
Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) is an evergreen tree that grows up to 35 to 80 feet high
tall with a broad, dense crown and widely spreading branches. Coast live oak is native to
California and is naturally found along the coastal ranges from northern central California
south to northern Baja California, typically in mixed evergreen forests, foothill woodlands,
and southern oak woodland communities. Coast live oaks are also used for landscaped
areas, such as parks, as they provide shade and an aesthetic appeal. Thirteen mature coast
live oak trees were mapped within the survey area. One tree is adjacent to the playground
located in the northwestern part of the survey area, one is located along the northern bank
of the Colma Creek Flood Control Channel just east of the lower footbridge, one is part of
the landscaping adjacent to a parking lot, and the other ten trees are located along West
Orange Avenue (Appendix B).
There are also numerous protected trees within the Park, including several heritage trees
that are protected by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance line the Colma Creek channel.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 41 June 2019
Waters of the United States/Wetlands
Waters of the United States
An approximately 1,092-foot long (0.695 acre) portion of the Colma Creek flood control
drainage channel lies within the survey area, bisecting Orange Memorial Park in a
northwest to southeast direction. The bottom and sides of this part of the channel are
entirely lined with concrete. Upstream of the northwestern portion of the Park past the
pedestrian bridge, the channel is approximately 11 feet deep with vertical banks and 40
feet wide. Downstream of this bridge and continuing to Orange Avenue, the channel
narrows to 35 feet with banks that are vertical from the channel bottom up to
approximately 6 feet where they slant out at a 45-degree angle to the top of the channel.
Downstream of Orange Avenue, the concrete channel widens and becomes trapezoidal. It
then drains directly to the San Francisco Bay, a traditional navigable waterway (TNW). The
entire section of the channel within the survey area is considered Non-Wetland Waters of
the U.S. and State and under jurisdiction of the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA,
RWQCB under Section 401 of the CWA, and CDFW under Section 1602.
Wetlands/Riparian Areas
Within the survey area, the channel is unvegetated
with the exception of a narrow strip along the
northern side of the channel bottom near the
northwestern boundary of the survey area and
several of the joints at the top of the channel near
the southeastern end of the survey area (Photo 7).
The herbaceous vegetation along the channel
bottom was observed during an October 2018 site
visit, but was under water during the March 2019
site visit by Wood biologists. This vegetation was
growing in areas where patches of sediment were
present along the channel bottom. Ruderal upland
species, such as Canada horseweed (Erigeron
canadensis) were observed growing in the joints
near the top of the channel close to Orange Avenue. No riparian areas or wetlands were
identified in the Project area.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
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 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Implementation of the proposed Project would
not result in adverse effects of any species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-
status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.
According to the City’s General Plan, the proposed Project does not contain areas identified
Photo 7. Narrow strips of riparian
vegetation are visible along the concrete
bottom channel where patches of sediment
accumulated.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 42 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
as containing sensitive biological habitats (City of South San Francisco 1999). While
numerous species were identified in the IPaC and CNDDB queries, most species identified
as having the potential to occur in the general vicinity of the Project area occur in
specialized habitats, such as riparian, wetlands, marshes, coastal scrub, or grasslands, and
do not have the potential to occur within the Project site, the Park, or within the Colma
Creek channel (Appendix B). The Project site lacks suitable habitat due to adjacent urban
development, previously disturbed areas, and the distance to the tidal areas of the San
Francisco Bay. Excavation activities associated with the installation of the diversion pipes
would involve the removal of two protected eucalyptus trees in the Park. One of the
eucalyptus trees is located on the west end of the Project area near the vacant City parcel; it
measures 42 inches dbh. The other tree is located on the east end of the project area near
the ballfield; it measures 48 inches dbh. Both trees measure approximately 60 to 70 feet
tall. Given only two eucalyptus trees would be removed and dozens of large protected and
heritage trees line Colma Creek and are planted throughout the park, this limited tree
removal would not substantially affect habitat within the Park for candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.
While construction activities, specifically tree removal would potentially impact nesting
birds that could in turn result in nest abandonment, these potential impacts would be
reduced by compliance with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (No. 1271-2000,
Municipal Code Chapter 13.30) and by conducting nesting bird surveys prior to
construction activities during the nesting season (February 15 to August 31). Construction
activities would potentially impact roosting sites for hoary bats and native trees within the
Project site, including western sycamore and coast live oak, but with the exception of the
removal of two eucalyptus trees, construction around these native trees would be avoided
during construction. Project impacts would permanently alter approximately 520 square
feet (0.012 acres) of USACE jurisdictional non-tidal waters of the USACE and CDFW
jurisdictional waters from installing a drop inlet that spans the Colma Creek drainage
channel. Numerous stormwater structures exist within Colma Creek channel and the
concrete channel lacks riparian vegetation and suitable aquatic habitat; however,
construction of the drop inlet could potentially impact downstream special status species.
Therefore, the implementation of MM BIO-1 is required to ensure a biological avoidance
and minimization plan is developed to protect sensitive species and habitats during work
activities. The plan would include worker environmental awareness training, pre-
construction surveys, the establishment of non-disturbance buffer zones, and monitoring.
Therefore, impacts to special-status fish and bird species would be less than significant
with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Biological Avoidance and Minimization Plan
Prior to construction, a contractor shall prepare a Biological Avoidance and
Minimization Plan for review by the City of South San Francisco. At a minimum, the plan
shall include a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Training Program, pre-construction
surveys, and the establishment of non-disturbance buffer zones around protected trees.
The pre-construction surveys shall commence within 14 days prior to construction
work during the avian nesting season (February 15 to August 31). During this time, a
qualified biologist or arborist shall conduct the pre-construction nesting bird survey
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 43 June 2019
within the Project site boundary and along Colma Creek (If construction work would
not occur during the nesting season, a nesting survey is not required).
If special-status birds are not identified nesting within the area of effect, further
mitigation is not required. If special-status birds are identified nesting within the area
of effect, a qualified biologist or arborist would determine a 75-foot no-disturbance
buffer around the nest(s) shall be staked with orange construction fencing.
Construction or earth-moving activities shall be restricted within the identified buffer
until the determination is made by a qualified biologist or arborist that the young have
fledged (i.e., left the nest) and have attained sufficient flight skills to avoid project
construction zones. This typically occurs by June 15; however, the date shall be
determined by a qualified biologist or arborist and would potentially be later. The
preconstruction nesting bird survey shall be submitted for review and approval by the
City of South San Francisco Parks and Recreation Division. Non-disturbance buffer
zones would potentially also be required to delineate tree protection areas around
native and protected trees.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1 would reduce potential impacts on
biological resources to less than significant.
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 the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project would occur within and adjacent to Colma
Creek, a perennial stream that has been identified as a non-tidal water of the United States
that flows into tidal waters of the United States. The drainage channel has been previously
modified for flood control management and the area adjacent to the creek does not support
riparian habitat. The bottom and sides of the 35 to 40-foot channel are entirely lined with
concrete and the majority of the adjacent upland vegetation consists of eucalyptus
woodland and ornamental trees. Riparian vegetation was only observed growing on
accumulated sediment within the channel during dry months; however, this vegetation was
not observed in the wet months (Appendix B). No local or regional sensitive habitat types,
natural communities, or sensitive plant species regulated by the USFWS and CDFW are
present within the Project site. Urban recreational development within the Park has
removed much of the suitable habitat for sensitive plant species. The proposed Project
would involve installing a drop inlet within the bottom of the concrete channel, but would
not impact any adjacent riparian habitat. The proposed Project would divert and treat a
portion of annual flows within Colma Creek. The flows diverted would be small (less than
five percent of annual flows) and would not substantially alter the downstream water flows
within Colma Creek, nor riparian habitat or downstream sensitive fish or bird species (i.e,
Green Sturgeon, California Ridgeway’s Rail) within the tidal salt and brackish marshes in
San Francisco Bay. While a portion of the treated flows would be used for irrigation (one
percent), the majority of the diverted water would be treated, infiltrated back into the
groundwater table, or discharged back to Colma Creek via an outfall pipe. Depending on
seasonal water table variations during the year, the water infiltrated to the groundwater
table via the water capture facility would eventually flow towards the San Francisco Bay,
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 44 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
and the downstream segment of Colma Creek would receive water from the groundwater
inflow. The downstream segments of Colma Creek past U.S. Highway 101 (half-mile from
Park) are also influenced by tidal fluctuations in the San Francisco Bay. Consequently, the
proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse impact on riparian or salt marsh
habitats as identified by CDFW or the USFWS, nor on downstream riparian or salt marsh
habitats within the tidally-influenced portion of Colma Creek. Therefore, impacts related to
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities would be less than significant.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less than Significant. As discussed above, the proposed Project would occur within and
adjacent to Colma Creek, a perennial stream that has been identified as a non-tidal water of
the United States that flows into tidal waters of the United States. The creek channel has
been modified for flood control management the areas adjacent to the Colma Creek do not
support wetlands. The bottom and sides of the channel are entirely lined with concrete and
the majority of the adjacent and upland vegetation consists of Eucalyptus woodland and
ornamental trees. Previous development of the concrete drainage channel and the urban
recreational development within the Park has removed adjacent wetland habitat. Project
implementation would also involve obtaining a Nationwide 7 permit (Outfall Structures
and Associated Intake Structures) under Section 404 of the CWA. Though the proposed
Project would involve the installation a drop inlet and diversion channel that spans the
bottom of the concrete channel, in addition to an overflow pipe and wier, the proposed
Project would not have a substantial adverse impact on state or federally protected
wetlands. The proposed drop inlet and diversion channel would measure approximately
four feet wide and would be installed flush with the bottom of the concrete channel, which
measures approximately 40 feet. Each side of the drop inlet and diversion channel would
be slightly modified to accommodate a two to three foot wide ramp area to drain the water
flow towards the inlet structure. This design would involve minor changes to the cross
section of the channel and only minor removal of concrete that lines the bottom of the
channel. Wetlands impacts would be further reduced through compensatory mitigation
conditions required as part of the Nationwide 7 permit. Impacts on biological resources
would be less than significant.
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?
Less than Significant. As discussed above, the Project site would occur within and
adjacent to Colma Creek, a perennial stream that has been identified as a non-tidal water of
the United States that flows into tidal waters of the United States. Given the drainage
channel has been previously modified for flood control management and the bottom and
sides of the channel are entirely lined with concrete, the area adjacent to the Colma Creek
does not support wetland or riparian habitat suitable to support native resident wildlife
species. Colma Creek is a tributary as a concrete channel upstream from San Francisco Bay.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 45 June 2019
While the San Francisco Bay supports native fish such as steelhead, coho salmon, green
sturgeon, and longfin smelt, the creek channel does not provide suitable habitat for native
fisheries given the lack of vegetation and bottom substrate. Previous studies for
downstream reaches of Colma Creek also found the area generally unsuitable for sensitive
fish populations (Horizon Water and Environment 2015). While the proposed Project also
involves the diversion of annual flows, only five percent of annual flows would be diverted
and the majority of the treated water would infiltrate back into the groundwater table or be
discharged back to Colma Creek. Consequently, the proposed Project would not interfere
with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. Impacts on biological resources
would be less than significant.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant. The City of South San Francisco’s Tree Preservation Ordinance
provides standards and requirements for the protection of certain large heritage trees and
trees within unique characteristics. The Ordinance also establishes recommended
standards for planting and maintaining trees on property that is already developed.
Vegetation within the Project area is typical of an urban park setting, with mostly
ornamental plantings and eucalyptus trees planted for shade and boundary. There is one
mature western sycamore tree and 13 mature coast live oak trees within the Project area.
While no native trees are proposed for removal, two protected eucalyptus would be
removed, in addition to a few smaller trees (less than 4 inches dbh) near the picnic areas.
With the implementation of MM BIO-1 and the mandated tree protection measures
outlined in the City of South San Francisco’s Municipal Code, 13.30 Tree Preservation
(Chapter 13.30.030 Prohibitions and protections for protected trees), the proposed Project
and tree removal activities would be consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation
Ordinance. As a result, impacts on biological resources would be less than significant.
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?
No Impact. The San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) was prepared for
the County of San Mateo in 1982 and was authorized by the USFWS in 1983. According to
the City’s General Plan EIR, the City of South San Francisco contains two areas designated
as habitat for the conservation of threatened and endangered species: San Bruno Mountain
and the portion of Sign Hill currently classified as a City park, both which are subject to the
San Bruno Mountain HCP. The proposed Project site is not within the planning area for the
San Bruno Mountain HCP (San Mateo County 1982). Also, the City does not have an
adopted HCP, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no impact on biological resources would occur.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 46 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Historic and cultural resources in South San Francisco are protected through the process of
local designation and oversight by the Historic Preservation Commission. The City of South
San Francisco contains one national historic landmark, Sign Hill, and other designated
resources including several residential and commercial buildings in the downtown area.
According to the General Plan EIR, Orange Memorial Park, including the proposed Project
site is not located within the vicinity of any identified historic resources. According to the
City’s General Plan EIR and consistent with the City’s history as an Ohlone settlement
location, there are Native American village sites and archaeological sites recorded
throughout the City. Known resources occur along the El Camino Real corridor, in the San
Bruno Mountains, and adjacent to portions of Colma Creek.
The proposed water capture facility would be located within approximately 1.5 acres along
the Colma Creek channel, within the southern half of the 28-acre Park. An archaeological
literature review and records search was conducted at the California Historical Resources
Information System (CHRIS) Northwest Information Center (NWIC) at Sonoma State
University for the Project site and a 0.5-mile radius around the Park (Appendix C). Thirty
cultural resource investigations have been conducted in the Project area and within 0.5
miles from the proposed Project site. Two of the previous investigations were conducted
within a portion of the proposed APE. The NWIC search identified three previously
recorded archaeological resources within 0.5 miles of the proposed Project site (i.e., P-41-
000048, P-41-000409, and P-41-000495), but no resources are recorded within this area.
Wood Environment & Infrastructure (E&I) archaeologists conducted a Phase 1
Archaeological Investigation including an intensive ground surface survey of the proposed
Project APE on January 4, 2019 of the proposed Project area of disturbance, or Area of
Potential Effect (APE), defined as the horizontal and vertical extent of all temporary and
permanent topographic modifications (e.g., 10 to 12 feet bgs). No prehistoric or historic-
period cultural resources were identified within the APE, but the potential for unknown
subsurface resources was identified resulting from Colma Creek alluviation over the past
10,000 years. Therefore, Wood E&I conducted an Extended Phase 1 Archaeological
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 47 June 2019
Investigation including systematic excavations throughout the APE from March 12 to
March 14, 2019. The investigation consisted of excavating fourteen (14) two-inch diameter
geoprobes spaced between 100- and 200-feet apart to depths between 10 to 13 feet bgs; all
soils were screened through one-quarter-inch mesh. No prehistoric or historic-period
archaeological materials were identified in any of the excavated soils,. The previously
undisturbed soils within the proposed Project APE were deposited during episodes of
repeated flooding along the Colma Creek channel that meandered over time. These intact
alluvial soils indicated that ground surfaces within the proposed Project APE were not
occupied throughout prehistory or since Euro-American settlement (Appendix C) (The
Extended Phase 1 Archaeological Survey Report contains confidential archaeological
information as is maintained at City of South Francisco offices, and is only available for
review at the City offices).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
No Impact. As defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, a historical resource is
as any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript determined to be
historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic,
agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California. Historical
resources are further defined as being associated with significant events, important
persons, or distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction;
representing the work of an important creative individual; or possessing high artistic
values. Resources listed in or determined eligible for the California Register of Historical
Resources (CRHR), included in a local register, or identified as significant in a historic
resource survey are also considered historical resources under CEQA. No such resources
are located within the proposed Project APE.
Direct impacts are those that cause substantial adverse physical change to a historical
resource. Indirect impacts are those that cause substantial adverse change to the
immediate surroundings of a historical resource such that the significance of a historical
resource would be materially impaired. The intensive surface survey and Extended Phase 1
excavations did not identify any prehistoric or historic-period archaeological resources.
Because no cultural resources were identified at the Project site, the implementation of the
proposed Project would have no impact on historical resources.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Policy 7.5-I-4 of the City’s General Plan requires
that the City ensure the protection of known archaeological resources by requiring a
records review for any development proposed in areas of known resources. Similarly,
Policy 7.5-I-5 requires that development project proposals include the preparation of a
resource mitigation plan and monitoring program by a qualified archaeologist in the event
that archaeological resources are uncovered. While the majority of the Project site has been
previously disturbed as a developed recreational park and filled with imported soil
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 48 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
material, ground disturbance and excavation within the two ballfields would occur during
construction. Trenchless excavation would also occur across the open picnic area and
pedestrian path along the south side of Colma Creek. As discussed in Section V, Cultural
Resources (a), an archaeological literature review and records search was conducted at the
CHRIS NWIC at Sonoma State University for the Project site and a 0.5-mile radius around
the Park (Appendix C). Thirty previous cultural resource investigations have been
conducted in the Project area extending 0.5 miles from the proposed Project APE, and two
of the previous investigations were conducted within a portion of the proposed APE.
No prehistoric or historic-period cultural resources were identified during the Phase 1 and
Extended Phase 1 Archaeological Investigation of the proposed Project APE. Intact soils
within the proposed Project APE experienced episodes of repeated flooding along Colma
Creek and a creek channel that regularly meandered over time. These intact alluvial soils
indicated that ground surfaces within the proposed Project APE were not occupied
throughout prehistory or since Euro-American settlement. Subsoils have a low potential for
the presence of prehistoric archaeological sites, as the ground surface would not have been
exposed long enough to develop into a table surface suitable for occupation and any
evidence of such occupations would have eroded and carried downstream. As a result,
there is little potential for archaeological resources to occur within the Project site and no
further archaeological monitoring is recommended. There is a remote possibility that
unanticipated archaeological resources could be discovered during Project excavation
activities, which could result in a potentially significant impact on cultural resources.
Therefore, the implementation of mitigation that ensures assessment of any unexpected
cultural resources by a qualified archaeologist is required to reduce potential impacts to
less than significant.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Archaeological Resource Discovery Plan
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, Project plans shall include a requirement
indicating that if historic or cultural resources are encountered during site grading,
excavation, or other work, all such work shall be temporarily halted immediately
within 100 feet of the area of discovery and the contractor shall immediately notify
the City of the discovery. In such case, the applicant shall retain the services of a
qualified archaeologist for the purpose of recording, evaluating, protecting, and
curating the time-sensitive discovery as appropriate. The archaeologist shall be
required to submit to the City for review and approval a report of the findings and
method of curation or protection of the resources. Grading or site work within the
vicinity of the discovery, as identified by the qualified archaeologist, shall not be
allowed until the appropriate steps have taken place.
