Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04_01_Intro to Environ Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-1 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 Chapter 4 Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation 4.1 Approach to Environmental Analysis 4.1.1 Introduction to Analysis This section describes the format of the environmental analysis in each environmental topic section of the chapter; discusses the effect of Public Resources Code Section 21099 on the scope of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis for the project; and explains the general approaches to baseline setting and cumulative analysis in this EIR. In December 2015, the California Supreme Court found that “CEQA generally does not require an analysis of how existing environmental conditions will impact a project’s future users or residents,” unless the project “could exacerbate hazards that are already present.” The Supreme Court identified several exceptions to this general rule in which CEQA could apply to impacts of the environment on the project, all of which are statutory provisions in CEQA that specifically require consideration of impacts of the environment, such as consideration of projects near airports, school construction projects, and statutory exemptions from housing and transit priority projects. (California Building Industry Assoc. v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369). None of these exceptions apply to the project; as such, this environmental impact report does not draw significance conclusions for those topics for which the environment could have an effect on the project. 4.1.2 Format of the Environmental Analysis Sections 4.2 through 4.10 address the physical environmental effects of the proposed project on the required CEQA environmental topics, as follows: Section 4.2, Air Quality Section 4.3, Biological Resources Section 4.4, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources Section 4.5, Energy Section 4.6, Geology and Soils Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation Section 4.10, Less-than-Significant Impacts 4.10.1, Aesthetics 4.10.2, Agricultural and Forest Resources 4.10.3, Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.10.4, Hydrology and Water Quality 4.10.5, Land Use 4.10.6, Mineral Resources 4.10.7, Population and Housing 4.10.8, Public Services 4.10.9, Recreation 4.10.10, Utilities 4.10.11, Wildfire City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-2 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 Sections 4.2 through 4.9 contain the following subsections: Environmental Setting, Regulatory Framework, and Impacts and Mitigation Measures, described below. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, Section 4.10 provides a brief discussion of topics where the proposed project would have less-than-significant impacts or no impacts, and therefore are not discussed in detail in this EIR. For each topic, Section 4.10 includes a brief description of the regulatory framework, significance criteria, and approach to analysis, and the lead agency’s reasons for determining that there would be no impact or a less than significant impact. 4.1.2.1 Environmental Setting The Environmental Setting subsection describes the existing conditions in the project site and the project vicinity as they relate specifically to that environmental topic. The description of existing environmental conditions serves as the “baseline” for measuring the changes to the environment that would result from the project and for determining whether those environmental effects would be significant. In general, existing conditions are the physical conditions that existed at the time that the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed project is issued (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)). However, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a), the EIR baseline may include projects that are approved and may be under construction. The EIR baseline may also take into account former conditions or circumstances that have changed prior to publication of the NOP. The modified existing conditions that serve as the baseline for the analysis of environmental impacts are further described below in Section 4.1.4, Approach to Baseline Setting. 4.1.2.2 Regulatory Framework The Regulatory Framework subsection describes federal, state, regional, and local regulatory requirements that are directly applicable to the environmental topic. 4.1.2.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures The Impacts and Mitigation Measures subsection describes the physical environmental impacts of the proposed project for each topic, as well as any mitigation measures that could reduce potentially significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. This subsection begins with a listing of the significance criteria used to assess the severity of the environmental impacts for that particular topic based on the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist. Environmental topic sections also include a topic- specific “Approach to Analysis” explaining the parameters, assumptions, and data used in the analysis. Under the “Impact Evaluation” discussion, the project-level impact analysis for each topic begins with an impact statement that reflects the applicable significance criteria. Some significance criteria may be combined in a single impact statement, if appropriate. Each impact statement is keyed to a subject area abbreviation (e.g., AQ for Air Quality) and an impact number (e.g., 1, 2, 3) for a combined alpha-numeric code (e.g., Impact AQ-1, Impact AQ-2, Impact AQ-3). When potentially significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures