The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutHousing Element Negative Declaration City of South San Francisco General Plan 2007-2014 Housing Element Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft May 15, 2009 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION State Clearinghouse File No.: TBD; City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element Name of Project City of South San Francisco General Plan 2007-2014 Housing Element Project Description The proposed project is an update to the Housing Element of the City of South San Francisco's ("City") General Plan. The current Housing Element was adopted by the City Council and eertified by the State of California ("State") in 2002, and the General Plan was most recently amended by the City Council on October 13, 1999. This Housing Element (update) focuses on housing needs from January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2014 in accordance with the Housing Element planning period for San Francisco Bay Area jurisdictions established by State law. The City has prepared its General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element to meet the requirements of State law and local housing objectives, and is consistent with the other clements of the City's General Plan, adopted in October 1999, with the exception of some of the land use designations for somc of the identified opportunity sites. A Gencral Plan Amendment is currently underway to make the land use designations consistent with the Housing Element density and requirements. Finding The City of South San Franciseo, by Gerry Beaudin on May 15, 2009, completed a review of the proposed project and determined that the 2007-2014 Housing Element ("proposed project") could have a significant effect on the environment, but there would not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the Initial Study for the proposed project would apply to the proposed project. No Environmental Impact Report is required. Mitigation Measures Air Quality: Mitigation Measure AQ-l and AQ-2 would reduce the impact associated with air quality plans to a less-than-significant level: AQ-1 Implement feasible control measures for construction emission of PM-10. The project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: . Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. . Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. . Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. AQ-2 Green Building Measuresfor New Construction. The following green building measures shall be incorporated, at the discretion of the Planning Department, into new residential construction: . Trees and other shade structures shall be incorporated to maximize summer shade and to minimize winter shade. Canopy cover shall extend over 50 percent of non-permeable surfaces following a ten-year growth period. . Residential construction shall use "green" cement, which contains recycled materials (slag or fly-ash) and is produced using emission-reducing technologies, if available, structurally appropriate for the intended use, and where feasible and practicable. . New construction shall use energy efficient lighting, to the extent feasible and appropriate. At the minimum, all buildings shall acbieve a 15 percent reduction in energy use associated with lighting over existing Title 24 standards. . Residential buildings shall include passive solar design features that include roof overhangs or canopies that block summer shade, but that allow winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows. . Roofing materials used in commercial/retail buildings shall be Energy Star@ certified. All roof products shall also be certified to meet ATSM high emissivity requirements. . Where feasible, recycled, rapidly renewable, reclaimed and/or certified components shall be used in the construction of new residential buildings. Cultural Resources: Mitigation Measures CR-I and CR-2 would reduce impacts to paleontological/ geological features and human remains to a less-than-significant level: CR-I Protect unique paleontological/geological features. Should a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature be identified at an opp0l1unity site during any phase of construction, the project sponsor shall cease all construction activities at the site of the discovery and immediately notify the City. The project sponsor shall retain a qualified paleontologist to provide an evaluation of the find and to prescribe mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less- than-significant level. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources or geologic features is canied out. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementing any additional prescribed mitigation measures prescribed by the paleontologist and approved by the City. CR-2 Protect human remains. If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resource shall be halted and the City and the County Coroner shall be notified immediately, according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of the State Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County Coroner to be Native American, the NAHC shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The project sponsor shall also retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the project site, and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the excavation and removal of the human remains. The City shall be responsible for approval of recommended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98. The project sponsor shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City, before the resumption of ground disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered. Noise: Mitigation Measure NO-I would reduce the impact associated with construction noise to a less- than-significant level: NO-i implement best management practices to reduce construction noise. The project sponsor shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project construction contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g., surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), would not require major equipment redesign: a. Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and nOIse receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: . Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; . Use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; . Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and . Minimize backing movements of equipment. b. Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible. c. Impact equipment (e.g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools. Compressed air exhaust silencers shall he used on other equipment. Other quieter procedures, such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible. d. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e. Select routes for movement of construction-related vehicles and equipment in conjunction with the City's Planning Department so that noise-sensitive areas, including residences and schools, are avoided as much as possible. f. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone num ber for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. Reasons for Conclusion An Initial Study of the proposed project was undertaken and prepared in aecordance with the City's environmental guidelines for the purpose of ascertaining whether the proposed project might have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study is on file with the City of South San Francisco, obtained at the City's Economic and Community Development Department - Planning Division, City Hall Annex, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, California, 94080. Copies of the document may also be viewed at the Office of the City Clerk, West Orange Library, and the Grand A venue Library. I hereby certify that this Mitigated Negative Declaration, along with the attached Initial Study were released for public review beginning May 15,2009, through June 15, 2009. ~~ Su;y K 'n, Chi;fPlanner Prepared for The City of South San Francisco Planning Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 (650) 877-8583 Prepared by PBS&J 353 Sacramento Street, Suite 1000 San Francisco, CA 94111 (415) 361-1500 City of South San Francisco General Plan 2007-2014 Housing Element Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft May 15, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................... .1-1 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.......................................................... .1-1 IS/MND Approach......................................................................................... .1-2 Mitigation Measures the City Requires as Standard Conditions of Project Approval........... .1-3 II. PROJECT INFORMATION ....... ....... ....... ....... ........ ....... ....... ....... ....... ........ ......II-1 III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM......................................................... .III-1 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ..... IV-1 V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION. ....... ....... ....... ........ ....... ....... ....... ....... ........ ....... ..... V-I Project Background........................................................................................ V-I Relationship of the Housing Element to the City's General Plan.................................. V-2 Housing Element Update Process....................................................................... V-2 Major Assumptions of the Housing Element.......................................................... V-2 Related Planning Efforts.................................................................................. V-7 Descriptions of Opportunity Areas...................................................................... V-8 Transit Village Area....................................................................................... V-8 South El Camino Real Area... ...... ....... ....... ....... ...... ....... ....... ....... ...... ....... ....... V-10 Downtown Area........................................................................................... V-II VI. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................. VI-1 1. Aesthetics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. VI-1 2. Agriculture Resources.......................................................................... VI-5 3. Air Quality....................................................................................... VI-6 4. Biological Resources.......................................................................... VI-14 5. Cultural Resources............................................................................. VI-17 6. Geology and Soils.............................................................................. VI-20 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials........................................................... VI-25 8. Hydrology and Water Quality............................................................... VI-30 9. Land Use and Planning....................................................................... VI-36 10. Mineral Resources............................................................................. VI-40 11. Noise............................................................................................. VI-41 12. Population and Housing....................................................................... VI-46 13. Public Services................................................................................. VI-48 14. Recreation....................................................................................... VI-52 15. Transportation/Traffic......................................................................... VI-54 16. Utilities and Service Systems................................................................ VI-59 16. Mandatory Findings of Significance........................................................ VI-64 City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Pagei May 15,2009 FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 TABLES Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Regional Location.................................................................................. IV-2 Planning Area (with Opportunity Sites) ........................................................ IV-3 Opportunity Sites.................................................................................... V-3 Transit Village Area Sites.......................................................................... V-4 South El Camino Real Area Sites................................................................. V-5 Downtown Area Sites.. ....... ....... ....... ....... ...... ....... ....... ....... ....... ....... ........ V-6 Transit Village....................................................................................... V-9 South El Camino Real... ....... ....... ...... ....... ....... ....... ...... ....... ....... ....... ..... V-lO Downtown Area................................................................................... V-12 APPENDICES Appendix A Standard Conditions and Limitations for Commercial Industrial and Multi-Family Residential Projects Appendix B Greenhouse Gas Calculations City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Pageii May 15,2009 I. INTRODUCTION In accordance with State law, the City of South San Francisco ("City") proposes to adopt a General Plan Amendment ("GP A") for the 2007-2014 Housing Element' ("proposed project") as a part of the City's General Plan. An updated Housing Element is required of each city in the State of California ("State") to address the housing needs of all residents, in all income levels, over the planning period (2007-2014). The City's previous Housing Element was adopted in December 2002. The City's Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element may be viewed and printed by going to the City's web site at www.ci.ssfca.us or www.ssfne1. A copy of the 2007-2014 Housing Element, as well as this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ("IS/MND"), and the environmental documents upon which this IS/MND relies, may also be obtained at the City's Economic and Community Development Department - Planning Division, City Hall Annex, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, California, 94080. Copies of the document may also be viewed at the Office of the City Clerk, West Orange Library, and the Grand A venue Library. For additional information, please call the Economic and Community Development Department - Planning Division, at 650.877.8535, or e-mail "gerry. beaudin@ssfnet. " INITIAL STUDy/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION This IS/MND has been prepared in accordance with the California En vironmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), which can be found in the State Public Resources Code ("PRC"), Section 21000 e1. seq., and the CEQA Guidelines, found in State Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et. seq., as amended. The Initial Study identifies the potential environmental impacts associated with adoption and implementation of the City's 2007-2014 Housing Element. Pursuant to Section 15074 of the State Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, when considering adoption of a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Lead Agency is bound by the following: A. Any advisory body of a public agency making a recommendation to the decision-making body shall consider the proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration before making its recommendation. B. Prior to approving a Project, the Lead Agency shall consider the proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration together with any comments received during the public review process. The decision-making body shall adopt the proposed Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration only if it finds on the whole of the record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Lead Agency's independent judgment and analysis. Throughout this document, the 2007-2014 Housing Element will be referred to as the "Housing Element" or the "proposed project." City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft PageI-l May 15,2009 C. When adopting a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Lead Agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. D. When adopting a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Lead Agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the Project or made a condition of approval to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts. E. A Lead Agency shall not adopt a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration for a Project within the boundaries of a comprehensive airport land use plan or if a comprehensive airport land use plan has not been adopted for a Project within two nautical miles of a public use airport without first considering whether the Project will result in a safety hazard or noise problem for persons using the airport or for persons residing or working in the Project area. The Lead Agency for the 2007-2014 Housing Element is the City of South San Francisco. The decision-making body is the City of South San Francisco City Council. During the 30-day comment period, please mail comments on this IS/MND to the project manager for the Lead Agency following address: Gerry Beaudin, Senior Planner City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department - Planning Division P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94083 IS/MND ApPROACH This IS/MND evaluates the environmental impacts of the 2007-2014 Housing Element. Since the Housing Element is a planning document, which does not authorize or analyze any specific development proposals, this IS/MND has been prepared as a programmatic review. As such, this document focuses on the overall effects of the adoption and implementation of the Housing Element in the Planning Area. The analysis does not examine the effects of individual, site-specific projects that may occur within the overall umbrella of this program in the future. Impacts of such projects will necessarily be evaluated once the specific projects have been proposed. General Plan elements, including the Housing Element, include proposed policies that are intended to be general, with details to be worked out during implementation. Thus, many of the impacts associated with implementation of the 2007-201 4 Housing Element can only be described in general terms. Furthermore, the development of 1,200 dwelling units ("du") to meet this Housing Element would be subject to goals, policies, and programs under the General Plan (including the 2007-2014 Housing Element), Municipal Code (which included the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance), and the Standard Conditions and Limitations ("SCL") for multi-family residential projects, promulgated by the City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft PageI-2 May 15,2009 City. Accordingly, environmental review for the 2007-2014 Housing Element relies on the environmental review that was certified and adopted for the City's General Plan, subsequent GPAs, and zoning code ordinances. Relevant goals, policies, and programs, as well as SCLs have been included, when appropriate, to mitigate or reduce potential impacts. MITIGATION MEASURES THE CITY REQUIRES AS STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PROJECT ApPROVAL The following Conditions of Approval ("CON') implement environmental mitigations and, are required through the City's standard project review and approval procedures. Each of the following requirements identified in this section will be imposed upon and incorporated into the proposed project as conditions of approval and or conditions of issuance of a building permit. Implementation of these COA, along with mitigation measures identified in this document, will insure that impacts associated with the proposed project remain less than significant. Air Quality: Mitigation Measure AQ-l and AQ-2 would reduce the impact associated with air quality plans to a less-than-significant level: AQ-I Implement feasible control measures for construction emission of PM-IO. The project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: . Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. . Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. . Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. AQ-2 Green Building Measures for New Construction. The following green building measures shall be incorporated, at the discretion of the Planning Department, into new residential construction: . Trees and other shade structures shall be incorporated to maximize summer shade and to minimize winter shade. Canopy cover shall extend over 50 percent of non-permeable surfaces following a ten-year growth period. . Residential construction shall use "green" cement, which contains recycled materials (slag or fly-ash) and is produced using emission-reducing technologies, if available, structurally appropriate for the intended use, and where feasible and practicable. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft PageI-3 May 15,2009 . New construction shall use energy efficient lighting, to the extent feasible and appropriate. At the minimum, all buildings shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in energy use associated with lighting over existing Title 24 standards. . Residential buildings shall include passive solar design features that include roof overhangs or canopies that block summer shade, but that allow winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows. . Roofing materials used in commercial/retail buildings shall be Energy Star@ certified. All roof products shall also be certified to meet A TSM high emissivity requirements. . Where feasible, recycled, rapidly renewable, reclaimed and/or certified components shall be used in the construction of new residential buildings. Cultural Resources: Mitigation Measures CR-l and CR-2 would reduce impacts to paleontological/ geological features and human remains to a less-than-significant level: CR-I Protect unique paleontological/geological features. Should a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature be identified at an opportunity site during any phase of construction, the project sponsor shall cease all construction activities at the site of the discovery and immediately notify the City. The project sponsor shall retain a qualified paleontologist to provide an evaluation of the find and to prescribe mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources or geologic features is carried out. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementing any additional prescribed mitigation measures prescribed by the paleontologist and approved by the City. CR-2 Protect human remains. If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resource shall be halted and the City and the County Coroner shall be notified immediately, according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of the State Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County Coroner to be Native American, the NAHC shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The project sponsor shall also retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the project site, and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the excavation and removal of the human remains. The City shall be responsible for approval of recommended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98. The project sponsor shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City, before the resumption of ground disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page 1-4 May 15,2009 Noise: Mitigation Measure NO-l would reduce the impact associated with construction noise to a less- than-significant level: NO-] Implement best management practices to reduce construction noise. The project sponsor shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project construction contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g., surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), would not require major equipment redesign: a. Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: . Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; . Use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; . Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and . Minimize backing movements of equipment. b. Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible. c. Impact equipment (e. g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools. Compressed air exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment. Other quieter procedures, such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible. d. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e. Select routes for movement of construction-related vehicles and equipment in conjunction with the City's Planning Department so that noise-sensitive areas, including residences and schools, are avoided as much as possible. f. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft PageI-5 May 15,2009 II. PROJECT INFORMATION 1. PROJECT TITLE City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (mailing) P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94083 (physical) 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Gerry Beaudin, Senior Planner 650.877.8535 4. PROJECT LOCATION City of South San Francisco 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (mailing) P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94083 (physical) 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION City-wide; Planning Area, encompasses all General Plan Designations 7. ZONING City-wide; Planning Area, encompasses all Zoning Districts 8. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT See Section V (Project Description), below, for a full description. 9. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETIING See Section IV (Environmental Setting), below. 10. OTHER PuBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE ApPROVAL IS REQUIRED None. City of South San FraJU:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Declamtion Draft Page Il-1 May 15,2009 III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: D Aesthetics D Agriculture Resources D Air Quality D Biological Resources D Cultural Resources D Geology ISoi13 D Hazards & Hazardous D Hydrology I Water Quality D Land Use / Planning Materials D Mineral Resources D Noise D Population / Housing D Public Services D Recreation D Transportati on/Traffic D Utilities / Service Systems D Mandatory Findings of Signifcance Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 00 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as describecm attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effeets that remain to be addressed. D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effeet on the environment, because all potentially signficant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation meaSlres that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Susy Kalkin. Chief Planner Name s//!:>/o, Dtte / _~ ~h-_ Si nature City afSouth San Francisco General Plan ~ 2007-2014 Housing Element ~ Initia! Study/Mitigated Negative Dee/aration Page Draft May 15, 2009 IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of South San Francisco ("Planning Area") is located in northern San Mateo County ("County"), on the San Francisco Peninsula ("Peninsula") (see Figure 1, Regional Location). The City is adjacent to the cities of Brisbane, Colma, Daly City, Pacifica, and San Bruno, as well as unincorporated portions of the County. The City is served by Highway 101 ("U.S. 101"), Interstate 380 ("1-380"), Interstate 280 ("1-280"), and Caltrain, as well as a BART station, which opened in June 2003 (see Figure 2, Planning Area [with Opportunity Sites]). In addition, the City is adjacent to the San Francisco International Airport ("SFO") and is anticipating the construction of a Ferry Terminal during the current Housing Element planning period (2007-2014). The City measures 9.6 square miles and was incorporated in 1908. The City is home to a collection of compact neighborhoods including an active and walkable downtown. Its population has tripled since the Second World War, but population growth has moderated in recent years, as the community has become increasing developed. East of u.S. 101 is an office and industrial area, where many of the City's biotechnology businesses are located as well as the Oyster Point Marina, situated on the San Francisco Bay ("Bay"). The City is known as the birth place of the biotechnology industry. City of South San FraJU:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft PageN-1 May 15,2009 V ~'0J~il-.... "?> \ I )l\,};dved~> ."., '"\\, . .'0 MARIN Sausalito:/' ~/~ pacifiai ~ eley - ~ Walnut ~ CONTRA COST A S~n Fr I ,,~ " '>= Daly City Montara o 4 8 MILES NORTH NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 1 Regional Location Source: South San Francisco Housing Element, 2009. 1000008084 South San Francisco General Plan Housing Element IS/MND I I -'-lo . I L ~ 0 L;j 0 z 0 " <.; '" :I:c . ~ I-c ~ c '" c . C 0 ~ ,1i , m ID , Z ~ ~ E " c c ID . W . 0 ~ C " '" m ~ 0 ~ :c ~ c 0 ~ to 0: iii ID C ID (9 0 U ~ U c e ~ c ~ 0? ~ '5 0 0? " ] " , , '1 , '" ~ ~ - . f:: !';i .1;j '-' ~ '" 'E: o W ~ " - " G N .. W m Q N II: m ~ ::J Q 00 Q ::<: ID Cl Q " Q 0? < u: ;; ~ " ::J ~ .2 ::<: "~ n (fJ g ;::1 if; ~, a ~ " . t; "; ~ . lil 0 U ::J ~ - 51 U '.3 ;:I... '" 0 ~ v. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is an update to the Housing Element of the City's General Plan. The current Housing Element was adopted by the City Council and certified by the State in 2002, and the General Plan was most recently amended by the City Council on October 13, 1999. This Housing Element (update) focuses on housing needs from January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2014 in accordance with the Housing Element planning period for San Francisco Bay Area jurisdictions established by State law. The City has prepared its General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element to meet the requirements of State law and local housing objectives, and is consistent with the other elements of the City's General Plan, adopted in October 1999, with the exception of some of the land use designations for some of the identified opportunity sites. A General Plan Amendment ("GPA") is currently underway to make the land use designations consistent with the Housing Element density and requirements. The purpose of a Housing Element is to identify current and projected housing needs, and set forth goals, policies, and programs that address those needs. The 2007-2014 Housing Element, a component of the City's General Plan, is a statement by the City of its current and future housing needs and proposed actions to facilitate the provision of housing to meet those needs at all income levels, and presents a comprehensive set of housing policies and actions for the years 2007-2014. The City adopted its current Housing Element in December 2002. The 2002 Housing Element was subsequently "certified" as legally adequate by the State Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD"). This project description includes a discussion of the following: . Project Background; . Relationship of the Housing Element with to City's General Plan; . Housing Element Update Process; . Major Assumptions of the Housing Element; . Related Planning Efforts; and . Descriptions of Opportunity Areas. PROJECT BACKGROUND The Association of Bay Area Governments ("ABAG"), in its final Regional Housing Needs Allocation ("RHNA") figures, allocated the City 1,635 housing units for the period from 2007 to 2014. The timeframe for this RHNA process is January 1, 2007, through June 30, 2014 (a seven and a half year planning period). This unit count includes the need for 373 very low-, 268 low-, and 315 moderate- income units. The allocation is equivalent to an annual need of 218 housing units for the seven-and-a- half-year time period. A total of 830 units have been approved, constructed, or rehabilitated in the City since the start of the current planning period in January 2007. Hence, there is a remaining need for 805 units. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-l May 15,2009 RELATIONSHIP OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN State Law requires that a General Plan and its constituent elements ".. .comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the adopting agency.2" This implies that all elements have equal legal status and no one element is subordinate to any other element. The Housing Element must be consistent with land use goals and policies set forth in the Land Use Element, and closely coordinated with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The Housing Element must also be consistent with area Specific Plans including those currently being developed in South San Francisco described under "Related Planning Efforts," below. As part of the implementation process for this Housing Element, a GP A and Zoning Ordinance Update are required to achieve internal consistency. HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE PROCESS The Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element will be presented to the City's Planning Commission and City Council for review before being forwarded to the HCD in June 2009. After a mandatory 60-day review period, HCD will provide the City with comments and recommendations on the Draft 2007- 2014 Housing Element. MAJOR ASSUMPTIONS OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT Housing Opportunity Sites. The City is built out, and all new housing opportunity sites identified in the 2007-2014 Housing Element are located on a limited number of infill and redevelopment sites near transit, providing the City with the chance to promote high-quality transit and pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods that include a full range of housing types and affordability levels (see Figure 3, Opportunity Sites). To meet ABAG's housing needs determination, the Housing Element has identified 19 opportunity sites for mixed-use and high-density housing development. These 19 opportunity sites are geographically clustered into three areas: . The Transit Village area . The South El Camino Real area . The Downtown area The Transit Village area is zoned for medium (30 dwelling units/acre ["du/ac"]) to high (50 du/ac) density residential development, and provides approximately 31 percent of the City's near-term residential development potential (see Figure 4, Transit Village Area Sites). The South El Camino Real area provides approximately 55 percent of the City's near-term residential development potential (see Figure 5, South El Camino Real Area Sites). The City is currently amending its General Plan and updating the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate mixed-use and high-density residential development in the South El Camino Real area. The Downtown area provides approximately 14 percent of the City's near-term residential development potential (see Figure 6, Downtown Area Sites). The Downtown area is currently zoned for mixed-use residential development of up to 30 du/ac; however, an ongoing downtown strategy planning process may lead to increased densities. 2 California Government Code, Section 65300.5. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-2 May 15,2009 ~~~ ! .~ u: c o " ~ , o " " . . ., " c .l!! .2 Ui ~ Z:' b .~ ~ 1:: o<:l ..!!! :g."'C III o [.l<: fl 3: ~ E Z a. lii .... ..c: .... (lI ~Oa.~;~~ W ...J c Q) c .2 Q) c .2 1ii :5 :::i 1ii Ui c Vi c ~ ~ ~ ~ ca ~ ca ~ I L8,I o "' G m ~ ~ o <> w II: ::J Cl u: o z " ~ C ID E ID W o c '" ~ o :c c ~ 0: iii ID C ID (9 o u ~ U c e ~ c ~ 0? ~ '5 o 0? .. " Q " Q Q Q Q Q L;j ~ o o '" o z " ~ ::t:c I-c 2i S' z~ ~: w ;;i C ID E ID W o c '" ~ o :c c ~ 0: ~ '" iii ID C ID (9 o u ~ U c e ~ c ~ 0? ~ '5 o 0? .. ~ Q ~ Q Q Q Q Q FIGURE 5 South EI Camino Real Area Sites 1000008084 South San Francisco General Plan Housing Element IS/MND FIGURE 6 Downtown Area Sites 1000008084 South San Francisco General Plan Housing Element IS/MND Goals and Policies. Taking into account the needs, constraints, and resources identified above, the City has developed a "Housing Plan" in consideration of its own local priorities, as well as its obligations under State law. The Housing Plan is structured as a series of goals and related implementing policies. Accompanying each implementing policy, there are one or more programs that the City will implement over the 2007-2014 planning period. The proposed Goals, Policies, and Programs contained in the 2007-2014 Housing Element have been modified from the 2002 Housing Element based on the Housing Needs Assessment, Constraints Analysis, and Housing Resources inventory contained within the 2007-201 4 Housing Element. The goals listed below form the core of the City's vision for the preservation and development of residential areas: . Goal 1: Promote the provision of housing by the private, public and non-profit sectors for all income groups in the community. . Goal 2: Take necessary steps to remove government and public infrastructure constraints to housing development through administrative support, intergovernmental cooperation, public- private partnerships and permit streamlining. . Goal 3: Strive to maintain and preserve existing housing resources, including both affordable and market-rate units. . Goal 4: Maintain and improve the quality of life, safety and historic integrity of existing neighborhoods as a high priority for the City. . Goal 5: Support the development of an adequate supply of safe, decent and affordable housing for groups with special housing needs. . Goal 6: Ensure that all households have equal access to the City's housing resources. . Goal 7: Promote energy efficiency in residential development within the City, including reduction of energy use through better design and construction in individual homes, and also through energy efficient urban design. To establish benchmarks to assess the progress toward achieving the City's housing goals, the 2007- 20]4 Housing Element also presents a five-year action plan, along with quantified objectives for the construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing. RELATED PLANNING EFFORTS Under a separate action from its 2007-2014 Housing Element, the City is currently evaluating the environmental effects (CEQA compliance) of certain GPA/Zoning Ordinance changes to the South El Camino Real and Downtown areas. This process is expected to be completed in approximately three to six months. El Camino Real/Chestnut Specific Plan. The purpose of the Specific Plan is to create an