Implementation of MM CUL-1 would reduce potential impacts on cultural resources to less
than significant.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. As noted in Section V, Cultural Resources (a) and
(b), the City has Native American village sites scattered around the City. While the majority
of the Project site has been previously disturbed as a developed recreational park, ground
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 49 June 2019
disturbance and excavation within the two ballfields would occur during construction.
Trenchless excavation would also occur across the open picnic area and pedestrian path
along the south side of Colma Creek. No prehistoric or historic-period cultural resources
were identified during the Phase 1 and Extended Phase 1 Archaeological Investigation of
the proposed Project APE. The potential for encountering unknown human remains during
Project construction is considered remote.
Existing regulations require that if human remains or cultural items defined by the Health
and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, are inadvertently discovered, all work in the vicinity of the
find would cease and the County Coroner would be contacted immediately. If the remains
are found to be Native American as defined by Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, the
coroner would contact the NAHC by telephone within 24 hours. The NAHC shall
immediately notify the person it believes to be the most likely descendant as stipulated by
California PRC, Section 5097.98. The most likely descendant(s) with the permission of the
landowner or authorized representative, shall inspect the site of the discovered remains
and recommend treatment regarding the remains and any associated grave goods. The
most likely descendant shall complete their inspection and make their recommendations
within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC.
Any discovery of human remains would be treated in accordance with Section 5097.98 of
the Public Resources Code (PRC) and Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
Therefore, no further disturbance shall occur until the Coroner has made findings as to the
origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to PRC 5097.98. Therefore, compliance
with existing regulations and the implementation of mitigation measures would reduce
potential impacts on cultural resources to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Human Remains
Pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 (c) State PRC §5097.98, if human
bone or bone of unknown origin is found during construction, all work shall stop in
the vicinity of the find and the San Mateo County Coroner shall be contacted
immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner shall
notify the Native American Heritage Commission who shall notify the person
believed to be the most likely descendant. The most likely descendant shall work
with the contractor to develop a program for re-internment of the human remains
and any associated artifacts. Additional work is not to take place in the immediate
vicinity of the find, which shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist, until the
identified appropriate actions have been implemented.
Implementation of MM CUL-2 would reduce potential impacts on cultural resources to less
than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 50 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
VI. ENERGY
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of South San Francisco adopted their Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2014 (City of
South San Francisco 2014a). The CAP identifies strategies and actions to reduce GHG
emissions. Through the CAP, the City implements GHG reduction measures at both city-
owned facilities and at private developments, including, but not limited to, the installation
of solar facilities at City buildings; installation of bioswales in private development;
enforcement of a construction and demolition waste recycling ordinance; implementation
of a Travel Demand Management (TDM) program; and requirement for electrical car
charging stations at City facilities.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project would involve the installation of a water
capture, treatment and infiltration facility that would result in water quality benefits, such
as pollutant reduction, groundwater recharge, flood reduction, and the reuse of surface
water to help the City meet local irrigation demands within Orange Memorial Park. During
construction, energy consumption would be associated with primarily diesel and gasoline
fuel consumption for the operation of construction equipment and for worker and haul
trips. During operations, energy consumption would be limited to an irrigation pump
proposed to be installed next to the water quality and disinfection shed. The consumption
of energy resources during construction would be temporary and the installation of a new
and energy-efficient irrigation pump is anticipated to function more effectively than the
existing irrigation system within the Park. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in potentially short- or long-term significant impacts due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Instead, the
proposed Project would improve water reuse and irrigation efficiency within Orange
Memorial Park. While construction activities would involve diesel and gasoline fuel use for
equipment and haul and commuter trips, overall consumption would be minimal and
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 51 June 2019
temporary. For these reasons, the proposed Project’s energy use would be less than
significant.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
Less than Significant. To ensure that development within the City is consistent with the
CAP, the City has also prepared a Development Review Checklist for improvement projects
and new development. While the proposed water capture facility is not considered a new
development and most measures in the checklist are not applicable, the checklist was
reviewed and the proposed Project is consistent with the City’s CAP. Proposed mechanical
equipment, such as the infiltration system and irrigation pump, would also include energy
efficient models, asphalt or concrete removed during construction would be recycled, and
on-site water that would be treated in the new cistern and infiltration system would be
reused for irrigation. The proposed Project is also consistent with all state plans for energy
efficiency, including the 2017 CARB Climate Change Scoping Plan, State of California Energy
Plan, California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, Clean Energy and Pollution
Reduction Act of 2015, and State Alternative Fuels Plan. For these reasons, the proposed
Project would not conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency, and impacts on energy would be less than significant.
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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 California Geological Survey 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
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 52 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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, as
updated), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The geologic setting of the Project site is based on existing reports and maps, including: the
City’s General Plan; U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and California Geological Survey (CGS)
maps; a project-specific Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Study (Fugro Consultants
2016); a project-specific Geotechnical Investigation (Cotton, Shires and Associates, Inc.
2018); and other technical documents (Appendices D and E).
The proposed Project site is located in the western Coast Ranges geomorphic province of
California, in the Northern California metropolitan area of South San Francisco. The Coast
Ranges are northwest-trending mountain ranges and valleys that subparallel the San
Andreas Fault (California Geological Survey 2002). The concrete-lined Colma Creek runs
down the center of the valley and borders the Project site to the northeast. Significant
earthquakes have occurred in the region due to crustal movement along this system of
subparallel fault zones through the San Francisco Bay Area and under the peninsula. The
topography of the City of South San Francisco (City) is historically characterized by erosion,
tectonism, marine and estuarine deposition, and placement fill and is comprised of flat to
gently sloping areas with steep hillsides to the northern and western portions of the City of
South San Francisco. Geological composition below the City consists of mostly developed
soils covered by urban cut-and-fill overlying Late Mesozoic marine sedimentary rock of
both the Great Valley and Franciscan basement complexes (California Geological Survey
2006; USGS 2006). The Project site is mapped as being underlain by alluvium (Cotton,
Shires and Associates 2018).
As one of the most seismically active areas in the country, significant earthquakes have
occurred in the San Francisco Bay Area. These earthquakes are generally believed to be
triggered by crustal movement along a system of sub parallel fault zones that trend
in a northwesterly direction through the San Francisco Bay Area and under the
peninsula. The Project site is located in an area of high seismicity; approximately 30 faults
in the San Francisco Bay Area that are considered capable of generating earthquakes, 11 of
which are within 40 miles of the City. The Peninsula segment of the San Andreas Fault
passes through the westernmost corner of the City, approximately two miles from the
Project site (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). The Project vicinity is also located within
an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (California Geological Survey 2006). Other active
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 53 June 2019
faults close to the site include the San Gregorio Fault, located 7.7 miles to the southwest,
and the Hayward Fault, located 16.3 miles to the northeast. Seismic ground shaking
associated with a large earthquake at any of these faults is considered to be a high potential
hazard in the Project area. No active faults have been mapped through the subject property
and the potential for surface faulting and ground rupture on the property is considered
low.
The flat, upland portion of the City consists of orthents soil overlain with cut and fill, and
have moderate potential for shrink-swell and erosion hazard (Natural Resources
Conservation Service 2018). Orthents soil is characterized as well-drained, silty clay, which
could potentially have expansive properties. These soil conditions would potentially
amplify earthquake waves and ground shaking, and this area has a liquefaction risk of
“high” (USGS 2018a). The Project site is flat (less than 15 percent slope) and natural grades
in the area slope down towards Colma Creek. The Project site is not associated with a high
risk of landslides, however, the potential for strong ground shaking to trigger a landslide
that slides into the canal is considered to be moderate to high due to the relatively loose
consistency of the adjacent soils (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). Borings drilled
within the Project site encountered a 4.5 to 5-foot thick layer of medium to stiff clayey fill
overlying loose, medium dense, dense, and very dense alluvial sands, and silty or clayey
sands (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018).
The soils underlying the Project site are loose to medium dense and are highly susceptible
to liquefaction, and groundwater depths of 18 feet and deeper were encountered during
the project-specific Geotechnical Investigation (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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 California Geological Survey Special
Publication 42.)
Less than Significant. The Project site is located in a known seismic zone, and the
proposed water capture facility would most likely be exposed to an earthquake at
some point during its 75-year design life. While the City of South San Francisco is
located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone as mapped by the California
Geological Survey, the site has been previously developed as a park, and no habitable
structures are involved in the water capture facility (California Geological Survey 2002).
While the Project site is near the San Andreas Fault, no active faults have been recognized
on, or mapped through the Project site ; the potential for surface faulting and ground
rupture is considered low, and the site is relatively flat. For these reasons, potential
impacts related to earthquake fault rupture would be less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 54 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. As discussed in Section VII, Geology and Soils
(a)(i) above, the Project site is located in one of the most seismically active regions in the
country. According to the project-specific Geotechnical Investigation (Cotton, Shires and
Associates, Inc. 2018), peak ground accelerations of up to 0.87g to 0.88g (acceleration of
gravity) should be anticipated at the site. The Project would be designed to comply with the
California Building Code (CBC) and employ design standards that consider seismically
active areas in order to safeguard the water capture facility against major structural
failures or loss of life. Therefore, while the Project site would be subject to ground shaking
during future seismic events (as are most structures within the Northern California area),
the incorporation of proper engineering measures in accordance with existing regulations
and building codes, the application of the engineering recommendations provided in the
geological reports, and proposed Mitigation Measure GEO-1, would minimize risks to life
and property. For these reasons, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Structural Engineering Controls and Monitoring
All earthwork and construction activities shall be monitored by a licensed engineer
or professional geologist. The purpose of the monitoring is to assess soil conditions
and confirm the appropriate engineered support systems are incorporated into the
project design and installed correctly.
Implementation of MM GEO-1 would reduce potential impacts on geological resources to
less than significant.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Soils that are most susceptible to liquefaction
are loose, saturated, fine-grained sands and non-plastic silts and clays that are generally
located within 50 feet of the ground surface. Seismic shaking has the potential to liquefy
the soil in areas that contain saturated granular sediments of a specific grain size. The
loss of shear strength in low to moderate relative density areas, along with shallow
groundwater, can create an environment in which soils take on a “liquid” quality. This
process typically occurs in poorly packed alluvial deposits, artificial fill, and areas with a
shallow water table.
As stated above, Project site soils are loose to medium dense and are highly susceptible to
liquefaction, and groundwater depths of 18 feet and deeper were encountered during the
project-specific Geotechnical Investigation (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). Through
the implementation of proposed mitigation (MM GEO-1) the exposure of people and
structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving seismic-related ground
failure and liquefaction would be minimized. Impacts on geological resources would be
less than significant with mitigation.
iv) Landslides?
Less than Significant. The potential for strong ground shaking to trigger a landslide that
fails and impacts the Colma Creek channel is considered to be moderate to high for the
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 55 June 2019
areas immediately adjacent to the concrete channel walls. Construction of the proposed
Project involves excavation for the underground storage reservoir and an infiltration
chamber approximately 60 feet away from the concrete channel walls. Construction of the
underground storage reservoir, which contains an infiltration chamber, would likely
remove approximately 7 to 15.5 feet of the loose soil that is susceptible to mobilizing
where the water capture structures are installed, which should mitigate the high risk of
landslides to the structures (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). In the immediate
vicinity of the Project site, the ground slope is too shallow to cause an event of any
significance, and the proximity to higher risk zones is negligible. The Project area is also
comprised of level to gradually sloping streets in a heavily urban area. For these reasons,
any impact associated with a seismically induced landside of the concrete walls that line
Colma Creek in this area would be less than significant.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant. The majority of the ground surface on the south side of the Park
consists of one to four feet of imported fill material on top of native soil. Construction of the
proposed water capture system (specifically the installation of the underground storage
reservoir) would involve the excavation of one to four feet of imported fill material on top
of an estimated five to eight feet of native soil for a total of 10 to 12 feet of excavated
material. This would result in the excavation of 4,800 to 12,000 cubic yards of soil during
construction. The activities would potentially create a potential for erosion during
construction. Artificial fill, however, would not be placed on the site, except to backfill
erosion (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). Given the majority of the construction area is
flat and previously disturbed, the potential for soil erosion and loss of topsoil is low. While
soil erosion could be caused by either water or wind and could be exacerbated during rain
events during construction, compliance with BAAQMD fugitive dust requirements would
minimize wind erosion. Compliance with the City’s Municipal Code, Section 14.04.180
Reduction of Pollutants in Stormwater would require effective erosion and sediment
controls and ensure soils are stabilized during construction. Similarly, the implementation
of the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program’s Construction Best
Management Practices (BMPs) would ensure exposed soils are stabilized during
excavation. BMPs required under a NPDES permit, as well as the implementation of a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would further reduce soil erosion. For these
reasons, impacts related to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil would be less than
significant.
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?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. According to the City’s General Plan EIR, soils in
the flat and lowland eastern portion of the City that are composed of Bay mud overlain
with fill have a high shrink -swell potential and high water table. These soil conditions can
intensify ground shaking and are subject to liquefaction. T he proposed Project is located
on soils that have been found to be unstable with the potential to result in on- or off-site
landslides, liquefaction, or collapse. Project geotechnical studies, however, determined that
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 56 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
these soils would not be destabilized as a result of the Project. The majority of the site is
also composed of primarily artificial fill soils. Fugro Consultants, Inc. performed a
preliminary geotechnical feasibility study for the Proposed project in December 2016
(Appendix C). The purpose of the study was to asses s geotechnical and geologic site
conditions based on subsurface data, existing geologic and seismic hazard maps, and
other available information. The study also assessed three exploratory borings (between
20 and 25 deep), three field percolation tests (15 feet deep), and four soil samples from
each boring for a total of 12 soil samples. In 2018, Cotton, Shires, and Associates, Inc.
conducted a Geotechnical Investigation for the proposed Project (Appendix D). The
purpose of the geotechnical investigation was to characterize the geotechnical conditions
surrounding and underlying the Project site and provide recommendations regarding
geotechnical hazards.
Based on the two investigations, the Project site is generally sited over native, poorly-
graded sands with clay and silty sands with clay over fat clay and sand (Fugro Consultants,
Inc. 2016). The three borings consisted of poorly-graded soil on top of between 17 to 20
feet of medium dense to dense, but poorly-graded sands combined with silt (Fugro
Consultants, Inc. 2016). Groundwater was encountered within the ballfields at 18 feet bgs
(Cotton Shires, and Associates 2018). There is also strong potential for ground shaking at
the site to trigger a landslide that fails into the canal due to the loose consistency of the
adjacent soils (Cotton Shires, & Associates 2018). This potential is moderate to high
because there is no information on the canal wall design, and whether the concrete channel
walls were designed to resist landslide forces. The installation of an underground storage
reservoir would remove approximately 7 to 15.5 feet of loose soil currently susceptible to
movement (Cotton Shires & Associates 2018). As a result, the installation of the
underground storage reservoir would potentially minimize the high risk of landslides and
lateral spreading to the existing canal.
As discussed in Section VII, Geology and Soils (a)(iii), the site contains a high potential for
seismically induced liquefaction (Cotton Shires, and Associates 2018). The Project site has
been mapped as alluvium consisting of sand and silt, but locally containing clay, gravel, and
boulders. According to the Geotechnical Report, liquefaction would potentially occur at the
Project site ranging from five inches in the northern portion of the Park to nine inches near
the ballfields (Cotton Shires & Associates 2018). As outlined in MM GEO-1, the final
engineering plans and specifications would be reviewed and approved by a registered
geotechnical engineer to ensure that all applicable geotechnical recommendations are
incorporated into the project designs. As a result, the potential for unstable soils in the area
after construction of the new improvements would be less than significant with the
implementation of mitigation.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
Less than Significant. The soils and subsurface materials present on the Project site,
specifically the roughly 6-foot thick clay layer encountered between 15 and 25 feet, are
potentially highly expansive (Cotton, Shires and Associates 2018). Highly expansive soils
could be subject to volume changes due to seasonal fluctuations in moisture content.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 57 June 2019
Provided that the bottom of the proposed water capture facility is greater than three feet
above the clay layer and that the moisture content remains constant (close to saturated),
the expansive soils would not adversely impact the water capture facility (Cotton, Shires
and Associates 2018). For these reasons, impacts associated with expansive soils would be
less than significant.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
No Impact. The proposed Project would involve the construction of a water capture
facility that consists of buried, reinforced concrete, prefabricated infiltration chambers, and
a 24-inch subterranean stormwater pipe. No septic tanks would be installed in
conjunction with this Project, nor would the Project require a connection to the City’s
sewer system. Therefore, no impacts would occur from soils incapable of supporting septic
tanks.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. While the majority of the Project site has been
previously disturbed as a developed recreational park, ground disturbance and excavation
within the two ballfields and adjacent to the picnic areas would occur during construction.
Excavation in these areas would potentially uncover unique paleontological resources or
geologic features. Based on the results of borings from the Geotechnical Investigation and
the geoprobes conducted during the Extended Phase 1 Archaeological Survey, the
likelihood of encountering unique paleontological resources or geologic features is low.
The potential uncovering such resources during excavation remains. The implementation
of MM CUL-1 requires that if historic or cultural resources are encountered during site
grading or excavation activities, all work shall be halted within 100 feet of the discovery
area and the contractor shall notify the City. The implementation of this measure also
applies to paleontological resources and geologic features, thereby minimizing potential
impacts to such resources. Therefore, impacts to unique paleontological resources or
unique geologic features would be less than significant with mitigation.
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 58 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Global climate change can be measured by changes in wind patterns, storms, precipitation,
and temperature. Scientific consensus has identified human-related emissions of
greenhouse gases (GHGs) above natural levels is a significant contributor to global climate
change. GHGs are substances that trap heat in the atmosphere and regulate the Earth’s
temperature, and include water vapor, CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), ground
level ozone, and fluorinated gases, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs),
hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and halons. The potential impacts of climate change
include severe weather patterns, flooding, reduced quality and availability of water, sea
level rise, and beach erosion. Primary activities associated with GHG emissions include
transportation, utilities (e.g., power generation and transport), industry, manufacturing,
agriculture, and residential. End-use sector sources of GHG emissions in California are as
follows: transportation (41 percent);industry (23 percent); electricity generation (16
percent); agriculture and forestry (8 percent); residential (7 percent); and commercial (5
percent) (CARB 2018).
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 is a California State Law that establishes a comprehensive program
to reduce GHG emissions from all sources throughout the state. AB 32 requires CARB to
develop regulations and market mechanisms to reduce California’s GHG emissions to 1990
levels by 2020, representing a 25 percent reduction statewide, with mandatory caps
beginning in 2012 for significant emissions sources.