are presented, if feasible, to avoid, eliminate, or reduce significant adverse impacts of the project. Each mitigation measure is numbered to correspond to the impact statement to which it pertains (e.g., Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1 corresponds to Impact AQ-1). If there is more than one mitigation measure for the same impact statement, the mitigation measure numbers include a lowercase letter suffix (e.g., Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1a and AQ-1b). City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-3 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 Each impact statement describes the impact that would occur without mitigation. The level of significance of the impact is indicated in parentheses at the end of the impact statement based on the following terms: • No Impact – No adverse physical changes (or impacts) to the environment are expected. • Less than Significant – Impact that does not exceed the defined significance criteria or would be eliminated or reduced to a less-than-significant level through compliance with existing local, state, and federal laws and regulations. • Less than Significant with Mitigation – Impact that is reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of the identified mitigation measures. • Significant and Unavoidable with Mitigation – Impact that exceeds the defined significance criteria and can be reduced through compliance with existing local, state, and federal laws and regulations and/or implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, but cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level. • Significant and Unavoidable – Impact that exceeds the defined significance criteria and cannot be eliminated or reduced to a less-than-significant level through compliance with existing local, state, and federal laws and regulations and for which there are no feasible mitigation measures. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the potential for the proposed project to result in significant cumulative impacts when combined with other current and future projects is described in a separate subsection following the project-level impact analysis for each environmental topic. Cumulative impact statements are numbered consecutively for each impact statement with an alpha-numeric code to signify it is a cumulative impact. 4.1.3 Public Resources Code Section 21099 Public Resources Code Section 21099 requires that the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to level of service (LOS) for evaluating traffic impacts of proposed projects. The new Guidelines must establish criteria that “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2) states that upon certification of the revised guidelines for determining transportation impacts pursuant to Section 21099(b)(1), automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA. Senate Bill (SB) 7431 is intended to better align CEQA transportation impact analysis practices and mitigation outcomes with the State’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, encourage infill development, and improve public health through more active transportation. SB 743 creates several key statewide changes to CEQA, as described in Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation. To aid in SB 743 implementation, the following State guidance has been produced: 1 Full text of SB 743: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB743 City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-4 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 • OPR’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA2 • California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals3 • California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans’) Local Development–Intergovernmental Review Program Interim Guidance, Implementing Caltrans Strategic Management Plan 2015–2020 Consistent with SB 7434 A vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact analysis is provided in Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation. The topic of automobile delay, nonetheless, may be considered by decision-makers, independent of the environmental review process, as part of their decision to approve, modify, or disapprove the proposed project. Therefore, a discussion of automobile delay is provided for informational purposes. The VMT metric does not apply to the analysis of impacts on non- automobile modes of travel such as riding transit, walking, and bicycling. 4.1.4 Approach to Baseline Setting Project development characteristics are typically compared to the existing physical environment to isolate impacts caused by the project on its surroundings. In other words, the existing condition (also referred to as the environmental setting) is normally the baseline against which the project’s impacts are measured to determine whether impacts are significant. Therefore, the Environmental Setting subsection of each topic describes existing conditions on and around the project site. These existing conditions are ordinarily established as of the date that the NOP is published. In some circumstances, however, it is appropriate to use a different baseline to identify project impacts to account for circumstances that can change over time during the course of the environmental review, project construction, and operation. Figure 4.1-1 shows the location of baseline projects and cumulative projects in the City that were considered in the analysis for the proposed project. Baseline projects are development projects within 0.5 mile of the project site that are approved and may currently be under construction. As discussed below, the final adjusted baseline also accounts for several projects in the City that are located more than 0.5 mile from the project site, but are within the same infrastructure network as the project site. The baseline condition for the proposed project includes the existing uses on the two project site parcels (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 015-024-290 and 015-24-360). 