GHG emissions contributing to global climate change are attributable in large part to
human activities associated with the industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation,
residential, and agricultural sectors. Therefore, an individual project’s GHG emissions are at
a micro-scale level relative to global emissions and effects to global climate change;
however, an individual project could result in a cumulatively considerable incremental
contribution. As such, impacts related to emissions of GHG are inherently considered
cumulative impacts. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to future development in the
City of South San Francisco are primarily associated with increases of carbon dioxide (CO2)
and, to a lesser extent, other GHG pollutants, such as methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide
(N2O) associated with area sources, mobile sources or vehicles, utilities (electricity and
natural gas), water usage, wastewater generation, and the generation of solid waste.
GHG Emissions Threshold
At the regional level, the BAAQMD has proposed the following thresholds of significance for
operational-related GHG emissions as of May 2017:
• For land use development projects, the threshold is compliance with a qualified GHG
Reduction Strategy; or annual emissions less than 1,100 metric tons per year
(MT/year) of CO2e; or 4.6 MT CO2e/SP/year (residents + employees). Land use
development projects include residential, commercial, industrial, and public land
uses and facilities.
• For stationary-source projects, the threshold is 10,000 metric tons per year
(MT/year) of CO2e. Stationary-source projects include land uses that would
accommodate processes and equipment that emit GHG emissions and would require
an Air District permit to operate.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 59 June 2019
If annual emissions of operational-related GHGs exceed these levels, the proposed project
would result in a cumulatively significant impact. The BAAQMD has not yet adopted a
threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions. However, Section 8.2 of
the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines recommends that the Lead Agency quantify and
disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction and make a determination of
the significance of the construction-related GHG impacts in relation to meeting Assembly
Bill 32 GHG reduction goals. The Lead Agency is also encouraged to incorporate BMPs to
reduce GHG emissions during construction as applicable. BMPs include but are not limited
to: using alternative fueled (e.g., biodiesel, electric) construction vehicles/equipment of at
least 15 percent of the fleet; using local building materials of at least 10 percent; and
recycling or reusing at least 50 percent of construction waste or demolition materials
(BAAQMD 2017b).
The City of South San Francisco adopted a CAP in 2014 that identifies strategies and actions
to reduce GHG emissions. The City has and continues to implement GHG reduction
measures associated with both City-owned facilities and private development. These GHG
reduction measures include, but are not limited to: the installation of solar facilities at City
buildings; requiring bioswales in private development; adopting and enforcing a
construction and demolition waste recycling ordinance; adopting and implementing a TDM
program; and providing electrical car charging stations at City facilities.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant. The primary source of proposed Project construction GHG
emissions would be from mobile sources such as worker trips and from haul trips during
excavation. Neither the City of South San Francisco nor the BAAQMD has adopted a
threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions. Project operational GHG
emissions would be limited to the long-term operation of a new irrigation pump. The
BAAQMD operational, long-term GHG emission thresholds of significance for stationary
source projects is more than 10,000 metric tons per year carbon dioxide equivalent units
(MTCO2e/year). If a project generates GHG emissions above the threshold level, the project
would be considered to generate significant GHG emissions and conflict with applicable
GHG regulations. Given that the proposed Project operations would be limited to the
electrical operation of an irrigation pump, annual operation GHG emissions are calculated
to be 4.56 MTCO2e/year, well below the 10,000 MTCO2e/year threshold of significance.
Annual short-term construction GHG emissions would be 210.37 MTCO2e/year and would
not significantly contribute to climate change. For these reasons, the proposed Project
impacts associated with GHG emissions would be less than significant.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant. The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan outlines the goals and objectives
to reduce Bay Area GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent
below 1990 levels by 2050, consistent with the GHG reduction targets adopted by the state
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 60 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
of California. The 2017 Clean Air Plan includes the following measures to reduce emissions
from construction and farming equipment:
• Use various strategies to reduce emissions from construction and farming equipment
(e.g., incentives for equipment upgrades and/ or encourage the use of renewable
electricity and fuels).
• Provide incentives for the early deployment of electric, Tier 3 and 4 off-road engines
used in construction, freight and farming equipment.
• Support field demonstrations of advanced technology for off-road engines and hybrid
drive trains.
• Work with CARB, the California Energy Commission (CEC), and others to develop
more fuel-efficient off-road engines and drive-trains; and
• Work with local communities, contractors, farmers, and developers to encourage the
use of renewable electricity and renewable fuels, such as biodiesel from local crops
and waste fats and oils, in applicable equipment.
CARB’s AB 32 Scoping Plan (2008) has several measures to reduce emissions from
transportation fuels, which would indirectly reduce emissions from construction
equipment. These include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), which would reduce GHG
emissions by minimizing the full fuel-cycle carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in
California. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update, which builds upon the initial Scoping Plan,
contains new strategies and recommendations to reduce GHG to reach the State’s 2030
GHG emissions reduction target (CARB 2017). California’s overall plan for climate
adaptation is also summarized in Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update. This plan
provides policy guidance associated with climate risks in nine sectors in California and
provides realistic sector-specific recommendations (CNRA 2018).
The various plans, policies, and regulations at the state and local level do not directly
require the reduction of GHG emissions from construction equipment; however, emissions
would be indirectly reduced through programs like the LCFS. Several rules adopted to
reduce emissions of non-GHGs, such as CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation
(13 CCR 2449), could also reduce GHG emissions. Since the construction equipment would
operate in compliance with all applicable regulations for off-road equipment, the proposed
Project would not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing GHG emissions. Proposed mechanical equipment, such as the infiltration system
monitors and irrigation pump would include energy efficient models. The proposed Project
would reduce water usage through the reuse of captured water in the underground storage
reservoir for irrigation demands in the Park. For these reasons, the proposed Project would
not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing GHG emissions and impacts would be less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 61 June 2019
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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/or 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 or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project
area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury,
or death involving wildland fires?
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 62 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project vicinity is characterized as a
developed, urban area with predominantly
residential, commercial, and public land uses
(Photo 8). The vicinity has historically supported
recreational and commercial uses, including
several greenhouses utilized by carnation-
growing company Mazzanti Carnations, Inc.
within the northern portion of Orange Memorial
Park. According to the State of California
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
EnviroStor Database compliant with
Government Code Section 65962.5, there are no
active hazardous waste clean-up sites within the
vicinity of the proposed Project. The nearest
known hazardous waste cleanup site is the Mantegani site located at 735 Commercial
Avenue (approximately 890 feet north of the Project site). This site was previously utilized
as an ornamental flower nursery, where potential soil contaminants included chemicals
typically associated with pesticides and herbicides. The greenhouse buildings were
demolished and removed from the property, and voluntary cleanup actions were
completed and certified as of February 20, 2007 (DTSC 2018). The next closest hazardous
waste clean-up site is the Morena Trust site (111 Starlite Street and 437, 439, 441, and 447
Canal Street) located approximately 0.55 miles southeast of the Project site. The site is an
active voluntary cleanup site as of July 5, 2016 and involves clean-up of contaminants
associated with former dry cleaning and laundry services, as well as a former ceramics
manufacturing business.
Testing performed in 2010 and 2011 within the portion of the Project site south of Colma
Creek that was first developed between 1956 and 1965 as a carnation nursery identified
elevated concentrations of organochlorine pesticides within the soil at depths between 1.5
and 4 feet bgs. While a two-foot thick soil cap was reportedly placed over this portion of the
site in 2011, additional testing was completed by Fugro Consultants, Inc. in 2016 to
evaluate the soils within the Project site for the presence of contaminants above and below
the proposed location of the underground storage reservoir (Fugro Consultants, Inc. 2016).
While no PCBs, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), or asbestos were detected in any of the
soils analyzed, organochlorine pesticides were detected in the soil samples collected at
depths between 2 and 3.5 feet bgs. For these soil samples, analyses detected concentrations
of DDD (at 0.0022 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg], DDE (up to 0.47 mg/kg), DDT (up to
0.38 mg/kg), and dieldrin (up to 0.17 mg/kg). All these detected concentrations were at or
below respective ESLs for commercial shallow soil exposure and any soil depth exposures
for construction workers (Fugro Consultant, Inc. 2016).
Concentrations of various metals were also detected in the samples collected above and
below the proposed location of the underground storage reservoir, but below the Total
Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLCs) and the San Francisco Bay RWQCB’s
Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for commercial/industrial soil exposure and ESLs
for Any Land Use/Any Soil Depth Exposure (Construction Worker), with the exception of
Photo 8. The Project vicinity consists of a
City-owned parcel north of Colma Creek
that is current vacant and was historically
used by as a greenhouse for an flower
nursery.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 63 June 2019
arsenic. Analyses detected arsenic in the soils above the proposed location of the
underground storage reservoir from 1.0 mg/kg to 3.0 mg/kg for all samples. These sample
levels exceed the commercial shallow soil exposure ESL of 0.31 mg/kg and the Any Land
Use/Any Soil Depth Exposure for a Construction Worker ESL of 0.94 mg/kg. Throughout
California arsenic levels have been found higher than ESLs due to historic chemical usage,
as well as its presence in local bedrock materials that have been used as import fill (Fugro
Consultants, Inc. 2016). The concentrations detected did not appear to be related to a
source release and are most likely associated with background arsenic concentrations
(Fugro Consultants, Inc. 2016).
The closest public schools to the Project site are Los Cerritos Elementary School and South
San Francisco High School, located approximately 600 feet (0.06 miles) and 1,120 feet (0.21
miles) to the south, respectively. The proposed Project site is not located in the vicinity of
any private airstrip.
The nearest airport to the Project vicinity is the San Francisco International Airport (SFO),
located approximately 2.1 miles to the southeast. The Project site is located within the SFO
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) Airport Influence Area (AIA) B, which is
based on a combination of the outer boundaries of the noise compatibility and airport
safety zones (C/CAG 2012).
The City of South San Francisco Fire Department manages and maintains emergency plans
and emergency preparedness training to City staff and community members. The City
abides by the County of San Mateo Emergency Operation Plan (EOP) under jurisdiction of
the San Mateo County Office of Emergency Services (OES), which administers policies and
procedures involving emergency preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation.
SMCReady and SMCAlert are the governmental entities that provide disaster information
and alert notifications to the City. The City is also under authority of the San Francisco Bay
Area Regional Emergency Coordination Plan (RECP), which provides an all-hazard
framework for collaboration and coordination during emergencies in the San Francisco Bay
Area (UASI 2008). According to the RECP, the California Highway Patrol (CHP) is
responsible for designating evacuation routes and strategies for traffic control and law
enforcement in the case of an emergency.
The Project site is located in an entirely urbanized area, outside of any fire hazard severity
zones (Photo 8). The nearest wildlands and areas of potential wildfire risk are located
approximately one mile to the southeast, where there is a local responsibility area (LRA)
with a very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ)(Cal Fire 2007).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. A hazardous material is defined as any material
that due to its quantity, concentration, physical or chemical characteristics, poses a
significant present or potential hazard to human health or to the environment if released.
Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, inorganic and organic chemicals,
solvents, mercury, lead, asbestos, paints, cleansers, or pesticides. With the exception of the
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 64 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
organochlorine pesticides and arsenic levels detected in the soil samples, known hazardous
materials are not present on the proposed Project site. Construction would involve
excavation, and grading, and the movement of soils from these activities (e.g., use of heavy
machinery, storage of fuel for machinery, potential dust emissions) could cause a
temporary impact to the public or the environment. During construction, workers could be
exposed to hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, solvents, and other chemicals if these
materials were accidentally spilled or released. Short-term soil exposure would potentially
also affect construction workers due to the presence of the low levels of organochlorine
pesticides and arsenic detected in the soil samples.
All construction activities would be required to comply with applicable policies, standards,
and regulations in order to ensure there are no hazards related to the routine use, disposal,
transport, or accidental release of hazardous materials (California Occupational Safety and
Health Administration [OSHA] requirements, Title 8 and 22 of the Code of California
Regulations). All excavated fill and native soil material would be disposed in accordance
with applicable codes and regulations and the transport and disposal of these materials is
not expected to create a significant hazard to construction workers or the nearby
community. While arsenic levels were above the Commercial Shallow Soil exposure ESL
and Any Land Use/Any Soil Depth Exposure for a Construction Worker ESL, throughout
California arsenic levels have been found higher than ESLs due to historic chemical usage
and from its presence in local bedrock materials, which have been used as import fill
(Fugro Consultants, Inc. 2016). The concentrations detected did not appear to be related to
a source release and are most likely associated with background arsenic concentrations
(Fugro Consultants, Inc. 2016).
In order to minimize potential impacts to construction workers and the public, a Hazardous
Materials Contingency Plan (HMCP) would be developed prior to the start of construction.
The HMCP would require standard federal, state, and local construction measures are
followed for hazardous materials and the removal of onsite debris. The HMCP would also
include the preparation of a Waste Management Plan (WMP) and a Site Mitigation Plan
(SMP). The WMP would indicate the intended salvage and recycling facilities for all
construction and demolition debris from the proposed Project as required by the City of
South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 15.60. The WMP would also reduce potential
impacts associated with hazardous materials during construction. The SMP focuses on site
operations. SMP implementation would mitigate potential exposure due to dust emissions
or contact with unsaturated soils containing detected organochlorines and arsenic and
provide standard construction guidelines for dust control and routine soil handling
procedures. The SMP would also address potential risk to construction workers due to
identified site contaminants, and include provisions for managing soil as part of
construction, including, but not limited to excavating, erosion and dust control measures,
and transporting and stockpiling waste.
During project operation, the proposed Project would include the storage and disposal of
accumulated trash debris, gross solids, and other particles that would be collected within
the water capture facility as part of the pretreatment process. The collected debris is not
anticipated to require hazardous waste disposal as part of routine maintenance. All other
maintenance activities would use small quantities of common disinfection solutions and
cleaning solvents needed for the up-keep of the diversion equipment; the use of these
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 65 June 2019
materials would not be a health risk when used in accordance with manufacturer
specifications. In summary, the proposed Project has the potential to temporarily expose
construction workers due to the presence of elevated arsenic levels. Therefore, the
implementation of a HMCP that incorporates waste management and site mitigation
procedures is necessary to reduce potential impacts. Impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan
The construction contractor (as required by the contract specifications) shall develop
a HMCP that includes standard construction measures required by federal, state, and
local policies for the handling of potential hazardous materials and removal of on-site
debris. The HMCP shall include the implementation of a WMP for the management of
all construction waste, and a SMP to minimize construction worker’s exposure to dust
emissions and emissions that have the potential to contain hazardous concentrations
of arsenic. At a minimum, this plan shall include the following:
a) If contaminated soils or other hazardous materials are encountered during any
soil moving operation during construction, the HMCP shall be implemented.
b) Instruct workers on recognition and reporting of materials that may be
hazardous.
c) Minimize delays by continuing performance of the work in areas not affected
by hazardous materials operations.
d) Identify and contact subcontractors and licensed personnel qualified to
undertake storage, removal, transportation, disposal, and other remedial work
required by, and in accordance with, laws and regulations.
e) Forward to engineer, copies of reports, permits, receipts, and other
documentation related to remedial work.
f) Notify such agencies as are required to be notified by laws and regulations
within the time stipulated by such laws and regulations.
g) File requests for adjustments to contract time and contract price due to the
finding of hazardous materials in the work site in accordance with conditions
of contract.
Implementation of MM HAZ-1 would reduce potential impacts on hazardous materials to less
than significant.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant. Construction and operation activities would not 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. The
proposed Project would involve the use of some hazardous and flammable substances
during the construction phase. These substances could include vehicle fuels and oils in the
operation of heavy equipment for site grading and project construction. Construction
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 66 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
vehicles onsite would potentially require routine maintenance or repair that could involve
the use of oil, diesel fuel, transmission fluid, solvents, or other materials. The materials
would be used in small quantities and when used in accordance with manufacturer
specifications they would not pose a significant hazard to the public or environment.
Operation activities associated with the proposed Project would not involve the use of
acutely hazardous materials or waste, and the limited use of any hazardous materials
would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturer specifications. The
limited use of hazardous materials, such as disinfection solutions and common cleaning
solvents, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials. For these reasons, no reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions that
could release hazardous materials into the environment are anticipated to occur during
construction or operation. Impacts on hazardous materials would be less than significant.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
Less than Significant. The closest public schools to the Project site are Los Cerritos
Elementary School and South San Francisco High School, located approximately 600 feet
(0.06 miles) and 1,120 feet (0.21 miles) to the south, respectively. Construction equipment
and operation equipment such as the irrigation pump would generate air contaminant
emissions. Based on the air quality analysis, construction and operation emissions would
not exceed BAAQMD thresholds and the levels generated are not considered hazardous.
While construction would involve the excavation and transport of fill and native soil
material and other construction-related debris, all of these materials would be transported
and disposed in accordance with applicable codes and regulations. Compliance with
BAAQMD fugitive dust requirements would minimize fugitive dust emissions during
excavation activities. Any hazardous materials used during operations would consist of
small amounts on common cleaning solutions that would be handled according to
manufacturer specifications. As a result, impacts from the Project on surrounding schools
in regard to hazardous materials would be less than significant.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The proposed Project site is not included on the list of hazardous materials
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. According to the State of
California DTSC EnviroStor Database, the nearest known hazardous waste cleanup site is
the Mantegani site located at 735 Commercial Avenue (approximately 890 feet north of the
Project site). This site was previously utilized as an ornamental flower nursery, where
potential soil contaminants included chemicals typically associated with pesticides and
herbicides. The greenhouse buildings were demolished and removed from the property,
and voluntary cleanup actions were completed and certified as of February 20, 2007 (DTSC
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 67 June 2019
2018). Therefore, no impact on hazardous materials would result from implementation of
the proposed Project.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project area?
Less than Significant. The nearest airport to the Project is the San Francisco International
Airport (SFO), located approximately 2.1 miles to the southeast. The Project site is located
within the SFO ALUCP Airport Influence Area (AIA) B, which is based on a combination of
the outer boundaries of the noise compatibility and airport safety zones (C/CAG 2012). As
a water capture facility, the proposed Project would not pose significant hazards for people
residing or working in the area. Therefore, impacts to safety associated with working near
the airport would be less than significant.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant. Throughout the duration of construction, Memorial Drive and West
Orange Avenue would not be closed or partially closed to traffic except for a lane closure
adjacent to the Park on a few occasions. At least one-way traffic would be maintained along
Memorial Drive to ensure the multi-family residents would access the Park Lane
Apartment complex. Access along Tennis Drive and Eucalyptus Avenue would potentially
be limited if excavated soils are temporarily stockpiled in the vacant lot north of Colma
Creek. Both streets would maintain one-way traffic.
While the proposed Project would result in additional worker and haul trips during
construction, these trips would be temporary and the operation of the water capture
facility would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan,
or a local, state, or federal agency’s emergency evacuation plan. All on-street construction
activities, specifically those on Memorial Drive, would need to maintain access standards to
allow access to the Park Lane Apartments and to ensure adequate emergency access.
Material and equipment haul trucks would follow designated truck routes to and from the
Project site. For these reasons, impacts on adopted emergency response and emergency
evacuation plans would be temporary and less than significant.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project site is not located in an area susceptible to wildfires as it is in an
urban setting and general lacks combustible native vegetation. The Project site is regularly
maintained by City Park and Recreation staff and is outside of any fire hazard severity
zones. The nearest wildlands and areas of potential wildfire risk are located approximately
one mile to the southeast within a LRA with a VHFHSZ (Cal Fire 2007). Therefore, there is
no significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildfires, and no public hazards
impacts would occur.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 68 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or groundwater
quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may imp ede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial on- or offsite
erosion or siltation;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite;
iii) 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; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed Project is located along Colma Creek within the Colma Creek Watershed, a
sub-watershed of the San Francisco Bay Basin. The Colma Creek Watershed is formed by
natural mountain ridge boundaries surrounding a lower valley floor, and has a drainage
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 69 June 2019
area of 15.8 square miles from its headwaters in the San Bruno Mountains to its discharge
in the San Francisco Bay (Coastal Conservancy 2015). The western border of the basin is
the San Andreas Fault, while the northern edge terminates at the San Bruno Mountain ridge
and the south is bounded by Interstate 380. The Colma Creek Watershed collects runoff
from the urbanized areas of Daly City, Colma, San Bruno and South San Francisco. Colma
Creek is approximately 8 miles long, most of which is channelized or conveyed
underground to allow for urban development (City of Daly City 2012). The Colma Creek
Watershed is under jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. The RWQCB is
responsible for the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin,
which establishes water quality objectives to regulate pollution and control activities that
can adversely affect aquatic systems (RWQCB 2017). The State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) and RWQCB issue NPDES permits to regulate specific pollutant discharges.
Stormwater discharges associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project
are regulated by the joint City and SMCWPPP (City of South San Francisco 1999). The
SMCWPPP operates under the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES
Permit (MRP). The MRP is a comprehensive permit that issues waste discharge
requirements related to construction sites, industrial sites, illegal discharges and illicit
connections, new development, and operations throughout municipal separate storm
sewer systems (MS4s) (RWQCB 2009). The RWQCB and MRP stipulate that construction
activities disturbing one acre or more of soil are required to obtain individual NPDES
permits for storm water discharges and implement a SWPPP for the site.
The City of South San Francisco is largely developed with a high proportion of impermeable
surfaces such as roads, roofs, and parking lots, which results in significant runoff with very
little ground infiltration. Stormwater and irrigation runoff is collected in the City’s storm
system and diverted to Colma Creek or the San Francisco Bay (City of South San Francisco
1999). As a result, Colma Creek is particularly susceptible to nonpoint sources of pollution
through runoff including sediment, oil, debris, heavy metals, hydrocarbons, herbicides and
pesticides, and fertilizers (City of South San Francisco 1999).
The proposed Project would take place along the Colma Creek channel, which is defined by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) as
a Zone A Channel Confined flood zone. According to the FIRM for the City of South San
Francisco, map number 06081C0043E, the 35 to 40-foot wide creek channel divides
Orange Memorial Park into two floodway zones. The northern half of Orange Memorial
Park and a portion of the baseball field in the southern portion of the site adjacent to West
Orange Avenue are in Zone AE, which is subject to flooding inundation by a one percent
annual flood event (floods with a 1 in 100 chance of occurring in a given year). The
southern half of Orange Memorial Park is in Zone X, which is outside of the 0.2 percent
annual chance floodplain (floods with a 1 in 500 chance of occurring in a given year).
The Project site is not within a tsunami inundation zone or a low-lying area susceptible to
sea level rise (Department of Conservation 2009; NOAA 2017).
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 70 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Less than Significant. The Clean Water Act prohibits the discharge of pollutants to
navigable waters from point and non-point sources unless authorized by a NPDES General
Construction Permit. The SWRCB and RWQCB issue NPDES permits for the City of South
San Francisco to regulate specific pollutant discharges. Stormwater discharges associated
with construction and operation of the proposed Project are regulated by the joint City and
SMCWPPP. The SMCWPPP operates under the San Francisco Bay Municipal Regional
Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP). The MRP is a comprehensive permit that issues waste
discharge requirements related to construction sites, industrial sites, illegal discharges and
illicit connections, new development, and operations throughout municipal separate storm
sewer systems (MS4).
The RWQCB and MRP stipulate that construction activities disturbing one acre or more of
soil are required to obtain individual NPDES General Construction Permits for storm water
discharges and implement a SWPPP during construction. The MRP also regulates
stormwater discharges in San Mateo County. The proposed water capture facility is a
regional project designed to help San Mateo County permittees reduce pollutants, such as
PCBs, mercury, and trash discharges into the San Francisco Bay. According to the MRP,
these reductions would be accomplished through the implementation of stormwater
capture, treatment, and infiltration projects and associated green infrastructure
improvements, such as the proposed water capture facility.
Construction activity including site grading, excavation, and the installation of an
underground water storage reservoir would result in temporary soil erosion that could
temporarily affect water quality. The proposed Project would also disturb greater than one
acre of land with the Park and must obtain an individual NPDES General Construction
Permit for the stormwater discharges during construction and implement a SWPPP for the
site. The SWPPP would include the implementation of erosion and sediment BMPs,
monitoring, and reporting that would reduce surface and groundwater quality impacts. The
Project site would also be stabilized, re-graded, and restored, thereby reducing any future
water quality impacts. The long-term objective of the regional water quality improvement
Project is to divert dry- and wet-weather runoff from the City of South San Francisco, such
that there is a net benefit to both stormwater runoff and receiving water quality in the San
Francisco Bay. Improved water quality in comparison to existing conditions would also be
considered a beneficial impact of the proposed Project. Therefore, water quality impacts
associated with the water capture facility would be less than significant.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project would not use groundwater nor would it
deplete groundwater supplies. It is designed to reduce the Park’s demand for non-potable
water by capturing and treating storm water to meet the Park’s irrigation needs. The
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 71 June 2019
proposed Project is also designed to recharge groundwater within the underground
storage reservoir and infiltration chamber. As a result, the installation of the water capture
system would not constitute a significant increase in the impervious cover in the vicinity of
the Project site and groundwater recharge would not be affected. Project implementation
would result in a net benefit to receiving water quality in the San Francisco Bay and
groundwater recharge in the West Side Ground Water Basin. Improved groundwater
quality in comparison to existing conditions would also be considered a beneficial impact
of the proposed Project. Therefore, groundwater resources impacts would be less than
significant.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
Less than Significant. The proposed Project as a water capture facility would not entail
any development or construction that would alter current drainage patterns at the
Project site or in the Park. The proposed Project would install a drop inlet and
underground diversion structure within the Colma Creek channel . T his structure
and the modifications to bottom of the concrete channel (i.e. ramp cuts to divert
water flows) would not measure more than 520 square feet (0.012 acres) within the
concrete bottom of the channel. While the water capture facility would redirect and treat
stormwater runoff within the underground water reservoir cistern and infiltration
chamber, the local drainage pattern would remain the same as it exists today. The
proposed Project would not construct any new drainage channels or features, other than
the drop inlet structure that spans Colma Creek. The proposed water capture facility
would divert approximately five percent of the water flows from Colma Creek through the
water capture facility within the southern portion of the Park back to Colma Creek via an
outfall pipe situated roughly 1,000 feet downstream of the drop inlet and diversion
structure. Proposed construction would not cause substantial erosion or siltation; the
water capture facility is designed to reduce downstream localized flooding by increasing
groundwater recharge within the Project area and meet TMDL requirements, thereby
reducing polluted stormwater runoff to the San Francisco Bay. As a result, construction
and operation of the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on existing
drainage patterns in the area.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
No Impact. As described in the City of South San Francisco General Plan, the City is
located in one of the most seismically active regions in the country. T here are
approximately 30 known faults in the San Francisco Bay Area that are considered
capable of generating earthquakes (City of South San Francisco, 1999a). According to the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and USFS, the alluvial lowlands surrounding
Colma Creek between Orange and South Linden Avenues have been determined to be
susceptible to extremely high or very high levels of wave amplification (City of South San
Francisco, 1999a). Ground shaking related to earthquakes can cause tsunami (or tidal
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 72 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
waves) and seiches in the San Francisco Bay. Since Colma Creek is located in a low-lying
area near the San Francisco Bay, there is a possibility for tsunami or seiche inundation. The
Project site is not within a tsunami inundation zone or a low-lying area susceptible to sea
level rise (Department of Conservation 2009; NOAA 2017), and the proposed Project would
not involve the construction of structures for human occupancy. The proposed water
capture facility would be designed in accordance with the CBC requirements. The majority
of the proposed Project would also be installed underground. Therefore, no pollutant
releases due to Project inundation associated with flood hazards, tsunamis, or seiches are
expected and no impacts on hydrology would occur.
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The RWQCB is responsible for the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for
the San Francisco Bay Basin, which establishes water quality objectives to regulate
pollution and control activities that can adversely affect aquatic systems (RWQCB 2017).
Under the CWA, a water body is placed on the Section 303(d) list when the receiving water
does not meet applicable water quality standards listed in the Basin Plan and does not
support the beneficial uses associated with the applicable water quality standard. Once
placed on the 303(d) list, the water body is subject to the development of a TMDL. The San
Francisco Bay RWQCB has developed TMDLs for several pollutants originating from urban
and stormwater runoff in the watersheds throughout San Mateo County. Colma Creek is
among the impaired water bodies with TMDLs for PCBs, mercury, and trash reductions. As
a result, Colma Creek has been identified for water quality improvements in the MRP and
San Mateo County SRP.
The proposed Project was identified in the San Mateo County SRP as a high-priority
regional project that can capture water from a large multi-jurisdictional drainage area. The
proposed Project co-locates stormwater diversion and treatment facilities in Orange
Memorial Park with other planned and future capital improvement projects. The proposed
Project would provide water quality improvements to meet the NPDES requirements of the
San Francisco Bay MRP. Implementation of the water capture facility would address
multiple water quality targets outlined in the MRP, including a reduction in pollutant
discharges of PCBs and mercury to San Francisco Bay to comply with TMDL requirements,
as well as trash discharge reductions. For these reasons, the proposed Project would not
conflict or obstruct the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan. Implementation of the proposed Project would result in
net benefits to receiving water quality in the San Francisco Bay and groundwater recharge
in the West Side Ground Water Basin. Improved groundwater quality in comparison to
existing conditions would also be considered a beneficial hydrological impact of the
proposed Project and no adverse impacts would occur.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 73 June 2019
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed Project is located in a developed urban area along Colma Creek in the City of
South San Francisco. The Project site is located within Orange Memorial Park that is
designated and zoned as Park and Recreation (PR) under the City’s General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance. Land uses in the Project vicinity predominantly consist of residential
areas zoned as Low, Medium, and High Density Residential (RL-8, RM-15, and RH-30,
respectively). Other land uses in the vicinity include commercial development to the west
zoned as El Camino Real/Chestnut Mixed Use High Density (ECR/C-MXH), and Los Cerritos
Elementary School to the south zoned as School (S). There is also a small parcel of land
adjacent to the northwest side of the Park along Chestnut Avenue owned by CalWater and
zoned as Public/Quasi Public (PQP) (City of South San Francisco 1999, 2018a).
The Project site is located within the SFO ALUCP Airport Influence Area (AIA) B, which is
based on a combination of the outer boundaries of the noise compatibility and airport
safety zones (C/CAG 2012).
The existing Colma Creek channel bisects Orange Memorial Park; two pedestrian bridges
the Park traverse the channel. The creek itself is maintained by the San Mateo County Flood
Control District as a flood control channel within the Colma Creek Flood Control Zone.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The proposed Project would implement a subterranean stormwater capture
facility and construction would take place entirely within Orange Memorial Park.
Construction activities over approximately 12 to 18 months including storage and staging
of construction materials have the potential to cause temporary physical disruptions to
residents in the vicinity. Once construction is completed, the Project would not physically
divide an established community. All affected ballfields would be regraded, restored,
reconstructed, and opened back up to the public. The installation of new turf would occur
after the water capture facility is complete, but it is part of a separate and subsequent
project. Therefore, no long-term impact on an established community would result.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 74 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use
plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project. Applicable land use
plans include the City of South San Francisco’s General Plan Land Use Element. Upon
completion of the Project, the existing setting of the Project site, including the open picnic
areas and two ballfields would be regarded and restored and the site would remain zoned
as Park and Recreation (PR) under the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. No park
or open space uses would be permanently displaced because of the water capture facility.
The proposed Project would not result in any changes to existing land use in the vicinity.
Therefore, no impact on applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations would result.
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed Project is located in a developed area comprised of commercial, industrial,
and residential uses. State mineral resources mapping indicates that no mineral resource
recovery sites have been established or considered in the vicinity of the proposed Project
(California Department of Conservation 2015). No oil or gas wells are located near or
within the Project site. The nearest well to the Project area is located approximate 2.1 miles
west and is plugged and abandoned (California Department Of Conservation 2018).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
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?
No Impact. Construction of the proposed Project would occur entirely within Orange
Memorial Park and the Colma Creek channel; temporary construction equipment would be
stored in the general vicinity of the Project site. The entire Project site is previously
disturbed land. No known mineral resources are located on the site or in the area
surrounding the Project. The Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known
or locally important mineral resource. The Project vicinity does not contain active
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 75 June 2019
aggregate or petroleum mining operations, and no such operations would occur. Neither
construction related activities or long-term operation of the proposed Project would cause
a significant loss of mineral resources that would be of value to the region. Therefore, there
would be no impact on mineral resources.
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?
No Impact. The proposed Project is not delineated as a locally important mineral resource
recovery site in the General Plan or on any other land use plan. Therefore, no Project
impacts on mineral resources would occur.
XIII. NOISE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or
federal standards?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The existing noise setting within the vicinity of Orange Memorial Park is generated vehicle
traffic along El Camino Real (State Route 82) and local street traffic along West Orange
Avenue, North Canal Street, Tennis Drive, Memorial Drive, and Commercial Avenue.
Centennial Way bike path is located directly south of the Park and generates bicycle and
pedestrian traffic. The SamsTran Number 37 Bus runs along West Orange Avenue during
weekdays (i.e. school days) with stops at West Orange Avenue and Tennis Drive. The BART
Line runs south of the Park and east of El Camino Real between the South San Francisco
and San Bruno stations. Secondary noise sources in the vicinity consist of aircraft
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 76 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
overflights from the nearby SFO Airport and distant traffic noise from U.S. Highway 101.
Adjacent land uses include urban, industrial, and residential development.
Residences, schools, hotels, child care facilities,
and convalescent facilities are typically
considered noise sensitive land uses. Based on a
conservative approach, the nearest potential
residential receptors to the Project site are single-
family homes located approximately 70 feet east
of the Park along West Orange Avenue and multi-
family residences located at Park Lane
Apartments to the west of the Park and south of
Colma Creek channel (Photo 9). Centennial Dog
Park and Boys and Girls Club of South San
Francisco are located approximately 400 feet to
the south on the opposite side of Memorial Drive.
Los Cerritos Elementary School is located
approximately 600 feet to the southeast of the Memorial Drive and West Orange Avenue
intersection.
The maximum ambient sound levels within residential land use areas are assumed to be
less than 65 dBA (South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.300.010, Performance
Standards).
City of South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) Chapter 8.32 Noise Regulations
The City of South San Francisco regulates exterior noise levels through its Noise
Regulations (Municipal Code Section 8.32.030, Maximum Permissible Sound Levels). Section
8.32.030 of the Noise Regulations contains maximum permissible sound levels to be
generated on properties in the City. The maximum allowable noise level is determined by
the land use category of the nearest sensitive receptor properties. The Noise Ordinance
limits noise levels in single-family or multiple-family residential areas to 60 decibels (dBA)1
between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Section 8.32.030(a) states it is unlawful for any
person to operate any source of sound at any location within the City, which causes the
noise level when measured on any other property to exceed:
1. The noise level standard for the specified land use for a cumulative period of more
than 30 minutes in any hour;
2. The noise level standard plus 5 dB for a cumulative period of more than fifteen
minutes in any hour;
3. The noise level standard plus 10 dB for a cumulative period of more than five
minutes in any hour;
4. The noise level standard plus 15 dB for a cumulative period of more than one
minute in any hour; or
1 Noise is measured and quantified with an A-weighted filter, which closely approximates the way the human
ear hears sound: a deemphasis for low-frequency and high-frequency sound. The resulting measurement is
quantified as an A-weighted decibel, or dBA.
Photo 9.The multi-family residences at the
Park Lane Apartments are located to the
west of Orange Memorial Park and to the
south of the Colma Creek channel.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 77 June 2019
5. The noise level standard or the maximum measured ambient level, plus 20 dB for
any period of time.
The City of South San Francisco regulates interior noise levels through Municipal Code
Section 8.32.040, Interior Noise Limits. Section 8.32.050(d) indicates that a noise level
more than 10 dB above the level allowed by Section 8.32.030 measured three feet from any
wall, floor or ceiling inside any unit on the same property when the windows and doors of
the unit are closed is unallowable.
The Noise Ordinance also contains special provisions for construction activities in
Municipal Code Section 8.32.050, Special Provisions. Section 8.32.050(d) indicates that
construction activities that are authorized by a valid city permit are allowed on weekdays
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.; on Saturdays between 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 other hours as authorized in the city
permit, as long as they meet at least one of the following noise limitations:
1. No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding 90 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.
2. The noise level at any point outside the property plane of the Project shall not
exceed 90 dB (Ordinance 1088 Section 1, 1990).
According to Municipal Code Section 8.32.060, Exception Permits, if the applicant can show
to the City Manager, or the Manager’s designee, that a diligent investigation of available
noise abatement techniques indicates that immediate compliance with the requirements of
this chapter would be impracticable or unreasonable, a permit to allow exception from the
provisions contained in this chapter may be issued, with appropriate conditions to
minimize the public determinant caused by such exceptions. Any such permit shall be of as
short a duration as possible, but in no case for longer than six months. These permits are
renewable upon a showing of good cause, and shall be conditioned by a schedule for
compliance and details of compliance methods in appropriate cases (Ordinance 1088
Section 1, 1990).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local,
state, or federal standards?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Construction noise would be limited by both the
permitted hours of construction activities and the maximum noise levels that would
potentially affect nearby properties. The City’s Municipal Code contains noise regulations
for permitted construction hours of operation and allowable exterior noise levels.
Therefore, the proposed Project would result in a significant noise impact if:
• Project construction activities occur outside allowed construction hours of operation
identified in The City’s Municipal Code Section 8.32.050, Special Provisions or do not
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 78 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
contain a valid city permit authorizing such construction activities and that such
activities do not produce a noise level exceeding 90 dB at a dista nce of 25 feet or
exceed 90 dB at any point outside the property plane of the project.