2 Office of Planning and Research. 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December. Available: http://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf. Accessed: June 10, 2020. 3 California Air Resources Board. 2017. 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals. January. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-01/2017_sp_vmt_ reductions_jan19.pdf. Accessed: June 10, 2020. 4 California Department of Transportation. 2016. Local Development–Intergovernmental Review Program Interim Guidance, Implementing Caltrans Strategic Management Plan 2015–2020 Consistent with SB 743. November. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-mobility-climate-change/sb- 743. Accessed: June 10, 2020. 11 12 7 8 1 15 4 16 17 23 9 5 2 6 22 21 3 13 10 18 14 20 20 20 20 101 101 E G r a n d A v e Utah Ave Harbor WayForbes Blvd Sister C i t i e s B l v d Allerton AveOyster Point Blvd Gateway B lv d Gr a n d view DrHalf Mile Radius Half Mile Radius Legend Project Site Baseline Projects 1. 850-900 Gateway Boulevard 2. 750-800 Gateway Boulevard 3. 700 Gateway Boulevard 4. One and Two Tower Place 5. 685 Gateway Boulevard 6. 379 Oyster Point Boulevard (Phase 1C-1D) 7. 201 Haskins Way 8. 127 West Harris Avenue 9. Caltrain Station Improvement Project Cumulative Projects 10. 494 Forbes Boulevard 11. 328 Roebling Road 12. 475 Eccles Avenue 13. 465 Cabot Road 14. 499 Forbes Boulevard 15. 1113 Airport Boulevard 16. 915 Airport Boulevard 17. 701 Airport Boulevard 18. Genentech Master Plan 19. Active South City: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan 20. Mobility 2020: East of 101 Transportation Plan 21. 379 Oyster Point Boulevard (Phases 2D-4D) 22. 379 Oyster Point Boulevard (City Phase 2C) 23. 215 Littleeld Avenue 2,0000 Feet 1,000 Image Source: Google, 2020. Baseline and Cumulative Project Source: City of South Francisco, 2020. 19 19 19 Graphics…00662.19 (8-3-2020) JCFigure 4.1-1 Location of Baseline and Cumulative Projects 751 Gateway Boulevard Project City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-6 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 The baseline projects listed below are considered part of the baseline condition against which the proposed project would be evaluated for environmental impacts, with the exception of the transportation analysis; the baseline condition for the transportation analysis represents existing conditions as of 2019 because the transportation analysis uses data collected in fall 2019 (before the COVID-19 pandemic, which substantially altered traffic patterns) for the existing office and research and development (R&D) campus adjacent to the project site. For several physical environmental topics, project-related impacts are unlikely to interact with conditions greater than a 0.5-mile radius from the project site (e.g., aesthetics, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise and vibration). However, some impacts related to air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, population growth, and water quality can affect existing conditions on a more regional scale. Several other projects in the City are located more than 0.5 mile from the project site and are confined by the same infrastructure network, particularly regarding transportation and circulation, public services, and utilities and service systems. Therefore, the impacts generated by these projects have also been considered to provide a final adjusted baseline in order to properly reflect conditions against which the proposed project is analyzed. Cumulative projects, which are discussed in more detail in Section 4.1.5 below, are considered reasonably foreseeable future development projects, transportation projects, or planning projects for which the City had an application on file but that have not been approved and for which construction had not commenced as of publication of the NOP for the proposed project (January 21, 2020) and/or projects that the City has otherwise determined are reasonably foreseeable. The following baseline projects are located within an approximately 0.5-mile radius of the project site (the numbers are keyed to Figure 4.1-1): 1. 850–900 Gateway Boulevard: Phase 1 of Gateway Business Park Master Plan, which includes construction of two office/R&D buildings (12 and five stories) totaling 451,485 square feet with a two-level subterranean parking garage and a 47,938-square-foot amenity building on a 6.3- acre site. (Entitled April 2013; construction to be completed in quarter 3 of 2020) 2. 750–800 Gateway Boulevard: Phase 2 of Gateway Business Park Master Plan, which includes construction of an office/R&D building consisting of eight-story and nine-story building wings connected by an atrium, totaling 390,534 square feet, with a two-level subterranean parking garage and a seven-level parking structure on a 5.0-acre site. (Entitled December 2018; construction to be completed in quarter 3 of 2021) 3. 700 Gateway Boulevard: Phase 3 of Gateway Business Park Master Plan, which includes construction of one office/R&D building (11 stories) totaling 314,395 square feet with a five- level parking garage on a 4.5-acre site. (Entitled December 2018; construction to be completed in quarter 3 of 2021) 4. One and Two Tower Place: Construction of two office towers totaling 665,000 square feet, including 24,000 square feet of commercial space, a 200-seat performing arts center, day care center for 100 children, and an amenity building, consisting of a 110-room hotel, wellness center, restaurant, retail, and various amenities adjacent and connected to the North Tower. (North Tower construction complete, amenity building construction to be completed in quarter 4 of 2020, hotel to be determined) City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-7 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 5. 