• Project operational noise sources exceed 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) for single-family uses.
Changes in noise levels of less than 3 dBA are generally not discernible to most people,
while changes greater than 5 dBA are readily noticeable and would be considered a
significant increase. Therefore, the significance threshold for mobile source noise is based
on human perceptibility to changes in noise levels with consideration of existing ambient
noise conditions and the City’s Noise Regulations. For ground borne vibration, according to
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines, a vibration level of 65 vibration
decibels (VdB) is the threshold of perceptibility for humans.2 For a significant impact to
occur, vibration levels must exceed 80 VdB during infrequent events ( U.S. Department of
Transportation [USDOT] / Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2006b).
Construction Noise
Two types of temporary noise impacts would occur during the 18-month Project
construction period. First, construction workers would commute to the site and trucks
would transport equipment and materials to the site. These worker and truck trips would
incrementally increase noise levels on El Camino Real and the local roads throughout the
duration of project construction. These worker and truck trips would result in intermittent
noise increases on local roads, but would not affect long-term ambient noise levels. The
second type of temporary noise impact would be related to noise generated during site
mobilization and staging, excavation, installation of water capture facilities, and grading.
Louder types of construction equipment would potentially include the operation of dozers,
cranes, front loaders, excavators, dump trucks, backhoes, generators, air compressors, and
forklifts. The City would ensure Project construction would comply with the City’s Noise
Regulations, but certain activities would potentially be more noticeable and cause short-
term nuisances to nearby sensitive receptors.
To determine noise levels associated with short-term construction (i.e., installation of the
water capture facility) and the corresponding noise levels that would be experienced at the
nearest sensitive receptor(s), it is industry practice (General Assessment) to combine the
two loudest pieces of equipment that would be operating simultaneously during a specific
construction phase and then calculate the attenuation of the construction noise level based
on the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor(s) (U.S. Department of Transportation
[USDOT] / Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2006). Maximum construction equipment
noise levels at the nearby sensitive receptors during construction are shown in Table 6. As
shown in Table 6, noise levels would be highest at the nearby sensitive receptors during
site mobilization and staging, the installation of the underground storage reservoir (i.e.
structural/auger drilling), and grading. Depending on the final plans for the underground
storage reservoir, these activities would include excavation and grading activities within 50
2 VdB is the vibration velocity level expressed in decibels relative to one micro-inch per second (1 x 10-6 inch per second).
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 79 June 2019
feet of the property line of the Park.3 However, typical construction equipment would not
be expected to generate noise levels above 90 dBA at 50 feet, and most equipment types
would typically generate noise levels of 85 dBA at 50 feet.
Table 6. Typical Noise Levels from Construction Equipment
Construction Equipment Noise Level (dB, Lmax1 at 50 feet)
Dump Truck 76
Auger Drill Rig 84
Drill Rig Truck 79
Air Compressor 78
Crane 81
Scraper 84
Dozer 82
Paver 77
Generator 81
Rock Drill 81
Front End Loader 79
Grader 85
Backhoe 78
Source: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide 2006.
1 Lmax is the instantaneous maximum noise level for a specified period of time.
For the proposed Project, the combined loudest pieces of equipment (e.g., crane, dump
truck, dozer, etc. at 85 dBA), during construction would reach 88 dBA at 50 feet from the
construction activity (USDOT / Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2006). These
higher noise levels would be generated during the use of earth moving equipment and
excavation activities, installation of the underground storage reservoir, and grading.
Therefore, the construction noise level at the sensitive receptor locations, including both
the single-family residences along West Orange Avenue and multi-family residences at Park
Lane Apartments, both located 70 feet from the Project site would be 85 dBA.
If a valid city permit is obtained, construction activities would comply with the South San
Francisco Noise Regulations, as long as no individual piece of equipment shall produce
noise levels that exceed the construction noise limit of 90 dB at the property line. Similarly,
groundborne vibration levels during construction should be minimal as no vibratory
equipment is expected to be used (e.g. jackhammers to break up pavement). While noise
levels would potentially still impact nearby sensitive receptors, these noise levels would be
temporary. Therefore, the proposed Project must adhere to the City’s Municipal Code and
obtain a valid city permit consistent with Municipal Code Section 8.32.050, Special
Provisions and implement standard noise reduction measures. The implementation of these
standard noise reduction measures would minimize the temporary increase in noise levels
and nuisance impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.
3 Based on the 30 percent conceptual plans, the underground storage reservoir is sited approximately 200 feet from
the property line of the Park along West Orange Avenue. The pipe inlet structure and diversion channel are sited
approximately 75 feet from the property line of the Park south of Colma Creek.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 80 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Operational Noise
There would be little to no operational noise associated with the proposed Project. The
water capture facility is a gravity-fed system that would not involve any large-scale
electrical or pumping equipment. Minimal noise generated by the water quality polishing
and disinfection shed and irrigation pump would occur. The dedicated equipment shed
would measure approximately 15 feet by 20 feet and would house the carbon and UV
treatment and distribution equipment and a control panel. Noise associated with running
the irrigation equipment would only consist of minor humming and would be similar to
noise levels associated with the existing irrigation pump in the same area. The small-scale
irrigation pump would be located adjacent to the equipment shed along the western
boundary of the ballfields and to the northeast of the large covered picnic area. The
operational noise levels associated with the new irrigation pump would be within a noise
level reduction enclosure (i.e., shed) and pump noise levels would not exceed the existing
criteria noise level for the specific land use. Park visitors who are utilizing the open picnic
area would potentially hear the light humming; however, this noise would be nominal and
unlikely detectable unless close to the shed (e.g., walking on the foot path between
ballfields and open picnic area).
In summary, noise levels associated with developing the water capture facility would
exceed criteria identified in South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 112.05 (60 dBA in
residential zones) and ambient noise levels of the area (Q-M2-1 zone are assumed to be 70
dBA). Short-term construction noise levels would be approximately 85 dBA at the single-
family residences along West Orange Avenue and the multi-family residences at the Park
Lane Apartments, both located approximately 70 feet away from the proposed construction
activity. Operational noise levels associated with an irrigation pump would not exceed the
existing criteria noise level for the specific land use as the irrigation pump would be within
a noise level reduction enclosure. Therefore, if construction activities occur within allowed
construction hours and a valid city exception permit is obtained and no single piece of
equipment would exceed a noise level of 90 dBA, then noise impacts would be temporary
and limited to nuisance impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. The implementation of the
mitigation measure below is required to ensure construction noise levels remain below the
noise thresholds. Therefore, noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Noise Minimization Measures
Construction noise levels would vary depending on the construction phase, equipment
type, duration, distance between noise source and sensitive receptor(s), and the
presence/absence of barriers between the noise source and receptors. To minimize
temporary increases in noise, the City shall require the construction contractor to limit
standard construction activities as follows:
• Secure a valid city permit for construction noise levels that could potentially
temporarily exceed 90 dB at the Park’s property line in order to comply with the
South San Francisco Noise Regulations.
• Construction equipment and haul trucks shall use the best available noise
control techniques, including improved mufflers, use of intake silencers, ducts,
engine enclosures and acoustically-attenuating barriers, curtains, and shields.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 81 June 2019
• Site stationary noise sources, such as air compressors and generators as far from
adjacent sensitive receptors as possible (i.e. site stationary sources along
western perimeter of ballfields and along Memorial Drive). These sources shall
be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds or incorporate insulation
barriers, shields, or other attenuating measures.
• If impact equipment and machinery are used such as jack hammers, pavement
breakers, and rock drills, they shall be hydraulically or electrically-powered to
avoid noise associated with air compressors or pneumatically-powered tools. If
the use of pneumatically-powered tools is necessary, an exhaust muffler shall be
installed on the air compressor. Such a muffler can lower noise levels from the
exhaust by up to 10 dBA. Similarly, the installation of external jackets on the
tools can reduce noise levels by 5 dBA.
• Material stockpiles and mobile equipment, staging, and parking areas shall be
located as far as possible from noise sensitive receptors (i.e. within parking area
west of enclosed picnic area off Memorial Drive and within vacant parcel located
in northwest portion of Orange Memorial Park).
• As construction would occur within 600 feet of Los Cerritos Elementary School,
the construction contractor shall coordinate with the school administration to
limit noise disturbance to the campus. Temporary sound walls shall be
constructed on the Project site boundary with the School.
• Identify a liaison that represents the property owners located adjacent to the
Project site along West Orange Avenue and a second liaison for the residents at
the Park Lane Apartment complex. These liaisons shall be contacted with
concerns regarding construction noise. The liaison’s contact information shall be
clearly displayed at the construction location on posted signs informing the
public of the construction hours and the liaison to contact in the event of a noise-
related problem.
• Notify all adjacent landowners and occupants of the properties adjacent to the
Project site of the anticipated construction schedule at least two weeks prior to
ground disturbing activities.
• Hold a pre-construction meeting with the Contractor Superintendent, General
Contractor, and City inspectors to confirm that all noise mitigation measures
(including signage on construction hours, valid city exception permit, and liaison
contact information) are completed.
If construction activity cannot comply with Municipal Code Section 8.32.050, Special
Provisions and noise levels are anticipated to exceed 90 dB at the Park’s property line,
the City shall require the construction contractor to obtain a valid exception permit
consistent with Municipal Code Section 8.32.060, Exception Permit.
Implementation of MM NOISE-1 would reduce noise impacts to less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 82 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
Less than Significant. According to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines, a
vibration level of 65 vibration decibels (VdB) is the threshold of perceptibility for humans.4
For a significant impact to occur, vibration levels must exceed 80 VdB during infrequent
events (U.S. Department of Transportation [USDOT] / Federal Transit Administration [FTA]
2006b). As a result, the excavation and grading activities associated with the water capture
facility would potentially result in vibration impacts due to human annoyance associated
with the vibration-generating activities. Table 7 shows the typical vibration levels
produced by construction equipment.
Table 7. Vibration Levels for Varying Construction Equipment
Type of Equipment Peak Particle Velocity (ppv) at
25 feet (inches/second)
Approximate Velocity Level at
25 feet (VdB)
Large Bulldozer 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks 0.076 86
Small Bulldozer 0.003 58
Auger/Drill Rigs 0.089 87
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 85
Vibratory Compactor/Roller 0.210 94
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006.
Vibration levels would be less than the 0.2 inches/sec ppv threshold of damage at buildings
over 25 feet from the Project site, except for compactor/roller equipment,. While vibration-
generating activities associated with the Project would primarily occur during site clearing
and excavation, these levels would be minimal as no vibratory equipment is expected to be
used to excavate the ballfield area (e.g., jackhammers to break up pavement) and
auger/drill rig equipment at a 25-foot distance would generate 0.089 ppv. The nearest
structures (i.e. single-family residences, multi-family apartments) are located over 70 feet
from the Project site. Based on the Caltrans Technical Advisory, vibrations are not
predicted to exceed safe thresholds at any adjacent sensitive receptors. Therefore,
vibration impacts would be less than significant.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less than Significant. The nearest airport to the Project vicinity is the SFO airport,
located approximately 2.1 miles to the southeast. The Project site is located within the SFO
ALUCP Airport Influence Area (AIA) B, which is based on a combination of the outer
boundaries of the noise compatibility and airport safety zones (C/CAG 2012). According to
the City’s General Plan EIR, aircraft noise from SFO is the primarily source of
4 VdB is the vibration velocity level expressed in decibels relative to one micro-inch per second (1 x 10-6 inch per second).
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 83 June 2019
transportation noise in the City. The Project site is just outside the aircraft noise exposure
contour. Because the Project would not introduce residents or employees to the area, it
would not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels
associated with the nearby airport. Therefore, noise impacts would be less than significant.
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of South San Francisco has a population of 67,078, with approximately 6,961.2
persons per square mile as of January 1, 2019 (DOF 2019). The City has experienced steady
population growth in recent years; US Census Bureau data shows an estimated citywide
population growth of 5.9 percent between April 2010 and July 2017. The City has an
estimated 21,006 households with an average of 3.14 persons per household recorded
between 2012 and 2016 (US Census Bureau 2017).
The Project site is located in an urban, developed area. The surrounding vicinity is
designated as low, medium, and high density residential, commercial, and school uses by
the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not include the construction of any new
structures, or residential housing, and does not involve the demolition of any structures.
Therefore, the proposed Project would not directly induce population such that no impact
to the local or regional population and housing would occur.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 84 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
No Impact. The proposed Project would not involve the displacement of existing people
or housing. Therefore, no construction of replacement housing would be needed and no
impacts on population and housing would occur.
IV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, or
the need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The South San Francisco Fire Department (SSFFD) provides fire protection services and
emergency medical (paramedic) services within the City. The City has five stations that
provide the community with emergency response services. The closest fire station is
located at 480 North Canal Street, approximately 2,500 feet to the east of the Project site.
The SSFFD provides a full emergency medical services program with a minimum on-duty
staff of 20 persons. Currently, the Emergency Medical Services division consists of 39 dual-
role Paramedic Firefighters, 10 part-time Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) and one
Emergency Medical Services (EM) Chief (City of South San Francisco 2018b).
The South San Francisco Police Department (SSFPD) provides law enforcement and police
protection services within the City with headquarters located approximately 0.4 miles from
the Project site. The Department is allotted 83 sworn and 35 civilian positions and is
divided into two Divisions, Operations and Services. The Operations Division includes
Patrol, Criminal Investigations, Downtown Bike Patrol, K-9, Neighborhood Response Team,
SWAT/Hostage Negotiations, and Traffic/Motors. The Services Division includes
Communications, Community Relations, Property/Evidence, Records, Planning, and
Recruiting. The Patrol Division consists of over 40 officers who cover 11 square miles of
the City on a 24-hour basis, and respond to both emergency and non-emergency calls for
service in each of the City’s four patrol “beats” (City of South San Francisco 2018c).
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 85 June 2019
The South San Francisco Unified School District (SSFUSD) is the primary school district that
provides public school education to the neighborhoods adjacent to the Project site. The
SSFUSD includes nine elementary schools, three middle schools, and three high schools.
There are also approximately four private schools within the City (City of South San
Francisco 2018d). The nearest public school to the Project site is Los Cerritos Elementary
School, located approximately 600 feet south of the Project Site.
The City of South San Francisco owns and operates approximately 264.9 acres of parks and
open space throughout the City, including 144.9 acres of 21 parks and playgrounds, 59.5
acres of open space, and 13.6 acres of athletic fields (City of South San Francisco 2018e).
The Project occurs within Orange Memorial Park, as described in Section XVI, Recreation.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of
the public services:
Fire protection?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Construction of the proposed Project would
install a water capture facility. No habitable structures would be constructed nor would
flammable materials be used during construction requiring an expanded need for fire
protection services that would result in the need for new or physically altered fire
protection facilities. Project implementation would not contribute to an increase in
population requiring fire protection services. The presence of Project construction workers
would be temporary such that the need for emergency medical services in case of an
accident would not exceed the City’s current demand and capacity.
Heavy trucking and worker commute trips during construction of the Project would
potentially induce short-term traffic on West Orange Avenue and Memorial Drive, which
would potentially cause a minor impact to emergency response routes. Construction
activities would occur within the Park and would be completed in accordance to applicable
SSFFD emergency access standards. Impacts to traffic during construction are further
described in Section XVII, Transportation. The proposed Project would also temporarily
disrupt circulation and parking along Memorial Drive (and possibly Tennis Avenue and
Eucalyptus Drive), requiring at a minimum a one-lane closure of Memorial Drive for
construction staging. These disruptions would potentially cause short-term impacts on fire
and emergency services due to temporary increases in traffic congestions on the
surrounding local streets, and in turn would potentially cause the providers to seek
alternate routes. As a result, these impacts are potentially significant despite possible
alternative routes in the vicinity. Therefore, implementation of a traffic control plan would
be established by the contractor and would be approved by the City of South San Francisco
and San Mateo County to reduce substantially adverse physical impacts associated with the
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 86 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
construction of the water capture facility. The plan would ensure coordination with
emergency response providers that serve the surrounding area.
Operation of the Project would not induce growth or result in the generation of significant
additional demand for fire protection services within the area, as it would increase water
quality but not involve generating new sources of potable water. The proposed Project
would not increase demand for public services including emergency services or fire
protection. Operation of the proposed Project would occur largely underground and
require only periodic maintenance, similar to the activities currently conducted at the
existing channel. Therefore, no new or expanded emergency service or fire infrastructure
would need to be built in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives of public services. Thus, impacts on fire protection services
during construction and operation would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Traffic Control Plan
A traffic control plan shall be established by the contractor, and approved by the
City of South San Francisco. This traffic plan shall provide for the appropriate
control measures, including barricades, warning signs, speed control devices,
flaggers, and other measures to mitigate potential traffic hazards in the vicinity of
the Park and El Cerrito Elementary School. The plan shall ensure coordination with
administrators of El Cerrito Elementary School and other nearby facilities, such as
the Boys and Girls Club by providing advanced notification to the facility
administrators on the timing, location, and duration of construction activities.
The traffic control plan shall also ensure coordination with emergency response
providers that serve surrounding area. The City of South San Francisco shall
potentially require a detour route if Tennis Avenue would be closed as a staging
area. If this detour route is necessary, it shall be devised by the contractor as part of
the traffic control plan. The plan shall also require that the export of excess soils
occur between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to avoid peak traffic periods.
Implementation of MM TRA-1 would reduce short-term impacts on fire protection services
to less than significant.
Police protection?, Schools?, Parks?, Other public facilities?
Less than Significant. Implementation of the proposed Project would not develop
facilities that would contribute to an increase in population nor increase the need for
schools or other public facilities. Consequently, the amount of people served by the local
school district would not increase as a result of the proposed Project. The proposed Project
would not contribute to an increase in population and an associated increase in existing
recreational facilities that would potentially result in physical deterioration of existing
facilities. The proposed Project, however, would be located within the Park designated and
zoned for recreation and open space uses (City of South San Francisco Planning Division
2015). Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would temporarily limit the use of
approximately 1.5 to 2.5 acres of the Park during construction over a 12- to 18-month
period, thereby temporarily increasing recreation use at adjacent park and open space
within Orange Memorial Park. Such temporary limits on access to recreational resources in
Orange Memorial Park, particularly the open picnic area and softball and baseball fields,
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 87 June 2019
would potentially create increased short-term demand at other parks and recreational
resources in the Project area. After construction, the existing park uses would be regraded
and restored, and as part of a separate and subsequent project, the existing ballfields would
be restored with new turf. Therefore, long-term recreational impacts would be less than
significant.
Once constructed, the water capture facility and storm drain conveyance pipes would be
underground, and the one small above-ground facility (i.e. water quality polishing and
disinfection and equipment shed) would not impact the use of recreational or public
facilities. The proposed Project would involve periodic inspection and maintenance of the
new facilities at the pipe inlet structure and the underground storage reservoir. Although
ballfield improvements, such as new turf, fencing, and dugouts are part of a separate and
subsequent project, once operational the proposed Project would result in overall
improved facilities at Orange Memorial Park. Operation impacts would not result in
substantial adverse impacts related to the new or physically altered features. Therefore,
long-term Project impacts on police, school, park, and other public facility services would
be less than significant.
XVI. RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) 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) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities that might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of South San Francisco is home to a range of outdoor recreation opportunities,
each reflecting the variety of the City’s landscape and pattern of development. The City’s
Parks and Recreation Department manages 264.9 total acres over 30 designated parks and
open space areas, averaging 4.1 acres per 1,000 residents. This includes 144.9 acres of 21
parks and playgrounds, 59.5 acres of open space, and 13.6 acres of athletic fields, each of
which are generally used year-round (City of South San Francisco 2018e).
Recreational facilities in the Project vicinity include Orange Memorial Park, Centennial Way
biking and walking trail, and Centennial Way Dog Park. Orange Memorial Park offers 28
acres of amenities including baseball, softball, and soccer fields, an indoor swimming pool,
two children’s playgrounds, seven tennis courts, a skate park, Orange Memorial Pool and
the Joseph A. Fernekes Recreation Building. The two ballfields are used year-round for
various athletic teams, including but not limited to youth baseball, youth and adult softball,
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 88 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
South San Francisco High School Athletics, and flag football. Athletic organizations that
currently use the ballfields include: South San Francisco High School; South San Francisco
youth baseball and softball leagues, the City of South San Francisco adult softball team, Colt
summer baseball program, and the South San Francisco Junior Giants team. Other groups
that use the ballfields include: the Summer High School Baseball Clinics, City of South San
Francisco Flag Football team, and the Boys and Girls Club. The soccer fields are also used
year-round for youth soccer practice and games.
The Park contains five of the City’s sixteen picnic areas that are available for rent or walk-
up use, which have a total occupancy of 290 people. The Park also serves as the location for
major community-wide events including Farmers Markets, car shows, and other public and
private events, such as Concert in the Park, Day in the Park, Streets Alive!, Parks Alive!, and
Movie Nights in the Park. The South San Francisco Farmer’s Market currently occurs every
Saturday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. While most of these special events occur within the
northern portion of the Park at the soccer fields, Joseph A. Fernekes Building, and
basketball and tennis courts, the Concert in the Park (in September) takes place on all of
the park sport fields, and various picnic season events (March to October) occur at the five
group picnic areas in the southern portion of the Park. Table 8 lists additional parks within
one mile of Orange Memorial Park.
Table 8. Recreational Facilities Within 1 mile of the Project Site
Source: City of South San Francisco Parks and Recreation Department 2018
Facility Name Location Relative to the Project Facilities
Centennial Way 0 miles- runs adjacent to Project
site to the south
• Regional Walking & Bicycle Trail
• Runs from SSF BART to San Bruno
BART
Sister Cities Park Trail terminus 30 feet to east • Trail between Orange Avenue and
Spruce Avenue
Avalon Memorial Lots 0.72 miles to the south • Open Space, Walking path and
benches
Avalon Park 0.84 miles to the south
• Children’s play area
• Public Restrooms
• Group picnic areas with picnic tables
• Ballfields (1 baseball)
Buri Buri Park 0.70 miles to the west
• Children’s play areas
• Picnic tables and group picnic areas
• Tennis and Basketball courts
• Ballfields (1 baseball)
• Walking trail
• Concession stand and restrooms
City Hall Playlot 0.83 miles to the east • Children’s play area
• Picnic tables
Francisco Terrace
Playlot 0.63 miles to the southeast
• Adult fitness equipment
• Basketball courts
• Children’s play area
Sign Hill Park 0.75 miles to the north • Walking Trail & Open space
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 89 June 2019
Regional recreational facilities include Centennial Way (bicycle and walking trail) and
Centennial Way Dog Park. Centennial Way, one of three linear parks in the City, is a popular
public trail for bike and pedestrian travel, which borders a portion of Orange Memorial
Park to the west. The Centennial Way park area is also home to Centennial Way Dog Park
and a sculpture garden, each of which are popular points of interest for pedestrians and
cyclists using the trail (City of South San Francisco 2018f).
There are also numerous recreation amenities including baseball and softball fields at
nearby schools, such as Ponderosa Elementary School, Sunshine Gardens Elementary
School, Alta Loma Middle School, South San Francisco High School, Baden High School, and
El Camino High School.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) 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?
Less than Significant. Demand for park and recreation services are typically linked to an
increase in population growth in the area through the development of new housing units or
the generation of new jobs. The proposed Project does not involve new housing or jobs; it
would construct and install the underground storage reservoir that would temporarily
limit the use of the Park for a 12 to 18-month construction period, thereby temporarily
increasing the use of adjacent space within Orange Memorial Park. Such temporary limits
on access to recreational resources would potentially also create increased demand on
neighborhood and regional parks and recreational resources in the Project area (listed in
Table 8).
Given that the two ballfields and a portion of the open picnic area at the Park would be out
of service during construction, athletic teams that typically use these ballfields would need
to utilize other ballfields in the area. As shown in Table 8 above, there are two parks with
ballfields within one mile of the Park, and a total of twelve other ballfields in the City. As a
result, construction of the Project would result in increased use at nearby sport fields. This
increased use would be from the softball and baseball leagues that currently use the ball
fields at Orange Memorial Park. The construction period for the proposed Project however
would be temporary, the two ballfields would be regraded and restored upon completion
of construction, and temporary use at other neighborhood and regional parks (and
ballfields) would not increase enough to cause substantial physical deterioration of the
facilities. Therefore, recreational impacts would be less than significant.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Less than Significant. Once completed, the proposed Project would provide
improvements to the existing two ballfields. During construction, both the softball and
baseball field would be temporarily fenced off and removed from use, but would be
regraded and restored upon Project completion. The construction of new fencing and
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 90 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
dugouts and the installation of new turf would also occur as part of a separate and
subsequent project. While the proposed Project would restrict recreation use within a
portion of the Park during construction, water capture facility operation would involve
minimal maintenance and no adverse physical impacts on the environment. Operations and
maintenance of the Project would include: cleaning out the grit chamber/trash screen and
the infiltration chamber up to four times annually; filtration and disinfection equipment
maintenance annually; and weekly checks on the irrigation reuse system. Therefore,
impacts associated with the construction or expansion of recreational facilities would be
less than significant.
XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) serves as the
Congestion Management Agency for San Mateo County and is responsible for administering
the state-mandated Congestion Management Program and preparing the Countywide
Transportation Plan, which establishes a long-range transportation vision for the county
and informs the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS) prepared by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The San Mateo County Transit District
(SamTrans) oversees the County’s bus transit system; the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers
Board (JPB) conducts planning and operations for the Caltrain commuter rail system; and
the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) is responsible for planning and
funding transportation improvements associated with the countywide transportation sales
tax (C/CAG 2018). The City is also responsible for planning and implementing
improvements to the local roadways within its jurisdiction. Applicable plans that are
relevant to the Project site and vicinity include: the Transportation Element of the City
General Plan; Pedestrian Master Plan (PMP); Bicycle Master Plan; City’s CAP; San Mateo
County Congestion Management Plan (CMP); and Plan Bay Area 2040 RTP/SCS.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 91 June 2019
The circulation system in the Project vicinity is comprised of residential roads and a state
highway. The principal component of this network includes State Route 82, which serves as
one of three main arterials of the City’s circulation network. The road network also
consists of Chestnut Avenue/Westborough Boulevard, West Orange Avenue, Memorial
Drive, Tennis Drive, and Eucalyptus Avenue. Figure 4 shows the surrounding
transportation network, as well as the designated truck traffic haul routes and proposed
travel routes for the Project. A description of each road included as part of this network is
also provided below.
State Route 82
California State Route 82 (SR-82) is a state highway controlled and maintained by the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) that extends for approximately 52
miles from Interstate 880 in San Jose to Interstate Route 280 in San Francisco. SR-82
comprises a portion of California’s historic El Camino Real as a component of the California
National Highway System, and serves as a major arterial road for the peninsula (Caltrans
2011). SR-82 is designated in the City’s Municipal Code as a truck traffic route for vehicles
exceeding a maximum gross weight of three tons (City of South San Francisco 2018a).
Within the Project vicinity, SR-82 is a six-lane highway with an intermittent center median
that is intersected by minor arterial and collector roads to provide through access to local
roadway networks. The posted speed limit of SR-82 in the Project vicinity (between its
intersection with West Orange Avenue and 1st Street) is 35 miles per hour (mph). SR-82
has an average daily traffic level varying from an average 32,000 to 41,000 daily vehicles
per day (ADT) (Caltrans 2016). According to the City of South San Francisco General Plan
Transportation Element, SR-82 has a daily volume of varying from 24,700 to 45,500 daily
trips with a capacity of 40,000 to 60,000 ADT (City of South San Francisco 1999). The
portion of SR-82 in the Project vicinity from Orange Avenue to Chestnut supports 30,951
ADT according to a transportation impact analysis prepared for the Community Civic
Campus Project Subsequent EIR (City of South San Francisco 2017a). While most roadway
segments were expected to be maintained within the City (based on the 1999 General
Plan), portions of El Camino Real continue to operate at congested levels (City of South San
Francisco 1999).
At SR-82 intersections with 1st Street and 2nd Street, designated right-turn lanes are absent
in both the northbound and southbound directions, while unprotected left-turn lanes are
provided. The intersection of West Orange Avenue lacks a designated right-turn lane but
provides a signalized left-turn lane in the northbound and southbound directions, as well
as pedestrian crosswalks. SR-82 is also a designated Class III bicycle route, in which there is
no bicycle lane and the road is shared with automobiles and other vehicles. The road
shoulders of SR-82 in the vicinity are used as parking for access to local businesses and
residences, and there are sidewalks present on both sides of the road. SR-82 is
approximately 100 feet in width including road shoulders.
EUCALYPTUS AVENUEEUCALYPTUS AVENUEM
I
S
S
I
O
N
R
O
A
D
MISSION ROAD
JUNIPERO SERRA BOULEVARDJUNIPERO SERRA BOULEVARDSOUTH SPRUCE AVENUESOUTH SPRUCE AVENUETENNISTENNIS
DRIVEDRIVE
HILLLSIDDE BOULEVARD
WEST ORANGEWEST ORANGE
AVENUEAVENUEMEMORIALMEMORIAL
DRIVEDRIVE
CENTENNIAL WAYCENTENNIAL WAY
TRAILTRAIL
EUCALYPTUS AVENUEM
I
S
S
I
O
N
R
O
A
D
JUNIPERO SERRA BOULEVARDSOUTH SPRUCE AVENUESNEATH LANELAWN
D
A
L
E
B
O
U
L
E
V
A
R
D
TENNIS
DRIVE
HILLSI
DE BOULEVARD
WEST ORANGE
AVENUE
WE STBOROUGH BOULEVARD
MEMORIAL
DRIVE
CENTENNIAL WAY
TRAIL
SAN BRUNO
COLMA
280
380
82
LEGEND
Orange Memorial Park
Construction Haul Route
Designated Truck Traffic Route
Centennial Way Trail
Bart 13 Line and Station
SamTrans Bus Route 37 and
Stops in the Project Area
Other Park
City of South San Francisco
Other Incorporated City
San Mateo County
0 1,600
SCALE IN FEET
N
Transportation Network 4
FIGURE
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 93 June 2019
Chestnut Avenue/Westborough Boulevard
Chestnut Avenue is a major arterial road that transitions from Westborough Boulevard east
of SR-82/El Camino Real and extends west for approximately 4,850 feet to Hillside
Boulevard north of the Project vicinity (City of South San Francisco 1999). This portion of
the roadway is also designated as a truck traffic route for vehicles exceeding a maximum
weight of three tons in the City’s Municipal Code (City of South San Francisco 2018a). The
speed limit of Chestnut Boulevard from El Camino Real to Commercial Avenue is 30 mph
(City of South San Francisco 2018a). The portion of the roadway from Grand Avenue to
Mission Road supports 19,332 ADT (City of South San Francisco 2017a). The width of the
paved road is approximately 85 feet, with four through lanes and one to two dedicated turn
lanes in each direction. At its intersection with Commercial Avenue, designated light-
controlled right- and left- turn lanes are provided in each direction. Chestnut Avenue does
not provide direct access to the Project site but would potentially convey vehicular
transportation to the vicinity via Commercial Avenue.
West Orange Avenue
West Orange Avenue is a two-lane undivided road controlled by the City of South San
Francisco that borders the Park to the southeast and provides access to the Project site.
West Orange Avenue is classified as a minor arterial road by the City’s General Plan
Transportation Element and has free-flowing traffic conditions with a Level of Service
(LOS) rating of A (City of South San Francisco 1999). According to the City of South San
Francisco General Plan Transportation Element, Orange Avenue between North Canal
Street and Commercial Street, north of the Project site, has a daily volume of 9,700 daily
trips with a capacity of 18,000 ADT. The speed limit of West Orange Avenue within the
Project vicinity is 25 mph. West Orange Avenue has frequent driveway access on the
residential side from its intersection with Memorial Drive to North Canal Street, north of
which it is separated from residences by a grove of eucalyptus trees. Pedestrian
accommodation is provided by sidewalks on both sides of the road and crosswalks at stop-
controlled intersections. West Orange Avenue is a designated bike route with defined bike
lanes along the majority of 1,300 foot border of the Park. The width of the paved road is
approximately 55 feet, including shoulders on either side that would potentially be utilized
as additional parking for access to residences and visitors to the Park.
Memorial Drive
Memorial Drive is a two-lane undivided road that borders the Park to the south and serves
as the primary access route to the Park Lane Apartments located to the southeast Colma
Creek. Beginning at West Orange Avenue, Memorial Drive extends for approximately 1,300
feet along the southern perimeter of the Park until its terminus behind the Park Lane
Apartments. The road has a speed limit of 15 mph and provides primary access to parking
lots along the south and west perimeter of Park. Pedestrian access along Memorial Drive is
limited as there is no developed shoulder or sidewalk as the road is separated from Park
facilities by a dirt barrier lined with eucalyptus trees. However, pedestrians would
potentially walk along the dirt barrier. Memorial Drive has an approximate width of 24
feet.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 94 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Tennis Drive
Tennis Drive is a two-lane undivided road that borders the Park to the north and has
frequent driveway access to residences north of the Park. Tennis Drive serves as the
primary access route to the largest central parking lot of the Park, adjacent to facilities such
as the Joseph A. Fernekes Recreation building, tennis courts, and a children’s playground.
Recreationalists utilizing Orange Memorial Pool would potentially use Tennis Drive to
access a smaller parking lot located within the northeast boundary of the Park. There are
one-directional stop signs at its intersections with West Orange Avenue and Eucalyptus
Avenue, and pedestrian accommodation is provided to access the Park. Tennis Drive is
classified as a local street under the City’s General Plan Transportation Element and has a
posted speed limit of 15 mph (City of South San Francisco 1999).
Eucalyptus Avenue
Eucalyptus Avenue is a two-lane undivided road that extends south from Tennis Drive and
provides primary access to facilities in the northwestern portion of the Park. Beginning at
Tennis Drive, Eucalyptus Avenue extends for approximately 425 feet and provides
driveway access to art studios and the skate park. The paved road then turns 90 degrees
east into the Park and transitions into a one-way street that allows through access back to
Tennis Drive in a loop around the Park’s central parking lot. For the length of the road
south of Tennis Drive and within the Park, Eucalyptus Avenue varies between
approximately 22-to 30-feet wide and is classified as a local street under the City’s General
Plan Transportation Element (City of South San Francisco 1999). This portion of
Eucalyptus Avenue does not have a posted speed limit.
Centennial Way / Biking and Pedestrian
The Centennial Way Trail is a 2.85-mile asphalt bike and pedestrian path that runs adjacent
to the Park for approximately 1,000 feet and provides direct access to park facilities (City of
South San Francisco 2018f). The trail is a designated linear park and is classified as a
contiguous Class 1 bike path, in which paved facilities are physically separated from
roadways used by motor vehicles and are designated for bike use (City of South San
Francisco 1999). Centennial Way is 10 feet wide with a decomposed granite shoulder along
the length of the paved trail. The Park is a dedicated point of interest according to the City’s
Centennial Way brochure (City of South San Francisco 2018f).
Public Transportation
The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is a heavy rail elevated and subway system that serves
the Bay Area and travels underground adjacent to the southern border of the Park. BART
provides daily regional transportation connecting San Francisco and Oakland to urban and
suburban areas, and linking communities to employment and activity centers throughout
the region. The nearest BART service to the Project vicinity is the South San Francisco
station, located approximately 1.15 miles to the northwest.
SamTrans provides bus service, including Redi-Wheels paratransit service and Caltrain
commuter rail service operated by San Mateo County Transit District. It operates 76 bus
routes throughout San Mateo County and into parts of San Francisco and Palo Alto. The
Caltrain Commuter Rail is a ticketed train service that provides regional weekday and
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 95 June 2019
weekend transportation in a linear route through the City. The nearest Caltrain service
station to the Project vicinity is approximately 1.2 miles to the east.
The South City Shuttle is a free, public weekday service that operates in a clockwise loop
and provides transit connections with SamTrans and BART, as well as trips to local stores
and community centers. The shuttle provides 15 daily departures times at two stops
located along West Orange Avenue that provide access to the Project vicinity.
Public Parking in the Project Vicinity
Public parking in the Project vicinity is available in City-owned public parking lots accessed
through Memorial Drive, Eucalyptus Avenue, and Tennis Drive, with the majority of off-
street parking available within a small parking lot off Memorial Drive (i.e. approximately
140 parking spaces) and a large parking lot off Tennis Avenue (i.e. approximately 160
parking spaces) On-street parallel parking in the immediate vicinity is also provided on
West Orange Avenue and pull-in spaces along Memorial Drive.
The traffic analysis is based on the conclusions of the focused traffic impact analysis
prepared by Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. for the proposed Project
(Appendix G).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project would involve the installation of a water
capture system; it does not involve changes to public transit routes, roads, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with programs,
plans, ordinances, or policies in place that address the circulation system in the Project
vicinity. Transportation impacts would be less than significant.
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b), which
pertains to analyzing transportation impacts based on vehicle miles travelled
(VMT)?
Less than Significant. Section 15064.3(b) of the CEQA Guidelines provides criteria for
analyzing transportation impacts associated with land use and transportation projects
based on vehicle miles travelled (VMT). This section summarizes qualitative analysis
methods such as the availability of transit and proximity to other destinations; it also
indicates that a qualitative analysis of construction traffic would potentially be appropriate
for many projects. A focused traffic impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Project.