685 Gateway Boulevard: Precise Plan modification to construct a new 15,400-square-foot amenity building and outdoor dining area on a 3-acre site shared with the 681 Gateway Campus. (Entitled March 2019; construction to be completed in quarter 3 of 2020) The following baseline projects are located in the East of 101 area (the numbers are keyed to Figure 4.1-1) 6. 379 Oyster Point Boulevard (Phase 1C-1D): Construction of three 6-story office/R&D buildings totaling 508,000 square feet on a 10-acre parcel, including a parking structure, new road alignment with utilities, new park at Oyster Point Boulevard and Marina Boulevard, Bay Trail improvements, and a new open space parcel. (Entitled March 2011; construction to be completed in quarter 3 of 2020) 7. 201 Haskins Way: Demolition of the existing building and construction of a new 280,765- square-foot office/R&D building and a five-level parking garage on a 6.5-acre site. (Entitled March 2019; construction to be completed in quarter 1 of 2021) 8. 127 West Harris Avenue: Construction of a five-story hotel with 128 rooms on a 64,117- square-foot lot. (Entitled August 2015; construction to be completed in quarter 3 of 2020) 9. Caltrain Station Improvement Project: The project will realign the existing South San Francisco Caltrain station to allow easier pedestrian access to downtown, as well as improve station safety and disabled access. An underpass and plaza will be constructed to allow pedestrians access from downtown to the newly renovated station and to the east side of U.S. 101. (Construction initiated quarter 4 of 2017; construction to be completed in 2021) 4.1.5 Approach to Cumulative Impact Analysis Cumulative impacts are two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase environmental impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. Cumulative impacts are impacts of the project in combination with other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15355(a)-(b)). The following factors are considered to determine the level of cumulative analysis in this EIR: • Similar Environmental Impacts – A relevant project contributes to effects on resources that are also affected by a proposed project. A relevant future project is defined as one that is “reasonably foreseeable,” such as a proposed project for which an application has been filed with the approving agency or has approved funding. • Geographic Scope and Location – A relevant project is located within the geographic area within which effects could combine. The geographic scope varies on a resource-by-resource basis. For example, the geographic scope for evaluating cumulative effects on air quality consists of the affected air basin, while the geographic scope for evaluating cumulative effects on traffic typically consists of the roadways within the region that could carry additional vehicles as a result of net new VMT generated by the proposed project. • Timing and Duration of Implementation – Effects associated with activities for a relevant project (e.g., short-term construction or demolition, or long-term operations) would likely coincide in timing with the related effects of a proposed project. City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-8 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1) sets forth two primary approaches to the analysis of cumulative impacts. The analysis can be based on (1) a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related impacts that could combine with those of a proposed project or (2) a summary of projections contained in a general plan or related planning document. For the purposes of this EIR, past and present projects that are approved and may be under construction are discussed as a part of the baseline, as established above. Any additional reasonably foreseeable probable future projects are considered further in cumulative impact analysis. The cumulative impact analysis in this draft EIR generally employs either a list-based approach or a projections approach, depending on which approach best suits the individual resource topic being analyzed. The cumulative analyses for those topics using a list-based approach typically consider individual projects from a list of nearby future projects anticipated in the project vicinity (i.e., within approximately 0.5 mile of the project site). The particular projects to be considered in the cumulative analysis for each topic vary by environmental topic and are appropriately tailored to the particular environmental topic based on the potential for combined localized environmental impacts under the topic. Presented below is a numbered list of reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Generally, these are projects for which the City had an application on file but that have not been approved as of publication of the NOP for the proposed project (January 21, 2020) and/or projects that the City has otherwise determined are reasonably foreseeable. These projects are mapped on Figure 4.1-1 on p. 4.1-5. For some physical environmental topics, project-related impacts are unlikely to interact with conditions greater than a 0.5-mile radius from the project site (e.g., aesthetics, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise and vibration). However, some impacts related to air quality, biological resources, GHG emissions, population growth, and water quality can affect existing conditions on a more regional scale. Several other City projects are located more than 0.5 mile from the project site and are confined by the same infrastructure network, particularly with regard to transportation and circulation, public services, and utilities and service systems. The following cumulative projects are located within an approximate 0.5-mile radius of the project site (the number is keyed to Figure 4.1-1): 10. 