Measurements of transportation impacts included the haul and worker vehicle trips
generated (Appendix G). Traffic impacts from construction trucks and worker vehicles
would be considered potentially significant if Project construction would materially
interfere with the area traffic flow and capacity of the street system, cause unsafe
conditions, or introduce substantial truck traffic through a residential area.
The analysis of the Project’s short-term construction impacts considers heavy truck traffic
generated from excavation, construction vehicles, and material and equipment delivery
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 96 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
over the duration of the 12- to 18-month period of construction. The analysis qualitatively
evaluates the potential for construction related impacts on traffic flows, reduction in lane
capacities on local streets, parking availability, delays or alterations of transit service, and
impacts to pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The proposed Project would require the use
of construction equipment such as excavators, bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders,
dump trucks, concrete ready-mix trucks, trailers, and cranes. This equipment, along with
other contractor vehicles, would be staged in the paved Park parking lots accessible from
Memorial Drive or within the immediate vicinity of the two ballfields within the Park
property. The worker, vendor, and haul trips generated would vary during construction
phase depending on the activities involved, as detailed in Table 9 below.
Table 9. Approximate Trips Generated
Construction Phase # Worker Trips
(/day)1 # Vendor Trips (/day) # Trips Hauling
Staging and Mobilization 10 0 0
Excavation and Export 25 0 700
Installation of Underground
Storage Reservoir 30 18 0
Installation of Diversion
Pipelines 25 1 0
Installation of Treatment and
Filtration Chambers 30 18 0
Restoration of Ballfields 10 1 0
Sources: Lotus Water 2019; Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. 2019 Assumptions
NOTE:
1 Assumes each worker arrives in their personnel vehicle each day and generates one inbound trip during the morning
peak hour and one outbound trip during the evening peak hour.
The proposed Project would require the delivery and removal of materials at the
construction staging areas. Materials delivery and concrete trucks supporting construction
activities at the Park would access the Project site by either: via Interstate 280 (I-280) to
Westborough Boulevard to El Camino Real (SR-82) to West Orange Avenue to Memorial
Drive; or via Interstate 380 (I-380) to SR-82 to West Orange Avenue to Memorial Drive
(Figure 4). According to the City’s Municipal Code, SR-82 and Chestnut
Boulevard/Westborough Boulevard are a designated truck traffic routes. Materials delivery
trucks and other heavy construction equipment supporting the Project would access the
construction staging areas via Memorial Drive. Removal of excavated materials would be
temporarily staged in the far western portion of the Park south of Colma Creek, or north of
the Colma Creek in a City-owned vacant parcel west of Eucalyptus Avenue.
As shown in Table 9, the maximum number of truck trips are forecasted to occur during the
excavation and export phase with up to 700 haul trips, including an additional 25 worker
trips during the morning and evening hours. Assuming the trip length for both haul and
worker trips is 15 miles per trip, this equates to 10,875 VMT (daily vehicle trips x miles per
trip). The number of haul trips is based on the dimensions of the proposed excavation area
for the underground storage reservoir and pipe inlet infrastructure, and the average
capacity of a haul truck (i.e., 12 to 16 cubic yards). The haul trips also take into account the
route to an off-site hauling destination, which is located approximately 15 miles northeast
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 97 June 2019
of the Project site at Treasure Island. The worker trips are derived based on similar water
capture projects constructed in other cities, and based on the number of employees needed
to operate construction equipment. Worker trips assume each employee arrives in a
separate vehicle each day and generates one inbound trip during the morning peak hour
and one outbound trip during the evening peak hour. While these worker trip routes would
potentially vary, they would all access the Project site via SR-82 and West Orange Avenue;
the analysis does not assume workers would commute to the site via public transit. Vendor
trips are also expected to vary based on the construction phase, as more vendor and
equipment delivery trips would be generated during the installation of the underground
storage reservoir.
During construction, no street (i.e., Memorial Drive or West Orange Avenue) would be
temporarily closed. At a minimum, one-way traffic would be maintained along Memorial
Drive to ensure the multi-family residents would potentially access the Park Lane
Apartment complex. The construction contractor would make its own arrangement for off-
site storage of equipment and worker parking, if necessary. Construction contractor
equipment and parking would occur along Memorial Drive near the southern portion of the
Park near the two ballfields, and possibly a City-owned vacant parcel located in the
northwest portion of the Park. Construction hours would be limited to Monday-Friday, 8
a.m. to 8 p.m.; Saturday, 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.; and Sunday and Holidays, 10 p.m. to 6 p.m. Work
would be conducted to ensure construction activities would not interfere unnecessarily
with other areas of the Park or residential setting of the immediate vicinity.
During Project operation, trip generation associated with the proposed Project would not
occur on a daily basis. Routine maintenance of the water capture facility would require five
annual trips of one to two vehicle(s) per visit that would utilize existing parking lots.
Project operation would also involve weekly trips to check the irrigation reuse system that
would require one vehicle per trip that would utilize the existing parking lots.
In summary, Project construction trips would be short-term over a 12- to 18-month period.
Hauling operations would be scheduled to occur during off-peak hours on the surrounding
road system between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., thereby reducing impacts on the
surrounding street network during morning and evening commutes. Therefore, although
the proposed Project would increase VMT (i.e. daily trips) during construction, this
increase in VMT would be temporary, the proposed Project would be consistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3(b), and transportation impacts would be less than significant.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
No Impact. The proposed Project involves the installation and operation of an
underground water capture facility. No changes to existing roads are proposed as part of
the Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due
to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. No transportation impacts would occur.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 98 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. The Project site is currently used for recreational
activities and the proposed Project involves the construction of a water capture and
treatment facility within the Park. With the exception of the small shed for the water
quality polishing and disinfection equipment and the park’s landscape irrigation, all the
storm water infiltration system infrastructure would be installed underground. No changes
to the existing roadway network would occur. Therefore, the proposed Project would not
result in inadequate emergency access during long-term Project operations.
While the majority of construction activities for the Project would be confined on-site,
short-term construction activities would potentially temporarily affect access on Memorial
Drive during certain periods of the day. Minor traffic control would potentially be
necessary during the hauling of export from the Project during the excavation phase and
during the installation of the underground storage reservoir. Memorial Drive and West
Orange Avenue would not be closed or partially closed to traffic except for a lane closure
adjacent to the Park on a few occasions. At least one-way traffic would be maintained along
Memorial Drive to ensure the multi-family residents can access the Park Lane Apartment
complex. No street would be temporarily closed or partially closed (one-way traffic)
without first obtaining the permission from the City of South San Francisco. The Project
would also implement traffic control measures, as outlined in Mitigation Measure TRA-1 to
maintain flow and access along local streets, but specifically Memorial Drive. The times of
day and locations of potential temporary lane closures would be coordinated so that they
do not occur during peak periods of traffic congestion. Therefore, construction would not
result in inadequate emergency access and impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 99 June 2019
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the
lead agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native American
tribe?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
At the time of the initial European contact with the Native Americans of the San Francisco
Bay area, Costanoans (from the Spanish costaños, or “coast people”), members of the
Penutian linguistic family, inhabited the area from the Carquinez Strait and the northern tip
of the San Francisco Peninsula to the region south of Monterey Bay and east to the Diablo
Range (Levy 1978). These Native Americans called themselves Ohlone, entered the Bay
Area approximately 1,500 years ago. They came from the Delta region and displaced earlier
Hokan speakers. An estimated 7,000 to 10,000 Native Americans lived near San Francisco
Bay by the time of European contact in the 18th century (Levy 1978). According to the
City’s General Plan EIR and consistent with the City’s historic as an Ohlone settlement
location, there are Native American village sites and archaeological sites scattered around
the City of South San Francisco. Known resources occur along the El Camino Real corridor,
in the San Bruno Mountains, and adjacent to portions of Colma Creek.
A search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC’s) Sacred Lands File was
requested on October 10, 2018 and conducted on November 5, 2018 to determine the
presence of any Native American tribal heritage resources within the APE and general
vicinity (Appendix C). The NAHC indicated that Native American tribal heritage sites are
not recorded within the proposed Project APE or vicinity. The NAHC identified seven
Native American contacts, both tribes and bands, that would potentially have specific
knowledge as to whether cultural resources are identified in the APE. The City of South San
Francisco notified the following six tribal organizations on May 6 and May 7, 2019 of the
opportunity for consultation pursuant to PRC Section 21074: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 100 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(i.e. two contacts); Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission Bay Juan Bautista; Costanoan
Rumsen Carmel Tribe; Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan;, Muwekma Ohlone
Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area; and the Ohlone Indian Tribe. As of June 18,
2019, none of the contacted tribes have requested consultation.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources,
or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k)?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project would not cause substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or in another local register. According to
the NAHC’s Sacred Lands File there were no Native American tribal heritage sites recorded
within the proposed Project APE or vicinity. The City did not receive any requests for
consultation or information regarding tribal resources provided by notified tribal
organizations in the area. Given the negative results of the NAHC Sacred Lands File Search
and the Phase 1 ground surface survey/ subsurface Extended Phase 1 Archaeological
Survey, and the existing disturbed environment of the Project site, the proposed Project
would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources.
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe?
Less than Significant. The City of South San Francisco has considered the significance of
potential tribal cultural resources in the Project APE and vicinity to Native American
Tribes. Based on the reasons summarized under Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources (a)
impacts on tribal resources would be less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 101 June 2019
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunication facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple
dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected demand, in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Water service to the Project site is provided by the South San Francisco (SSF) District of the
California Water Service (CalWater) primarily via the San Francisco Regional Water System
(SF RWS). This water system is owned and operated by the San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission (SFPUC). The SF RWS provides approximately 80% of the SSF District’s water
supply, and the remaining water is pumped from eight local district groundwater wells
(BAWSCA 2018a). The SF RWS sources the majority of its water (approximately 85%
during non-drought conditions) from the Toulumne River through Hetch Hetchy Reservoir,
with the remaining supply sourced from the combined Alameda and Peninsula waters
through five reservoirs: Calaveras, San Antonia, Crystal Springs, San Andreas, and Pilarcitos
(SFPUC 2013). The Project site utilizes connections to the Crystal Springs and San Andreas
pipelines. During the fiscal year of 2016-2017, the SSF District of CalWater reported an
annual water production of 5.87 million gallons per day (MGD) (BAWSCA 2018b).
The City of South San Francisco and the City of San Bruno own and operate the South San
Francisco/San Bruno Water Quality Control Plant (SSFWQCP) located along Colma Creek
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 102 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
near the San Francisco Bay. The SSFWQCP treats wastewater from Cal Water’s SSF District
prior to discharge into the San Francisco Bay, and has a designed capacity to treat 13 MGD
average daily flow. The average dry weather flow through the facility is 9 MGD, and peak
wet weather flows can exceed 60 MGD (CalWater 2016a). The sewer system includes
gravity lines and force mains that combine both wastewater and stormwater runoff. Sewer
system services, including operations, maintenance, and capital projects, are funded by the
City of South San Francisco’s sewer enterprise fund. The City’s Sewer System Management
Plan (SSMP) upholds regulatory requirements to improve stormwater quality, including
prevention of unpermitted wastewater discharges and regularly scheduled sewer system
cleaning and maintenance (City of South San Francisco 2014b).
Solid waste disposal services are provided by the South San Francisco Scavenger Company,
Inc. Waste is sorted at the Blue Line Transfer, Inc. South San Francisco Transfer Station, the
nearest full-service public disposal and recycling facility to the Project site. The City is
mandated by the State of California to divert 65 percent of all solid waste generated by a
construction or demolition site from landfills either by reusing or recycling, and all new
construction projects are required to implement a WMP (City of South San Francisco
2017b). The Blue Line Transfer’s diversion rate for loads of mixed construction and
demolition debris is 65 percent (SSF Scavenger 2017). The Blue Line Biogenic CNG Facility,
a joint effort between Blue Line Transfer Inc. and South San Francisco Scavenger, Co., Inc.
composts organic waste at a diversion rate of 95 percent (SSF Scavenger 2018). The
primary landfill of San Mateo County is the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, which has a
throughput capacity of 3,598 tons per day. The landfill has an estimated closure date in
2034, with over 60,500,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity as of December 2015 (Cal
Recycle 2017).
Electric power services are provided by Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) and Pacific Gas and
Electric (PG&E). The City automatically enrolled all residents and businesses in PCE in
2016 in an effort to reduce GHG emissions and combat global warming, and offers the
option to remain using PG&E as an energy provider. PCE purchases electricity directly from
renewable energy sources, and PG&E delivers the electricity to homes and businesses using
its existing transmission and distribution lines (City of South San Francisco 2018g). PG&E
additionally provides the City’s natural gas.
The proposed Project is along Colma Creek, a stormwater channel that bisects Orange
Memorial Park and captures stormwater runoff throughout South San Francisco. There are
two stormwater drains in the Project vicinity, both of which are outfalls into Colma Creek
and flow towards the San Francisco Bay.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric
power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant. Construction workers would generate a negligible amount of
wastewater from using existing toilet facilities associated with the public restrooms in the
Park or from using portable toilets that would be managed by a private company where the
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 103 June 2019
waste is properly disposed off-site. Implementation of the proposed Project would include
the development of a SWPPP to minimize the potential construction-related impacts on
existing stormwater drainage facilities in the Project vicinity (refer to Section V, Hydrology
and Water Quality). Existing land uses within the Park would not be modified and the
Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment, electric, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities.
Therefore, the Project impacts on utilities would be less than significant.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not require additional water service. Most water
would be provided by the proposed water capture facility, and any additional water use
needed for irrigation purposes is already provided by the existing water lines and supply
that irrigate the Park turf areas. Therefore, no impacts on utilities would result from
project implementation.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves
or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant. Construction workers would generate a negligible amount of
wastewater from using existing toilet facilities associated with the public restrooms in the
Park or from using portable toilets that would be managed by a private company where the
waste is properly disposed off-site. The water capture facility Project would not involve
the construction of new housing or include any new development that would require
solid waste disposal, wastewater treatment . Wastewater generation from construction
workers would not cause a measurable increase in wastewater flows to a point where the
local sewer capacity and wastewater treatment plant is constrained. The proposed
Project would also generate negligible long-term, operational wastewater volumes. Any
trash debris, gross solids, or other particulates would be routinely removed from the
pretreatment devices and infiltration chamber and disposed by the San Francisco
Scavenger Company, Inc. Therefore, the proposed Project would not exceed wastewater
treatment capabilities, its contribution would be negligible, and no new or expanded
wastewater treatment facilities would be required. Project impacts on wastewater utilities
would be less than significant.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Less than Significant. According to the City’s General Plan EIR, the disposal of solid and
hazardous waste is overseen by San Mateo County and collected and processed at the
Scavenger Company’s South San Francisco Transfer Station. Solid waste is then transferred
to Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, which has a throughput capacity of 3,598 tons per day.
Project construction would not generate substantial amounts of solid waste. Solid wa ste
generated would be limited to mostly excavated soil and fill material that would require
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 104 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
recycling and waste removal services . Most fill would also be reused off-site (i.e., at
Treasure Island). Project operation would generate nominal amounts of trash debris,
gross solids, and other particulates that would be routinely collected and removed from
the pretreatment devices and infiltration chambers. These nominal amounts are not
anticipated to be substantially more t han the waste currently generated at the Park.
Therefore, impacts on solid waste utilities would be less than significant.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant. The Project would generate a limited amount of solid waste during
construction and would not generate large quantities of solid waste during operation and
maintenance activities. The operation of the water capture facility would generate nominal
amounts of trash debris, gross solids, and small particulates collected within the
pretreatment devices and underground storage reservoir. The collected trash debris and
gross solids would be cleaned out as part of the system’s operations and maintenance. Most
excavation and construction debris would be recycled, and any remaining waste would be
transported to Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, which has a throughput capacity of 3,598
tons per day. The amount of construction debris anticipated to be generated during
construction and the small amount of trash debris and gross solids collected during
operation would not significantly impact the Ox Mountain Sanitary landfill capacity.
Disposal of waste materials would comply with all local, state, and federal requirements for
integrated waste management and solid waste disposal, and the Project would be required
to submit a WMP as outlined in MM HAZ-1. Therefore, impacts related to solid waste
requirements would be less than significant.
XX. WILDFIRE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
Yes No
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources, power lines or other
utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 105 June 2019
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire
slope instability, or drainage changes?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located in an entirely urbanized area, outside of any fire hazard severity
zones. The nearest wildlands and areas of potential wildfire risk are located approximately
one mile to the southeast, where there is a local responsibility area (LRA) with a VHFHSZ
(Cal Fire 2007).
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
Less than Significant. As discussed in Section IX Hazards and Hazardous Materials (f), ,
access along Memorial Drive during Project construction would potentially be limited to
one travel lane, as the proposed Project would involve staging equipment along the road.
Access along Tennis Drive and Eucalyptus Avenue would potentially also be limited during
staging activities if excavated soils are temporarily stockpiled in the vacant lot north of
Colma Creek. While proposed Project construction would result in additional worker and
haul trips over a 12- to 18-month period, they would be temporary and the operation of the
water capture facility would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan, or a local, state, or federal agency’s emergency evacuation plan. All on-street
construction activities, specifically those on Memorial Drive, would need to maintain access
standards to allow access to the Park Lane Apartments and to ensure adequate emergency
access. The proposed Project would implement Mitigation Measure TRA-1, which would
minimize impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The Project
site is also located in an entirely urbanized area, outside of any fire hazard severity zones.
Therefore, wildfire impacts would be temporary and less than significant.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not include temporary or permanent
development and not involve project occupants. Recreationists would use the Park
facilities both during and following project construction, but these recreational uses would
not exacerbate wildfire risks. Therefore, no wildfire impacts would occur.
c) Require the installation of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 106 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
No Impact. The proposed Project would not involve the installation of any infrastructure,
such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water resources, or electrical lines that would
potentially exacerbate fire risk. The water capture facility would install a series of
pretreatment devices and an underground storage reservoir and some irrigation
infrastructure. Therefore, no wildfire impacts associated with infrastructure would occur.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-
fire slope instability, or drainage changes. The water capture facility includes the
installation of a drop inlet structure in Colma Creek, a series of pretreatment devices, and
an underground storage facility that includes a cistern and infiltration chamber. The
combination of the proposed stormwater features are designed to improve drainage and
reduce downstream localized flooding. Therefore, no wildfire impacts associated with
runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes would occur.
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially 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, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of an endangered,
rare, or threatened species, 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?
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 107 June 2019
IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially 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, substantially
reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or
threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. The proposed Project includes water
infrastructure improvements within Orange Memorial Park. The City of South San
Francisco is located within the South Bay of San Mateo County and is highly urbanized.
Accordingly, the potential for candidate, sensitive, or special status species or habitats is
low within the City limits. As described in Section IV, Biological Resources, Section V,
Cultural Resources, and the preceding analyses no significant unmitigable impacts to the
environment would result. The implementation of MM BIO-1 and MMs CUL-1 and CUL-2
would minimize impacts to biological and cultural resources. Based on these findings, the
proposed Project would not degrade the quality of the environment, adversely impact
biological resources, such as fish or wildlife habitat or populations, or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The City of South San
Francisco hereby finds that impacts related to degradation of the environment, biological
resources, and cultural resources would be less than significant with the incorporation of
mitigation measures.
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.)
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Cumulative environmental impacts are multiple
individual impacts that, when considered together would be considerable, or compound
other environmental impacts. Individual impacts would potentially result from a single
project or multiple separate projects that would potentially occur at the same place and
point in time or at different locations and over extended periods of time. The proposed
water capture facility would not result in individually limited or contribute to cumulatively
considerable significant impacts. As discussed in Sections I through XX, all short-term
environmental issues would result in either no impacts, less than significant impacts, or
less than significant impacts with the incorporation of mitigation with the implementation
of the proposed Project. Once operational, the proposed Project would have a beneficial
impact on water quality and use of the Park would be similar to existing conditions.
Construction of the proposed Project would result in some short-term temporary impacts
such as geology and soils hazards, hazards and hazardous materials, increases in ambient
noise levels, and additional haul and worker trips. Geological hazards associated with
seismic activity, liquefaction, and soil instability would be mitigated through the
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 108 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
implementation of mitigation measures. Hazardous material exposure to construction
workers would be mitigated through the implementation of mitigation measures. Noise
impacts would also be temporary and less than significant with the implementation of
mitigation measures. Construction impacts associated with additional haul truck and
worker trips would be minimized with a traffic control plan required through the
implementation of mitigation measures. In summary, the Project’s contribution to potential
cumulative impacts related to these other issues would be less than cumulatively
considerable. Therefore, Project impacts would be less than significant with the
incorporation of mitigation measures.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. Based on the nature and scope of the proposed
Project and the analysis of the proposed Project’s impacts, as summarized in Sections I
through XX, no environmental effects have been identified in this IS/MND that would cause
substantial adverse effects, either directly or indirectly, on human beings. There would be a
variety of other potential effects during construction including:
• Impacts to nesting birds and downstream special status fish and bird species
associated with construction activities and minor tree removal (discussed in Section
IV, Biological Resources)
• Adverse impacts to prehistoric cultural resources and potential unknown human
remains (discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources);
• Exposure of construction workers to hazardous materials, such as arsenic through
transport, use, and disposal during excavation activities (discussed in Section IX,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials);
• Exposure of nearby single-family and multi-family residences to increases in ambient
noise levels and nuisances associated with construction-related noise (discussed in
Section XIII, Noise);
• Impacts to emergency response routes during construction (discussed in Section IV,
Public Services)
• Inadequate emergency access along Memorial Drive during construction (discussed
in Section XVII, Transportation).
Most of these impacts would be temporary and intermittent, and all of these impacts would
be less than significant based on compliance with applicable federal, state, and local
regulatory requirements and established impact thresholds, as well as the implementation
of mitigation measures. The proposed Project would not involve the use of hazardous
materials in a manner that poses, unusual risks, and any hazardous impacts associated with
exposure of construction workers to potential harmful contaminants in the soil (i.e.,
arsenic) during excavation would be minimized through the implementation of mitigation
measures. The proposed Project would not involve operational noise that would interfere
with surrounding residential uses, and would not result in long-term traffic hazards. Based
on the analysis in this IS/MND, the City of South San Francisco finds that direct and indirect
impacts to human beings would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 109 June 2019
This page intentionally left blank.
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 110 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.0 REFERENCES
ARB. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Accessed: 20 February 2018.
Retrieved from: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf
ARB. 2015. California’s Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory. Accessed: 5 October 2015.
Retrieved from: http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm
BAAQMD. 2001. 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan. Accessed: 16 March 2019. Retrieved from:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2001-
ozone-attainment-plan/oap_2001.pdf
——. 2009. Proposed Thresholds of Significance. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/proposed-
thresholds-of-significance-dec-7-09.pdf?la=en
——. 2017a. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. Accessed: 29 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-
air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed-final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en
——. 2017b. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-
research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en
——. 2018a. 2017 Air Monitoring Network Plan. Accessed: 29 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/technical-
services/2017_network_plan_20180701-pdf.pdf?la=en
——. 2018b. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Accessed: 29 August 2018.
Retrieved from: http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-standards-
and-attainment-status
BAWSCA. 2018a. California Water Service- South San Francisco District. Accessed: 13
September 2018. Retrieved from: http://bawsca.org/members/profiles/cws-san-
francisco
——. 2018b. Water Use by Member Agency. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://bawsca.org/water/use/agency
——. 2018c. SF RWS Purchases. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://bawsca.org/water/supply/purchases
Cal Fire. 2007. San Mateo County FHSZ Map. Accessed: 12 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps_sanmateo
Cal Recycle. 2017. Solid Waste Information System Facility Detail. Accessed: 13 September
2018. Retrieved from: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/Directory/41-
AA-0002
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association [CAPCOA]. 2017. CalEEMod Version
2016.3.2. Accessed: 28 April 2019. Retrieved from:
http://www.capcoa.org/caleemod/
California Air Resources Board. 2018. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to
2016. Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators. Accessed on 28 April 2019.
Retrieved from:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2016/ghg_inventory_tr
ends_00-16.pdf
_____. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. November 2017. Accessed 28
April 2019. Retrieved from:
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 111 June 2019
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf
California Department of Conservation. 2000. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the City and
County of San Francisco, California. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Reports/SHZR/SHZR_043_City_And_
County_of_San_Francisco.pdf
——. 2015. Regulatory Maps Portal. Accessed: 5 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regu
latorymaps
——. 2016. San Mateo County Important Farmland 2016 . Accessed: 29 August 2018.
Retrieved from: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2016/smt16.pdf
California Department Of Conservation. 2018. Division of Oil, Gas, & Geothermal Resources-
Well Finder. Accessed: 6 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/#close
California Department of Water Resources. 2018b. Projected Changes in Precipitation,
Temperature, and Drought Across California’s Hydrologic Regions. Accessed: 15
October 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.climateassessment.ca.gov/techreports/docs/20180827-
Projections_CCCA4-EXT-2018-002.pdf
——. 2018a. Management of Groundwater and Drought Under Climate Change . Accessed: 15
October 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.climateassessment.ca.gov/techreports/docs/20180827-Water_CCCA4-
EXT-2018-006.pdf
California Geological Survey. 2002. California Geomorphic Provinces. Accessed: 30 August
2018. Retrieved from: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/cgs-
notes/Note_36.pdf
——. 2006. Simplified Geologic Map of California. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/information/publications/ms/Documents/M
S057.pdf
California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2018. Safeguarding California Plan: 2018
Update. California's Climate Adaptation Strategy. January 2018. Accessed on 28 April
2019. Retrieved from:
http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/safeguarding/update2018/safeguarding-
california-plan-2018-update.pdf
Caltrans. 2011. California Highway System. Accessed: 18 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=026e830c91
4c495797c969a3e5668538
——. 2016. 2016 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways. Accessed: 18 September
2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/docs/2016_aadt_volumes.pdf
——. 2018. California Scenic Highway Mapping System. Accessed: 7 December 2018.
Retrieved from:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/
CalWater. 2016a. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, South San Francisco District .
Accessed: 12 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.calwater.com/docs/uwmp2015/bay/South_San_Francisco/2015_Urb
an_Water_Management_Plan_Final_(SSF).pdf
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 112 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
——. 2016b. California Water Service Map. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.calwater.com/docs/rates/maps/BAY_South_San_Francisco_SAM_201
6.pdf
C/CAG. 2012. Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San
Francisco International Airport. Accessed: 12 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://ccag.ca.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2014/10/Consolidated_CCAG_ALUCP_November-20121.pdf
Center for History and New Media. n.d. Zotero Quick Start Guide. Accessed: Retrieved from:
http://zotero.org/support/quick_start_guide
City of Daly City. 2012. General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report. Accessed: 10
September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.dalycity.org/Assets/Departments/Economic+and+Community+Develo
pment/planning/DEIR/3.8+Hydrology$!2c+Flooding$!2c+Water+Quality+DEIR.pdf
City of South San Francisco. 1997. Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Update.
Accessed: 21 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=496
——. 1999. General Plan. Accessed: 24 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/departments/economic-community-development/planning-
division/general-plan
——. 2007. Draft Master Plan Update - Orange Memorial Park. Accessed: 10 September 2018.
Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=494
——. 2011. Bicycle Master Plan. Accessed: 20 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=760
——. 2014a. City of South San Francisco Climate Action Plan. Adopted February 13, 2014.
Accessed: 16 February 2019. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=5640
——. 2014b. Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). Accessed: 13 September 2018.
Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=824
——. 2015. South City Shuttle. Accessed: 20 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=456
——. 2017b. Construction and Demolition Waste Management Plan. Accessed: 13 September
2018. Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=2416
——. 2017a. DRAFT SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE COMMUNITY
CIVIC CAMPUS PROJECT. Accessed: 2 April 2019. Retrieved from:
http://weblink.ssf.net/WebLink/0/edoc/354253/Community%20Civic%20Campu
s%20SEIR.pdf
——. 2018h. Public Art Map. Accessed: 22 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://parksmap.ssf.net/
——. 2018a. South San Francisco Municipal Code. Accessed: 24 August 2018. Retrieved from:
https://qcode.us/codes/southsanfrancisco/
——. 2018e. Parks Division. Accessed: 27 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/departments/parks-recreation/parks-division
——. 2018f. Centennial Way. Accessed: 27 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=250
——. 2018b. Fire Department. Accessed: 5 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/departments/fire
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 113 June 2019
——. 2018c. Police Department. Accessed: 6 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/departments/police
——. 2018d. Schools in South San Francisco. Accessed: 5 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/our-city/living/schools-in-south-san-francisco
——. 2018g. Community Choice Energy. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/departments/city-manager/sustainability/community-choice-
energy
——. 2018i. Walking & Biking Map. Accessed: 20 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/home/showdocument?id=9133
——. n.d. South San Francisco Farmers’ Market. Accessed: 22 August 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.ssf.net/departments/city-manager/community-relations/south-san-
francisco-farmers-market
City of South San Francisco Planning Divison. 2015. Zoning District Map. Accessed: 27 August
2018. Retrieved from: http://www.ssf.net/Home/ShowDocument?id=514
Coastal Conservancy. 2015. San Bruno Creek/Colma Creek Resiliency Study. Accessed: 10
September 2018. Retrieved from: http://seachangesmc.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/08/SanBruno_Colma-Resiliency-FINAL_Rpt_150820.pdf
Cotton, Shires and Associates. 2018. ‘Geotechnical Investigation. Stormwater Capture
Project, Orange Memorial Park. South San Francisco, California ’ ( No. Prepared for
Lotus Water).
Department of Conservation. 2009. Bay Area Tsunami Inundation. Accessed: 11 September
2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Tsunami/Inundation_Maps/SanMateo
Department of Finance (DOF). 2019. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the
State - January 1, 2018 and 2019. Accessed: 6 May 2019. Retrieved from:
http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-1/
Department of Toxic Substance Control. 2018. EnviroStor Database. Accessed: 14 November
2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=38330005
Department of Transportation. 2019. California Scenic Highway Mapping System - San Luis
Obispo County. Accessed: 27 February 2019. Retrieved from:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/
DTSC. 2018. EnviroStor Sites and Facilities. Accessed: 12 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=orange+memorial+p
ark
Environmental Health Coalition. 2011. San Diego Bay. Accessed: 10 September 2018.
Retrieved from: https://www.environmentalhealth.org/index.php/en/where-we-
work/san-diego-region/san-diego-bay
Federal Transit Authority. 2006. Noise and Vibration. Accessed: 18 March 2019. Retrieved
from: https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/environmental-
programs/noise-and-vibration
FEMA. 2012. Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Accessed: 14 September 2018. Retrieved
from:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=orange%20memorial%20park
#searchresultsanchor
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 114 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Fugro Consultants. 2016. ‘Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Study, Proposed Orange
Memorial Park Storm Water Capture Project, South San Francisco, California’.
Heublein, J. C., J. T. Kelly, C. E. Crocker, A. P. Klimley, and S. T. Lindley. 2009. Migration of
Green Sturgeon Acipenser medirostris in the Sacramento River. Environmental
Biology of Fishes 84(3):245–258.
Horizon Water and Environment. 2015a. Biological Assessment for the Colma Creek Flood
Control Channel Maintenance Project. San Mateo County, California. December 2015.
Accessed on 28 April 2019. Retrieved from:
https://publicworks.smcgov.org/sites/publicworks.smcgov.org/files/ColmaCreekFl
oodControlChannelMaintenance_ISMND_June2016_0.pdf
_____. 2015b. Wetland Delineation Report for the Colma Creek Flood Control Channel
Maintenance Project. San Mateo County, California. December 2015. Accessed on 28
April 2019. Retrieved from:
https://publicworks.smcgov.org/sites/publicworks.smcgov.org/files/ColmaCreekFl
oodControlChannelMaintenance_ISMND_June2016_0.pdf
Leidy, R. A. 2002. Unpublished stream survey date, 1992-2002. USEPA.
_____. 1984. Distribution and Ecology of Stream Fishes in the San Francisco Bay Drainage (and
associated unpublished data, 1981-1984). Hilgardia 52(8).
Levy, Richard. 1978. Costanoan. In California. Handbook of North American Indians, Volume
8. Edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 398-413. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Moyle, P. B. 2002. Inland Fishes of California, Revised and Expanded. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Web Soil Survey. Accessed: 27 August 2018.
Retrieved from: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
NOAA. 2017. Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts. Accessed: 11 September 2018.
Retrieved from: https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/#/layer/slr
Reclamation. 2014. License to Panoche Drainage District to Connect the Firebaugh Sumps to
the San Joaquin River Water Quality Improvement Project. Accessed: 15 October 2018.
Retrieved from:
https://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/includes/documentShow.php?Doc_ID=18761
RWQCB. 2009. San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit .
Accessed: 11 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/board_decisions/adopted_order
s/2009/R2-2009-0074.pdf
——. 2016. Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin. Accessed: 10 September 2018.
Retrieved from:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sandiego/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/
——. 2017. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin . Accessed:
11 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/basin_planning.html
Robinson A., Greenfield BK. 2011. LTMS Longfin Smelt Literature Review and Study Plan.
San Francisco Estuary Institute, Oakland, CA. 40 pp
San Diego Coastkeeper. 2010. Toxic Sediment in the San Diego Bay. Accessed: 10 September
2018. Retrieved from: https://www.sdcoastkeeper.org/learn/fishable/sediment
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 115 June 2019
San Mateo County. 1982. San Bruno Mountain Area Habitat Conservation Plan Steering
Committee. November 1982. Accessed on 28 April 2019. Retrieved from:
https://parks.smcgov.org/san-bruno-mountain-habitat-conservation-plan
——. 2018b. Stormwater-San Mateo County Storm Drains (ArcGis Map). Accessed: 14
September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?url=http://services.arcgis.co
m/yq3FgOI44hYHAFVZ/ArcGIS/rest/services/Stormwater/FeatureServer/0&sourc
e=sd
——. 2018a. Storm water Dataset, San Mateo County. Accessed: 14 September 2018.
Retrieved from:
http://smcmaps.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=1&laye
rs=b529c88f006f47ae80b05f2e59928506
SFPUC. 2013. SFPUC Water System. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/
docs/dsedoc/sanfranciscocity.pdf
Shuford, David W. and Gardali, Thomas. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A
Ranked Assessment of Species, Subspecies, and Distinct Populations of Birds of
Immediate Conservation Concern in California. Accessed on 28 April 2019.
Retrieved from: http://www.co.contra-
costa.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/34166/Shuford-Gardali-2008-California-Bird-
Species-of-Special-Concern
SMC Transit District. 2011. South San Francisco/San Bruno Community-Based Transportation
Plan. Accessed: 18 September 2018. Retrieved from:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/completed_projects/ej_communityplan
s/D4_Countywide_Transportation_Plan_for_Low-
Income_Populations/SanBruno_SouthSanFrancisco_CBTP_APPENDICES.pdf
Some dude. 2018. Report on Slugs - Maine - Study on February 29, 2018.
SSF Scavenger. 2017. Blue Line Transfer, Inc. Memo to Construction & Demolition Debris
Generators. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://ssfscavenger.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/CD-Hauler-Letter-OCT-
2017.pdf
——. 2018. Blue Line Biogenic CNG Facility. Accessed: 13 September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://energy-vision.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/South-SF-Scavenger-
BlueLine-Profile.pdf
UASI. 2008. Regional Emergency Coordination Plan. Accessed: 14 September 2018. Retrieved
from: http://www.bayareauasi.org/recp
US Census Bureau. 2017. QuickFacts- South San Francisco City, California. Accessed: 6
September 2018. Retrieved from:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/southsanfranciscocitycalifornia/PS
T045217
US Department of Agriculture. 2018. Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey.
Accessed: 19 November 2018. Retrieved from:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
INITIAL STUDY
City of South San Francisco Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project
June 2019 116 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
US Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration (USDOT/FHWA). 2006.
Roadway Construction Noise Model. Available at:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/rcnm/
_____. 2006a. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. May 2006.
_____. 2006b. Noise and Vibration Manual.
USGS. 2006. San Francisco Bay Region Geology and Geologic Hazards. Accessed: 30 August
2018. Retrieved from:
https://geomaps.wr.usgs.gov/sfgeo/geologic/stories/sanfran_mesozoic.html
——. 2018a. Liquefaction Susceptibility. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/geologicmaps/liquefaction.php
——. 2018b. Geology. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/geologicmaps/geology.php
——. 2018c. Landslides. Accessed: 30 August 2018. Retrieved from:
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/geologicmaps/landslides.php
INITIAL STUDY
Orange Memorial Park Water Capture Project City of South San Francisco
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 117 June 2019
5.0 REPORT PREPARATION
City of South San Francisco
Bianca Liu, P.E. Associate Project Engineer
Adena Friedman Senior Planner
Greg Mediati Parks Manager
Lotus Water
Robert Dusenbury, P.E. Principal
Shauna Dunton, P.E. Engineer
Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc.
Dan Gira CEQA Program Manager
David Stone, RPA Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Juliana Prosperi, AICP Project Manager
Angie Harbin-Ireland Biology Group Manager
Jason Erlich Biologist
Ken Victorino, RPA Senior Archaeologist
Marie Laule Environmental Analyst
Kaylan Lamb Environmental Analyst
Taylor Lane Air Quality Specialist
Deirdre Sites Graphics and Mapping
Janice Depew Word Processing
Ashley Shivley Formatting