494 Forbes Boulevard: Construction of two four-to-five story research and development office buildings totaling 326,020 square feet and a three-level parking structure on a 7.5 acre site. (Original entitlement December 2012, Design Review Modification – Planning Commission hearing November 2019; construction date to be determined) 11. 328 Roebling Road: Demolition of an existing building (79,501 square feet), and construction two office/R&D buildings totaling 105,536 square feet and at grade and subterranean parking on a 2.97-acre site. (Entitled June 2020; construction date to be determined) 12. 475 Eccles Avenue: Construction of two four-story office/R&D buildings totaling approximately 262,287 square feet, and a five-level parking structure on a 6.1-acre site. (Entitled August 2016; construction date to be determined) 13. 465 Cabot Road: Construction of a new 34,365 square foot two-story office and service center. (Entitled October 2018; permit issued September 2019) City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-9 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 14. 499 Forbes Boulevard: Construction of a five-story office/R&D building totaling 128,737 square feet, and a four-level parking structure on a 3-acre site. (Under review; construction date to be determined) 15. 1113 Airport Boulevard: Construction of 12 additional guest rooms to the second and third floor of an existing 24-room hotel. (Entitled January 2017; construction date to be determined) 16. 915 Airport Boulevard: Construction of a five-story hotel with 115 rooms on a 28,894-square- foot site. (Under review; construction date to be determined) 17. 701 Airport Boulevard: Construction of a five-story hotel with 131 rooms on a 20,239-square- foot site. (Incomplete. Project review on hold by the applicant; construction date to be determined) 18. Genentech Master Plan: The Master Plan outlines a potential expansion that would allow the Central Campus to grow to approximately six million square feet during the 10-year planning period. This expansion represents a 100 percent increase in space compared with the current Central Campus development. The Master Plan indicates that Genentech will meet its potential space requirements by both the redevelopment of buildings that Genentech currently owns and occupies and by the redevelopment of expansion property that Genentech has recently acquired or may acquire in the ten-year planning period. (Planning period is ongoing) 19. Active South City: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: The Active South City: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan will update existing plans and identify needs and opportunities to improve walking and bicycling in the City The plan recommends a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation. The recommendations are intended to provide safer, more direct bicycle routes through residential neighborhoods, employment and shopping areas, and to transit stops. The development of this plan is set forth in the City’s General Plan. (Plan development is ongoing) 20. Mobility 2020 – East of 101 Transportation Plan: The plan strives to achieve a more balanced transportation system where walking, biking, transit use, and carpooling are as convenient as driving. The Mobility Plan identifies projects, policies, and programs to support the transition to a robust multimodal network. (Plan implementation is ongoing) The following cumulative projects are located in the East of 101 area (the number is keyed to Figure 4.1-1): 21. 379 Oyster Point Boulevard (Phases 2D-4D): Current entitlements allow up to 1.7 million square feet of office/R&D buildings in Phases 2–4 on current Oyster Point Business Park properties. (Master Plan approved March 2011, Precise Plan submitted August 2019; construction date to be determined) 22. 379 Oyster Point Boulevard (City Phase 2C): Phase IIC improvements will take place on City- owned land managed by the Harbor District. They include a new pump station, repairs to the landfill clay cap, improved parking areas and landscaping. To complement the planned improvements, a planning effort will take place to set a vision for new land uses in the marina area. This effort will be conducted in partnership with the Harbor District and public stakeholders. (Schedule for planning; construction date has not yet been determined) 23. 215 Littlefield Avenue: Construction of an 11,585-square-foot addition and exterior modifications to a newspaper and radio building. (Planning Commission approved February 2020; construction date to be determined) City of South San Francisco Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Approach to Environmental Analysis 751 Gateway Boulevard Project 4.1-10 September 2020 ICF 0662.19 The 1999 General Plan is currently being updated as part of the Shape SSF 2040 General Plan.5 The 1999 General Plan remains active until completion and adoption of the new general plan. The general plan update is currently in progress and is not considered in the cumulative analysis. It is anticipated that approval of the general plan update will occur in quarter 4 of 2022. 5 City of South San Francisco. 2020. Shape SSF 2040 General Plan. Available: https://shapessf.com/. Accessed: May 8, 2020.