implementable development vision for the area around the intersection of El Camino Real and Chestnut City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-7 May 15,2009 Avenue. The gross plan area is approximately 65 acres. Francisco BART station and located one and a half miles completion date for the Specific Plan is Fall/Winter 2009. It is within one mile west of Downtown. of the South San The anticipated South El Camino Real General Plan Update. The current land use designation for much of the southern portion of El Camino Real is "Community Commercial." Community Commercial designation does not allow for residential or mixed-use development. The proposed/drafted GP A allows for mixed-use development throughout the southern portion of the corridor. The height limits are proposed to be increased to allow for 80 feet as of right, and up to 120 feet with additional review and approval. This is up from the existing 50-foot height limit that currently exists for most of the properties on South El Camino Real. Finally, the permitted Residential Density has been set at 60 units per acre, with increases possible through the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. The anticipated completion date for the South El Camino Real General Plan Update is Summer 2009. Zoning Ordinance Update. The South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update is underway to ensure that current standards and guidelines support the implementation of the General Plan, including the Housing Element. The update is structured into four "modules." Staff, the City's consultant, and the City's Planning Commission are currently working through modules 2 and 3. The anticipated completion date for the update is Fall/Winter 2009. DESCRIPTIONS OF OPPORTUNITY AREAS Transit Village Area The Transit Village area is located in the northwestern portion of the City, and is generally bound by McLellan Drive to the north, Chestnut A venue to the south and east, and El Camino Real to the west (see Figure 4). The Transit Village area was recently identified in the BART Transit Village Plan. With the adoption of the BART Transit Village Plan in 2001, the City of South San Francisco established zoning standards and design guidelines that promote a vibrant mixed-use district consistent with the area's role as an important transit hub. A key element of the plan was to upzone various parcels to allow for more intensive residential development. Since its adoption, more than 450 residential units have been developed within the Transit Village; including a 361-unit apartment development, of which 70 units are designated for low- and moderate-income households; and a 99-unit condominium development. Built at densities of approximately 50 dulac, these properties are consistent with the City's vision for higher density, mixed-use development in the area. Six housing opportunity sites were identified in and around the Transit Village area, as listed in Table 1, and shown in Figure 4. These six parcels contain approximately 18 acres of land with a combined capacity for up to 622 housing units. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-8 May 15,2009 Table 1 Transit Village Estimated Existing Allowable Actual Site Acres Existing Use Adjacent Uses Zoning du/ae du/ac Units BART, Multi-Family Transit Village 1 0.5 Vacant Residential ("MFR"), & ("TV")- 30 30 14 Retail/Commercial Residential ("C") ("R")&-C Site 1 0.5 30 14 Vacant & 2 0.1 Single Family SFR & MFR TV-RM 30 30 3 Residential ("SFR") 2 1.5 Vacant BART TV-RM 30 30 44 Site 2 1.6 30 47 3 1.3 Vacant Motel Hospital & MFR TV-C 30 30 38 3 1.3 Vacant TV-RH 50 50 63 3 3.1 Lumber Yard TV-RH 50 50 156 Site 3 5.6 257 TV-RM & TV- 4 7.6 Vacant MFR, Colma Creek Planned 30 30 228 Commercial ("P-C") Site 4 7.6 30 228 5 0.3 Utility MFR R-3-L 30 23 7 Site 5 0.3 23 7 6 0.5 Vacant SFR & MFR R-3-L 30 24 12 Site 6 0.5 24 12 7 1.5 Vacant Colma Creek P-C-L 30 30 45 7 0.4 Vacant Hospital P-C-L 30 30 12 Site 7 1.9 30 57 TOTAL 18.0 35 622 Source: City of South San Francisco, 2009; BAE, 2009 Notes: a. Allowable density is based on existing, adopted zoning standards. As listed, the Transit Village area housing opportunity sites are either currently vacant or underutilized. Sites 1, 3, 5, and 6 are entirely vacant. Site 2 contains a vacant single family development but otherwise has no permanent structures. Site 2 is currently listed for sale by a commercial broker and the City has engaged in pre-development discussions with an interested developer for the site. Site 4 contains a small Cal Water pumping station but is otherwise vacant. In all cases, each opportunity site City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-9 May 15,2009 is owned by a single entity, including Sites 3 and 6, which were recently acquired by the Redevelopment Agency. South El Camino Real Area The South El Camino Real area is located in the South-central portion of the City, and is generally bound by Orange Avenue to the north, Noor Avenue to the south, Huntington Avenue to the east, and El Camino Real to the west (see Figure 5). The City is currently amending the General Plan policies that pertain to the South El Camino Real area, updating the Zoning Ordinance to allow for residential development and increased densities. The City expects both of these planning projects and accompanying CEQA documentation to be completed in 2009. The South El Camino Real General Plan update is intended to help transform an area with a concentration of aging strip retail into a more vibrant transit corridor, including substantial mixed-use high-density (60 du/acre) residential development. For purposes of this analysis, the City has identified three sites along the South El Camino Real corridor with near-term redevelopment potential for multi-family housing. These three housing opportunity sites are listed in Table 2 and shown in Figure 5. These sites total 21.3 acres and could accommodate approximately 474 housing units. Table 2 South El Camino Real Existing Proposed Estimated Existing Adjacent Max Max Actual Site Acres Use Uses GP Density GP Density Density Units Mobile High School, Mixed 8 2.0 Home SFR,& MDR 30 du/ac Use 60 du/ac 50 du/ ac 100 Retail ("MU") Site 8 2.0 Less 12 existing residential units 88 60 du/ac 9 14.8 Retail Retail, Office MDR 30 du/ ac MU 60 du/ac (on 1/3 295 of site) Site 9 14.8 295 10 0.6 Parking C 30 du/ ac MU 60 du/ac 13 10 0.5 Parking C 30 du/ ac MU 60 du/ac 60 du/ac 10 (on 1/3 10 3.8 Vacant Retail, Office C 30 du/ ac MU 60 du/ac of site) 68 Cinema Site 10 4.5 91 TOTAL 21.3 474 Source: City of South San Francisco, 2009; BAE, 2009. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-10 May 15,2009 While numerous other sites along the corridor are also ultimately expected to support residential development, due to existing developer interest and/or a high degree of underutilization, these three present the most significant and realistic opportunities for housing development within the current Housing Element cycle, ending in 2014. Downtown Area The Downtown area is located in the northeastern portion of the City, and is generally bound by Linden Avenue to the north, Commercial Avenue to the south, U. S. 101 to the east, and Maple Avenue to the west (see Figure 6). The City is currently developing a Downtown Strategy to establish a vision for future development in the Downtown area. Covering a range of underutilized publicly- and privately-owned parcels, the strategy provides conceptual development plans for numerous sites throughout the Downtown. As part of the strategic planning process the City is exploring potential changes to zoning and the General Plan to accommodate increased densities and support a more vibrant mix of land uses. Building on the Downtown Strategy and for purposes of this analysis, the City has identified 10 sites in the downtown area with near-term redevelopment potential. These nine housing opportunity sites are listed below in Table 3 and shown in Figure 6. Sites 12, 13, 16, 17, and 18 are owned by the Redevelopment Agency ("RDA"); Sites 14, 15, and 19 are owned by the City; and Sites 10 and 11 are privately owned. As indicated in Table 3, these 10 sites total 4.3 acres, with a combined development capacity of up to 143 units. The City's 2007-2014 Housing Element is consistent with the City's long-term commitment to supporting high-quality residential development and will be required of comply with the goals, policies, and programs already established under the City's General Plan, in addition to those proposed under the Housing Element. Furthermore, future development will also be subject to the City's multi-family residential SCLs (included as Appendix A, Standard Conditions and Limitations). There is sufficient land to support the production of more than 1,195 new housing units. Nearly 100 percent of the City's development capacity consists of higher density housing sites (densities exceeding 30 du/ac), all of which is located within developed areas already served with needed infrastructure, including sewer, water, stormwater, and transportation facilities. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-ll May 15,2009 Table 3 Downtown Area Existing Adjacent Uses Existing Estimated Actual Site Acres Use Zoning Max Density Density Units 11 1.4 Vacant MFR, Gas C-I-L 30 duJ acre 30 43 Station, Utility Site 11 1.4 30 43 12 0.3 Vacant SFR, MFR, C C-I-L 30 duJ acre 30 10 Site 12 0.3 30 10 13 0.3 Auto SFR, MFR,C DHDR 40 duJ acre 72 24 Site 13 0.3 72 24 14 0.3 Restaurant SFR, MFR, C C-I-L 30 duJ acre 30 10 Site 14 0.3 30 10 Hotel, MFR, Duwntuwn 15 0.3 Parking Commercial 30 duJ acre 30 10 Public ("D-C") Site 15 0.3 30 10 16 0.3 Parking Hotel, MFR, D-C-L 30 duJ acre 30 10 Public Site 16 0.3 Less 6 existing residential units 30 4 17 0.3 Financial C D-C-L 30 duJ acre 30 10 Building 17 0.2 Parking C-I-L 30 duJ acre 30 5 17 0.1 0 C-I-L 30 duJ acre 30 2 17 0.2 C C-I-L 30 duJ acre 30 5 Site 17 0.7 30 22 18 0.1 Vacant C D-C-L 30 duJ acre 30 2 18 0.1 Vacant C D-C-L 30 duJ acre 30 4 Site 18 0.2 30 7 Vacant 19 0.2 Fire C D-C-L 30 duJ acre 30 5 Station 19 0.3 Parking D-C-L 30 duJ acre 30 10 Site 19 0.3 30 14 TOTAL 4.3 143 Source: City of South San Francisco, 2009; BAE, 2009. City of South San Francisco General Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Draft Page V-12 May 15,2009 VI. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The development of approximately 1,200 dwelling units ("du") under the City's 2007-2014 Housing Element, of which 805 dus need to be developed by the City to meet its remaining RHNA allocation, would be subject to the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan (including the 2007- 2014 Housing Element), the City's Standard Conditions and Limitations for multi-family residential projects (included as Appendix A), and the Municipal Code (which includes the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance). As such, the Housing Element would have less-than-significant impacts or no impacts on the following items: Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDet Incorporation ImIDet ImIDet 1. Aesthetics Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a D D D lEI scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock D D D lEI outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its D D D lEI surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect D D D lEI day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion: a) Scenic Vistas The opportunity sites are not located within formally designated public vistas, nor would they result in the obstruction of any formally designated public vista. The South San Francisco General Plan does not contain policies pertaining to scenic vistas; thus, the proposed project would not conflict with an adopted planning policy regarding scenic vistas. b) Scenic Resources and Scenic Routes The City of South San Francisco does not have formally designated scenic routes; however, Highway 280 is a state designated scenic highway located along the western side of the City. The proposed project would not conflict with an adopted planning policy regarding scenic routes. The South San Francisco General Plan does not contain policies pertaining to scenic routes. As such, the Housing Element would not impact scenic resources along scenic routes. City of South San FraJU:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Declamtion Draft Page V1-1 May 15,2009 c) Visual Character South San Francisco's industrial roots are reflected in its urban character, which contrasts with a visually distinct setting. San Bruno Mountain to the north, the ridge along Skyline Boulevard to the west, and the San Francisco Bay to the east provide the City with particular visual resources. The City is contained by hills on three sides and the terrain within the City ranges from the flatlands along the water to hills to the east and north. Hills are visible from all parts of the City, and Sign Hill and San Bruno Mountain are visual landmarks. Much of the City's topography is rolling, resulting in distant views from many neighborhoods. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to visual character: . Policy 2-G-]: Preserve the scale and character of established neighborhoods, and protect residents from changes in non-residential areas. . Policy 2-G-6: Maximize opportunities for residential development, including through infill and redevelopment, without impacting existing neighborhoods or creating conflicts with industrial operations. . Policy 2-]-2: Establish height limitations for specific areas as delineated on Figure 2-3 (from the City's General Plan). For these specific areas, do not regulate heights separately by underlying base district uses. . Policy 2-]-7: Establish a comprehensive design standards and guidelines strategy. . Policy 2-]-8: As part of establishment of design guidelines and standards, and design review, improve the community orientation of new development. . Policy 2-]-9: Ensure that any design and development standards and guidelines that are adopted reflect the unique patterns and characteristics of individual neighborhoods. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following goal applies to scenic resources and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element: . Goal 4: The maintenance and improvement of the quality of life, safety and historic integrity of existing neighborhoods is a high priority for the City of South San Francisco (Formerly Goal 5). While future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to be consistent with the City's General Plan, to fully achieve the vision of the 2007-2014 Housing Element, the City is exploring GPAs/Zoning Ordinance changes, which would alter portions of the City's land use designations and zoning within the South El Camino Real and Downtown area opportunity sites. In the South El Camino Real area, this would include a change in the land use designation to a mix of uses ("mixed-use"), which could include residential development of up to 60 du/ac. In the Downtown area, this would also include a change in the land use designation to mixed use, while exploring the City of South San FraJU:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page Vl-2 May 15,2009 possibility of increased density. Both areas currently allow for up to 30 dulac, with one opportunity site within the Downtown area allowing density of up to 40 du/ac. Such densities could require the raising of the height limitations in the zoning of the opportunity sites. Standard Conditions and Limitations. The following Standard Conditions and Limitations are applicable to the Housing Element: . Item 9: No additional signs, flags, pennants or banners shall be installed or erected on the site without prior approval. . Item 10: Adequate trash areas shall be provided and enclosed by a six (6) foot high decorative masonry wall. Adequate solid gates and vehicular access to such areas shall be provided. . Item II: All ducting for air conditioning, heating, blower systems, accessory mechanisms and all other forms of mechanical or electrical equipment which are placed on or adjacent to the building shall be screened from public view. . Item 12: All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turn-around areas and landscaping areas shall be kept free of debris, litter and weeds at all times. Site, structures, paving, landscaping, light standards, pavement markings and all other facilities shall be permanently maintained. . Item 13: There shall be no open storage of materials or equipment on the subject property, except as approved by each permit. Municipal Code. Title 13 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Tree Preservation. The regulations contained within the Title 13 provide strict guidelines for the protection and preservation of City street trees and protected trees. Title 2 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Historic Preservation Commission's guidelines to preserving neighborhood character. In addition, Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's guidelines to preserving for keeping with the visual character of the street or area in which a project is proposed. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to all of the above-mentioned Municipal Codes. d) Light or Glare General Plan. The City of South San Francisco's General Plan does not contain goals, polices, or programs that are related to light and glare, therefore, the Housing Element would not conflict with an adopted planning policy regarding light and glare. Standard Conditions and Limitations. In addition to Item 12, above, the following Standard Conditions and Limitations is applicable to the Housing Element: . Item 8: All exterior lights shall be installed in such a manner that there shall be no illumination on adjacent properties or streets which might be considered either objectionable by adjacent property owners or hazardous to motorists. City of South San FraJU:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page Vl-3 May 15,2009 Municipal Code. Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's General Sign Standards. The regulations contained within the Title 20 provide guidelines to minimize glare and spillover light. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 20 of the Municipal Code. Finding: Compliance with the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan, Municipal Code Titles 13 and 20, and Standard Conditions and Limitations Items 8 through 13, would ensure that the scale and character of the City's existing neighborhoods remain intact under the Housing Element, there would not be impacts to scenic vistas or scenic resources and there would not be impacts with regard to light and glare. As such, the proposed project would have no impact to aesthetics. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-4 May 15,2009 Potentially Significant ImIDet Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant ImIDet No ImIDet 2. Agriculture Resources 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) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. 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 D D D lEI 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? D D D lEI c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? D D D lEI Discussion: a - c) Farmland Impacts As stated in the 2002 Initial Study/Negative Declaration for the 2002 Housing Element, the City is located in a heavily urbanized area and does not contain agricultural resources within its limits. 3 No Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmlands, or Farmlands of Statewide Importance have been identified at, or around, the opportunity sites. No parts of the opportunity sites are under a Williamson Act contract and no part of the opportunity sites or surrounding areas are zoned for agricultural uses (South San Francisco General Plan and Zoning Ordinance). Finding: The proposed project would have no impact to agricultural resources and would not convert designated Farmland to non-agricultural use. City of South San Francisco, Negative Declaration/Initial Study for the South San Francisco General Plan/Housing Element Update., October 16, 2002. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-5 May 15,2009 Potentially Significant ImIDet Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation No ImIDet Less Than Significant ImIDet 3. Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? f) Result in a cumulatively considerable increase in greenhouse gas emissions? D lEI D D D D D lEI D D D lEI D D D lEI D D D lEI D D lEI D Discussion: a) Conflict with Air Quality Plan The Bay Area is currently designated as a nonattainment area for State and national ozone standards and as a nonattainment area for the State PM-lO standard. As required by federal and State air quality laws, the 2001 Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan and the 2000 Bay Area Clean Air Plan have been prepared to address ozone nonattainment issues. In addition, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has prepared the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to air quality plans: . Policy 7.3-1-]: Cooperate with the BAAQMD to achieve emissions reductions for nonattainment pollutants and their precursors, including carbon monoxide, ozone, and PM-lO, by implementation of air pollution control measures as required by State and federal statutes. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-6 May 15,2009 . Policy 7.3-1-3: Adopt the standard construction dust abatement measures included in BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. The standard mitigation referred to in Policy 7.3-1-3 would apply to all projects under the Housing Element that are subject to CEQA. Mitigation Measure AQ-l, as follows, would reduce any impacts to air quality plans to a less-than-significant level: AQ-] Implement feasible control measures for construction emission of PM-]O. The project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: . Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. . Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. . Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. b) and c) Air Q/Jality Standards Northwest winds are most common in South San Francisco, reflecting the orientation of wind gaps within the mountains of the San Francisco Peninsula. The persistent winds in South San Francisco result in a relatively low potential for air pollution. However, during the fall and winter months, there are periods of several days when winds are light and local pollutants can accumulate. The BAAQMD monitors and regulates air quality pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, as amended, and the ]988 California Clean Air Act. In particular, the BAAQMD regulates ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NCh), sulfur dioxide (S02), particulate matter (PM-lO), and lead (Pb). In general, within the City, residents and workers may experience occasional violations of PM- 10 standards due to construction activities and other local dust sources. Residents and workers may also experience elevated concentrations of carbon monoxide along congested freeway segments and at congested intersections. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to Policies 7.3-1-1 and 7.3- 1-3, as listed above. In addition, the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to air quality standards: . Policy 7.3-G-]: Continue to work toward improving air quality and meeting all national and State ambient air quality standards and by reducing the generation of air pollutants both from stationary and mobile sources, where feasible. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-7 May 15,2009 . Policy 7.3-G-2: Encourage land use and transportation strategies that promote use of alternatives to the automobile for transportation, including bicycling, bus transit, and carpooling. . Policy 7.3-1-2: Use the City's development review process and the CEQA regulations to evaluate and mitigate the local and cumulative effects of new development on air quality. . Policy 7.3-1-4: Require new residential development and remodeled existing homes to install clean- burning fireplaces and wood stoves. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following goal, polices, and programs from the 2007-2014 Housing Element apply to air quality standards and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element. . Goal 7: The City of South San Francisco will promote energy efficiency in residential development within the City, including reduction of energy use through better design and construction in individual homes, and also through energy efficient urban design. . Policy 7-]: The City shall continue to promote the use of energy conservation features in all new residential structures. . Program 7-2A: The City shall continue to provide information on energy-efficient standards for residential buildings (e.g., brochures and other information). . Policy 7-3: The City shall promote the use of weatherization programs for existing residential units especially among low-income households. . Policy 7-4: The City shall encourage the use of energy efficient and energy conserving design and construction techniques in all types of projects (including new construction and remodeled and rehabilitated structures). Standard Conditions and Limitations. The following Standard Conditions and Limitations is applicable to the Housing Element: . Item] 4: The construction and permitted use on the property shall be so conducted as to reduce to a minimum any noise vibration or dust resulting from the operation. Municipal Code. Title 8 of the City's Municipal Code restricts the burning of solid waste. The regulations contained within Title 8 provide guidelines to minimize air pollution from the burning of solid waste. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-8 May 15,2009 d) Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollution Concentrations General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to sensitive receptors: . Policy 7.3-G-3: Minimize conflicts between sensitive receptors and emissions generators by distancing them from one another. e) Odors During construction, various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on construction sites would create odors. These odors are temporary and not likely to be noticeable beyond the construction sites. Residential land uses are not anticipated to result in indoor emissions. Offensive odors are typically associated with industrial land uses rather than residential uses. General Plan. The City of South San Francisco's General Plan does not contain goals, polices, or programs that are related to odor; therefore, the Housing Element would not conflict with an adopted planning policy regarding odor. Municipal Code. Title 8 of the City's Municipal Code restricts the burning of solid waste, and Title 20 outlines restrictions on odors generated by certain land uses. The regulations contained within the Municipal Code provide guidelines to minimize odors affecting surrounding land uses. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Titles 8 and 20 of the Municipal Code. f) Result in a Cumulative Considerable Increase in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Overview. Global climate change is a long-term alteration of global weather patterns, as measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperatures. The science of global climate change is evolving and remains subject to debate and uncertainties; however, recent reports from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ("IPCC") have concluded that global climate change is likely due, at least in part, to emissions of greenhouse gases ("GHG") from human activities. 4 Greenhouse gases are most frequently produced by the burning of fossil fuels for transportation and electricity generation, and include carbon dioxide ("C02"), methane ("CH4'), nitrous oxide ("N20"), sulfur hexafluoride ("SF,"), perfluorocarbons ("PFC"), and hydrofluorocarbons ("HFC"). They allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere but trap a portion of the outward-bound infrared radiation, thereby warming the air. The process is similar to the effect greenhouses have in raising the internal temperature. Greenhouse gases have varying global warming potential ("GWP"). The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere; it is the cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas over a specified time horizon resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas relative to a reference gas. Because C02 contributes to over 80 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, GWP is measured in 4 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group I: The Physical Basis of Climate Change, http://ipcc-wgl. ucar.edu/wl/wl-report.html. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-9 May 15,2009 C02 equivalencies (CChe). The GWP of CH4 is 23 times the GWP of C02, while the GWP is 296 times the GWP of C02. According to the 2006 California Climate Action Team Report,5 the following climate change effects, which are based on the IPCC predictions, can be expected in California over the course of the next century: . A diminishing Sierra snow pack resulting in depletion and destabilization of the State's water supp ly; . Increasing temperatures from 8 to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit under the higher emission scenarios, leading to a 25 percent to 35 percent increase in the number of days ozone pollution levels are exceeded in most urban areas; . Increased vulnerability of forests due to pest infestation and increased temperatures; and . Increased electricity demand, particularly in the hot summer months. Additionally, health effects may arise from predicted temperature increases and extreme weather events. The frequency of outbreaks of climate-sensitive diseases, such as malaria, dengue fever, yellow fever, and encephalitis, may increase. Extreme events such as flooding and hurricanes may displace people and harm crops. Climate change may also contribute to air quality problems from increased frequency of smog and particulate air pollution. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Policies. Currently the federal government does not actively regulate emissions of GHGs; however, the State has been proactive in developing GHG emissions limits. In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order S-3-05, which sets forth a series of target dates by which statewide emission of GHGs would be progressively reduced as follows: . By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; . By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and . By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. In 2006, the State Legislature passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill No. 32; California Health and Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et seq., or AB 32), which requires the California Air Resources Board ("CARB") to design and implement emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (representing an approximate 25 percent reduction in emissions). CARB has also approved a 1990 emissions inventory of 427 million metric tons per year of C02e emissions, with a 2020 target reduction of 169 million metric tons C02e per year. In June 2007, CARB directed staff to pursue 37 early actions for reducing GHG emissions under AB 32. The early actions include development of: a low carbon fuel standard, regulations for refrigerants with high GWP, guidance and protocols for local governments to facilitate GHG reductions, and California Environmental Protection Agency Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature, March 2006 City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page V1-10 May 15,2009 measures for ports and industries.' In total, the 44 recommended early actions have the potential to reduce GHG emissions by at least 42 million metric tons C02e per year by 2020, representing about 25 percent of the estimated reductions needed by 2020.7 General Plan. The City's General Plan contains several policies that would help to reduce residential GHG emissions. These include the following: . Policy ]-7: The City shall encourage a mix of residential, cornmercial and office uses in the areas designated as Downtown Commercial, mixed Community Commercial and High Density Residential, mixed Business Commercial and High Density Residential, mixed Business Commercial and Medium Density Residential in the General Plan and in the South San Francisco BAR T Transit Village Zoning District. . Policy ]-9: The City shall maximize opportunities for residential development, including through infill and redevelopment of underutilized sites, without impacting existing neighborhoods or creating conflicts with industrial operations. . Policy 7.3-G-2: Encourage land use and transportation strategies that promote use of alternatives to the automobile for transportation, including bicycling, bus transit, and carpooling. . Policy 4.3-G-]: Develop a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation. . Policy 4.3-G-2: Provide safe and direct pedestrian routes and bikeways between and through residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers. . Policy 4.3-G-3: In partnership with employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle operations. . Policy 4.3-G-4: In partnership with the local business community, develop a transportation systems management plan with identified trip-reduction goals, while continuing to maintain a positive and supportive business environment. . Policy 4.3-1-8: Adopt a TDM program or ordinance which includes, but is not limited to, the following components: o Establishment of baseline TDM requirements for all new projects generating more than 100 peak period trips. o Establishment of additional requirements for all new projects seeking a FAR bonus. , California Air Resources Board, September 2oo7a. Draft List of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse California Air Resources Board Res. No. 07-55 (December 6,2007). 7 City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page V1-11 May 15,2009 o An ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure TDM measures are actually implemented. o Reduce parking requirements for new projects implementing a TDM Program. New housing units developed pursuant to the Housing Element would have the potential to generate approximately 13,844 metric tons of C02e. This includes 3 metric tons C02e from direct natural gas consumption, 1,494 metric tons C02e from indirect electricity generation, 1,379 metric tons C02e from solid waste emissions, and 10,967 metric tons C02e from project-related vehicle trips. Additional emissions would be generated during construction; however, these cannot be accurately estimated at the program level due to the variables associated with individual construction projects. Calculations are provided as Appendix B. The GH G emissions associated with implementation of the Housing Element would contribute to the cumulative global climate change impact. However, the General Plan policies identified above would help to minimize GHG emissions by reducing energy consumption, minimizing solid waste generation, and providing trip reductions. Moreover, as discussed in the project description, the new housing units would consist of infill development and would be located near public transit facilities. The City also has several policies encouraging mixed-use development, which has proven trip reduction benefits. This land use pattern would result in energy efficiency and a reduction in the number and length of single- occupancy vehicle trips, the largest GHG-generating source of emissions associated with the Housing Element. With implementation of the Mitigation Measure below, the Housing Element's contribution to the cumulative global climate change effect would be less than significant: AQ-2 Green Building Measures for New Construction. The following green building measures shall be incorporated, at the discretion of the Planning Department, into new residential construction: . Trees and other shade structures shall be incorporated to maximize summer shade and to minimize winter shade. Canopy cover shall extend over 50 percent of non-permeable surfaces following a ten-year growth period. . Residential construction shall use "green" cement, which contains recycled materials (slag or fly-ash) and is produced using emission-reducing technologies, if available, structurally appropriate for the intended use, and where feasible and practicable. . New construction shall use energy efficient lighting, to the extent feasible and appropriate. At the minimum, all buildings shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in energy use associated with lighting over existing Title 24 standards. . Residential buildings shall include passive solar design features that include roof overhangs or canopies that block summer shade, but that allow winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows. . Roofing materials used in commercial/retail buildings shall be Energy Star@ certified. All roof products shall also be certified to meet A TSM high emissivity requirements. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-12 May 15,2009 . Where feasible, recycled, rapidly renewable, reclaimed and/or certified components shall be used in the construction of new residential buildings. Finding: Compliance with the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan, Standard Conditions and Limitations Item 14, the Municipal Code, and Mitigation Measures AQ-l and AQ-2 would ensure that development under the Housing Element would comply with federal, State, and local air quality standards. The Housing Element would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and would not result in a cumulatively considerable a net increase of criteria non-attainment pollutants (ozone precursors and PM-lO). In addition, it would not violate any air quality standard, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or create objectionable odors. As such, the proposed project would have less-than-signiticant impact to air quality. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-13 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 4. Biological Resources Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, D D D lEI policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or 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, regulations or D D D lEI by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, D D D lEI 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 D D D lEI 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 D D D lEI resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, D D D lEI or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-14 May 15,2009 Discussion: a) - d) Habitat, State and Federal Regulations, Waters, and Wildlife Corridors South San Francisco's natural environment has undergone drastic changes during its history of urbanization; many natural areas have been completely developed, the Bay has been filled, and the hillsides have been graded extensively. However, the remaining presence of hillsides and marshlands gives the City a wide diversity of plant and animal life and habitat. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to habitat and state and federal regulations: . Policy 2-1-]3: As part of development review in environmentally sensitive areas require specific environmental studies and/or review as stipulated in Section 7.1: Habitat and Biological Resources Conservation. . Policy 7.]-G-]: Protect special status species and supporting habitats within South San Francisco, including species that are State or federally listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Rare. . Policy 7.] -G-2: Protect and, where reasonable and feasible, restore saltmarshes and wetlands. . Policy 7.]-1-]: Cooperate with State and federal agencies to ensure that development does not substantially affect special status species appearing on any State or federal list for any rare, endangered, or threatened species. Require assessments of biological resources prior to approval of any development on sites with ecologically sensitive habitat, as depicted in Figure 7-1 (of the City's General Plan). . Policy 7.]-1-4: Require development on the wetlands delineated in Figure 7-1 to complete assessments of biological resources. Municipal Code. Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's guidelines to requiring that construction of projects is consistent with the City's habitat conservation plan. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 20 of the Municipal Code. e) andf) Local Policies and Ordinances and Habitat Conservation Plans Any development under the Housing Element would comply with the San Bruno Mountain and Sign Hill Habitat Conservation Plans ("HCP"); however, none of the opportunity sites are located within these HCP-protected areas. Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's guidelines requiring that construction of projects is consistent with the City's habitat conservation plan. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 20 of the Municipal Code. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-15 May 15,2009 Finding: Compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan would ensure that development under the Housing Element would not result in impacts to biological resources. Development at the opportunity sites identified in the 2007-2014 Housing Element would occur as infill, in an urbanized and built-out City. Since the opportunity sites would not be located on identified ecologically sensitive lands, the Housing Element would not have a substantial adverse effect on any species, riparian or natural habitats, federally-protected wetlands, migratory corridors, or nursery sites. In addition, the Housing Element would not conflict with local policies or provisions of an adopted HCP. As such, the proposed project would have no impact to biological resources. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-16 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 5. Cultural Resources Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource D D D lEI as defined in '15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological D D D lEI resource pursuant to '15064. 5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or D lEI D D unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal D lEI D D cemeteries? Discussion: a) Historic Resources Despite its rich history, the City has relatively few designated historic resources. Local, state, and national historic resources are accorded special protection against alteration and demolition under the City's Municipal Code and State and federal law. Historic resources in the City of South San Francisco include: the potential Downtown Historical Commercial District, which is composed of late 19th and early-mid 20th century commercial buildings; the national historic landmark, Sign Hill; and many local landmarks, including several homes, commercial, and industrial buildings. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to historic resources: . Policy 7.5-G-]: Conserve historic, cultural, and archaeological resources for the aesthetic, educational, economic, and scientific contribution they make to South San Francisco's identity and quality of life. . Policy 7.5-G-2: Encourage municipal and community awareness, appreciation, and support for South San Francisco's historic, cultural, and archaeological resources. . Policy 7.5-1-]: Explore the feasibility of establishing a Downtown South San Francisco Historical Commercial District, to promote the revitalization and redevelopment of the area. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-17 May 15,2009 . Policy 7.5-1-2: Institute downtown urban design guidelines, and require a design review of developments in the proposed Downtown South San Francisco Historical Cornmercial District to ensure that the height, massing, and design of buildings furthers Downtown's character. . Policy 7.5-1-3: Explore mechanisms to incorporate South San Francisco's industrial heritage in historic and cultural preservation. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following goal from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to historic resources and would be followed with implementation of the Housing Element: . Goal 4: The maintenance and improvement of the quality of life, safety and historic integrity of existing neighborhoods is a high priority for the City of South San Francisco (Formerly Goal 5). Municipal Code. Title 2 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Historic Preservation Commission's guidelines to preserving neighborhood character. In addition, Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's guidelines to preserving for keeping with the visual character of the street or area in which a project is proposed. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 2 and Title 20 of the Municipal Code. b) - d) Archaeological Resources Consistent with its history as an Ohlone settlement location, South San Francisco has Native American village sites and shell mounds scattered around the City. Known resources include: a Native American archaeological village containing household items, projectile points, dietary debris, and human burials, located within the El Camino Corridor Redevelopment Area; and a large shell mound and two small shell middens near the south slope of San Bruno Mountain. South San Francisco's coastal location, and its rich history as a center of industry, makes the existence of additional prehistoric and historic archaeological resources likely. General Plan. In addition to policies 7.5-G-l, 7.5-G-2, and 7.5-1-3, as listed above, development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to archaeological resources: . Policy 7.5-1-4: Ensure the protection of known archaeological resources in the City by requiring a records review for any development proposed in areas of known resources. . Policy 7.5-1-5: In accordance with State law, require the preparation of a resource mitigation plan and monitoring program by a qualified archaeologist in the event that archaeological resources are uncovered. The standard mitigation referred to in Policy 7.5-1-5 would apply to all projects under the Housing Element that are subject to CEQA. The following Mitigation Measures would reduce the impact to cultural resources to a less-than-significant level: City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-18 May 15,2009 CR-] Protect unique paleontological/geological features. Should a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature be identified at an opportunity site during any phase of construction, the project sponsor shall cease all construction activities at the site of the discovery and immediately notify the City. The project sponsor shall retain a qualified paleontologist to provide an evaluation of the find and to prescribe mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources or geologic features is carried out. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementing any additional prescribed mitigation measures prescribed by the paleontologist and approved by the City. CR-2 Protect human remains. If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resource shall be halted and the City and the County Coroner shall be notified irnmediately, according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of the State Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County Coroner to be Native American, the NAHC shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The project sponsor shall also retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the project site, and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the excavation and removal of the human remains. The City shall be responsible for approval of recornmended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98. The project sponsor shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City, before the resumption of ground disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered. Finding: Compliance with the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan and Municipal Code and implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-l and CR-2 would ensure that development under the Housing Element would comply with federal and State laws protecting cultural resources. Development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to survey for cultural, pre- historic, and historic resources, and abide by any applicable federal and/or State laws. In addition, should any sensitive resources be discovered during the construction of future development under the 2007-201 4 Housing Element, all building activity should cease until a resource mitigation plan and monitoring program is prepared by a qualified professional. As such, the proposed project would have a less-than-signiticant impact to cultural resources. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-19 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 6. Geology and Soils Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based D D D lEI on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? D D D lEI iii) seismic-related ground failure, D D D lEI including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? D D D lEI b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the D D D lEI 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 D D D lEI potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building D D D lEI Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems D D D lEI where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-20 May 15,2009 Discussion: a) i) - iii) Surface Fault Rupture, Seismic Ground-Shaking, and Seismic-Related Ground Failure The City is subject to earthquakes from seismic activity generated both on nearby and distant fault systems. There are approximately 30 known faults in the Bay Area that are considered capable of generating earthquakes. Because of its presence within South San Francisco, the San Andreas Fault is considered a source of high earthquake hazard to the entire City. Both ground rupture, with associated displacement and ground cracking, and high levels of ground shaking that would accompany a rupture in the area, are possible hazards. The San Andreas Fault is included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. Additionally, the San Gregorio Fault Zone is also located in the vicinity of the City. The San Gregorio Fault is a major right oblique slip fault; the closest location of the fault is approximately 7 miles west of the City. The fault has been active, although there has not been a known large magnitude surface faulting earthquake on the San Gregorio Fault. In addition to these potentially active fault traces, there are several fault traces within City limits that are considered to be potentially inactive. They are the Serra, Coyote Point/Hillside, and San Bruno Fault Zones. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policy with regard to surface fault rupture, seismic ground-shaking, and seismic-related ground failure: . Policy 8.] -G-]: Minimize the risk to life and property from seismic activity and geologic hazards in South San Francisco. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Building Code, which incorporates the 2001 California Building Code ("CBC"). The regulations contained within the City's Building Code provide strict guidelines for where structures can be placed in regards to geological suitability. In addition, Title 19 of the City's Municipal Coded outlines expansive soil investigation requirements prior to the construction of a subdivision. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 15 and Title 19 of the Municipal Code. a) iv) Landslides and c) Geologic Instability The parts of the San Francisco Bay region that have the greatest susceptibility to landsliding are hilly areas underlain by weak bedrock units of slope greater than 15 percent. In South San Francisco this hazard is primarily located on the southern flank of San Bruno Mountain and near Skyline Boulevard. The opportunity sites are not within landslide areas. Most of the lowland areas of South San Francisco are mapped by the County of San Mateo as potentially having liquefaction hazards, with moderate liquefaction potential in the alluvial fan of Colma Creek and in a narrow strip of land south of Sister Cities Boulevard. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-21 May 15,2009 General Plan. As mentioned above, development under the Housing Element would be subject to Policy 8.1-G-l with regard to geologic hazards. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Building Code, which incorporates the CBC. The regulations contained within the City's Building Code provide strict guidelines for where structures can be placed in regards to geological suitability. In addition, Title 19 of the City's Municipal Code outlines expansive soil investigation requirements prior to the construction of a subdivision. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 15 and Title 19 of the Municipal Code. b) Erosion or Loss of Topsoil According to the City's General Plan, the City can be categorized by three geological zones: Lowland Zone. A large portion of the City, primarily east of U. S. 101, is underlain by deposits of Bay mud up to 80 feet deep in some places. Associated development hazards include expansive soil, settlement, and corrosivity. Seismic hazards include earthquake wave amplification and liquefaction. Development in the lowland zone often requires engineering solutions to address soil constraints and the increased risk of geologic and seismic hazard in this area. Upland Zone. Soils in this zone are mostly developed, covered by urban land and cut-and-fill. The cut-and-fill in some areas has superimposed the alluvial soils of the Colma Creek floodplain. The difficulty in this zone is the varying nature of the fill, which was laid with varying attention to engineering practices. There is a moderate potential for expansive soil and/or erosion hazard here. Hillside Zone. The Hillside Zone includes some slopes of over 30 percent. The native soils of this zone are characterized as various sandy and gravelly loams with generally high to very high erosion potential, low strength and stability, and shallow depth. These areas are susceptible to soil creep and small landslides. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to erosion or loss of top soil: . Policy 8.1-1-2: Steep hillside areas in excess of 30 percent grade should be retained in their natural state. Development of hillside sites should follow existing contours to the greatest extent possible. Grading should be kept to a minimum. Standard Conditions and Limitations. The following Standard Conditions and Limitations is applicable to the Housing Element: . Item 6: Prior to construction, all required building permits shall be obtained from the City's Building Division. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-22 May 15,2009 Municipal Code. Title 13 of the Municipal Code outlines the City's Tree Preservation. The regulations contained within the Title 13 provide strict guidelines for the protection and preservation of City street trees and protected trees that help prevent erosion and loss of top soil. Title 14 outlines watercourse protection from erosion. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Building Code, which incorporates the CBC. The regulations contained within the City's Building Code provide strict guidelines for where structures can be placed in regards to geological suitability. In addition, Title 19 outlines erosion control for subdivisions and Title 20 outlines the general erosion control requirements. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Titles 13, 14, 15, 19, and 20 of the Municipal Code regarding erosion control. d) Expansive Soils Refer to the above discussion under Item b, Erosion or Loss of Topsoil, for a brief description of the soil types found in the City. General Plan. In addition to the aforementioned Policy 8.1-G-l, development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to expansive soils: . Policy 8.]-1-]: Do not permit special occupancy buildings, such as hospitals, schools, and other structures that are important to protecting health and safety in the cornmunity, in areas identified in Figure 8-2. . Policy 8. ]-1-3: Explore programs that would build incentives to retrofit unreinforced masonry buildings. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following goal, polices, and program from the 2007-2014 Housing Element apply to expansive soils and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element: . Goal 4: The maintenance and improvement ofthe quality oflife, safety and historic integrity of existing neighborhoods is a high priority for the City of South San Francisco. . Policy 4-]: The City shall prohibit new residential development in areas containing major environmental hazards (such as floods, and seismic and safety problems) unless adequate mitigation measures are taken. . Policy 4-3: As appropriate and required by law, the City shall continue the abatement of unsafe structures. . Program 4-3A: Review Projects for Major Environmental Hazards during the Environmental Review Process. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-23 May 15,2009 Standard Conditions and Limitations. Item 6 of the Standard Conditions and Limitations, as described above, is applicable to the Housing Element in regard to expansive soils. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Building Code, which incorporates the CBC. The regulations contained within the City's Building Code provide strict guidelines for where structures can be placed in regards to geological suitability. In addition, Title 19 of the Municipal Code outlines expansive soil investigation requirements prior to the construction of a subdivision. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Titles 15 and 19 of the Municipal Code regarding expansive soils. e) Capability of Soils to Suppol1 Septic Tanks 2007-2014 Housing Element. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to Policies 4-1 and 4-3, along with Program 4-3A, as listed above, with regard to expansive soils. Implementation of the programs associated with these goals of the proposed project will serve as a beneficial impact to the Planning Area through the use of systematic code enforcement, regulatory measures, and cooperative neighborhood improvement programs. and the maintenance and improvement of the quality of life and safety of the structures within the City. Standard Conditions and Limitations. The following Standard Conditions and Limitations is applicable to the Housing Element: . Item ]6: Prior to anyon-site grading, a grading permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Building Code, which incorporates the CBC. The regulations contained within the City's Building Code provide strict guidelines for where structures can be placed in regards to geological suitability. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Titles 15 of the Municipal Code regarding septic tanks. Finding: Compliance with the goals and policies of the General Plan, Title 15 of the Municipal Code, and Standard Conditions and Limitations Item 16 would ensure that development under the Housing Element would comply with federal and State laws protecting geologic resources. The General Plan policies listed above have been crafted to ensure that future development would comply with federal and State laws in regards to geology and soils, and the City's Municipal Code would ensure that future development is in compliance with the standards established by the State. In addition, future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to prove site suitability, in regards to geologic hazards, through a geological investigation. As such, the proposed project would have no impact to seismic-related failures, geologic instability, erosion, expansive soils, and the support of septic tanks. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-24 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine D D D lEI transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident D D D lEI 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 D D D lEI 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 D D D lEI 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, D D D lEI would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result D D D lEI in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency D D D lEI response plan or emergency evacuation plan? City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-25 May 15,2009 Potentially Significant ImIDct Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant ImIDct No ImIDct h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? D D D lEI Discussion: a) - d) Hazardous Materials Numerous industrial and commercial operations, both past and present, have manufactured, handled, stored, and disposed of hazardous materials in South San Francisco. Hazardous material sites include manufacturing operations, active and abandoned landfills, facilities with leaking underground storage tanks (USTs), permitted dischargers, and generators of hazardous wastes. Most hazardous materials concentrations are located in the East of 101 area; however there are 114 know sites with leaking USTs within the City as identified by the Cortese List, published in December 1994. No sites in the Transit Village or South El Camino Real areas are listed with the State as having known or potential contamination8 However, certain sites within the Downtown area have been suspected of environmental contamination, which may require clean up, in order to facilitate housing development. These include Site 10, 11, 12, and 17. As of March 2009, Phase II Investigations were not available for any of these sites. Prior to development at these sites, a Phase II Investigation and, if required, remediation shall be completed in accordance with the City's Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) and Policies 8.3-G-2 and 8.3-1-2, described below. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to hazardous materials: . Policy 8.3-G-]: Reduce the generation of solid waste, including hazardous waste, and recycle those materials that are used, to slow the filling of local and regional landfills, in accord with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. . Policy 8.3-G-2: Minimize the risk to life and property from the generation, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials and waste in South San Francisco. Comply with all applicable regulations and provisions for the storage, use and handling of hazardous substances as established by federal (Environmental Protection Agency ["EP A"]), State (Department of Toxic substances Control ["DTSC"], Regional Water Quality Control Board ["RWQCB"], California Occupational Safety and Health Administration ['Tal OSHA"], California Environmental Protection Agency ['Tal EP A"]), and local (County and City) regulations. 8 Department of Toxic Control Substances, March 2009. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-26 May 15,2009 . Policy 8.3-1-2: Continue to maintain hazardous waste regulations in the City's Zoning Ordinance. . Policy 8.3-1-3: Prepare a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) coverage for the sites included in the Cortese List of Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites. . Policy 8.3-1-4: Establish an ordinance specifying routes for transporting hazardous materials. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following policy from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to hazardous materials and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element: . Policy 4-]: The City shall prohibit new residential development in areas containing major environmental hazards (such as floods, and seismic and safety problems) unless adequate mitigation measures are taken. (Existing Policy 5-1) Municipal Code. Title 8 of the Municipal Code outlines health and welfare regulations and Chapter 8.16 discusses disposal of hazardous materials. Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines coordination with hazardous materials inventory and response program. In addition, Title 15 of the Municipal Code outlines the City's Fire Code with respect to hazardous materials. Also, Title 20 of the Municipal Code outlines regulations on the storage of hazardous materials. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Titles 8, 14, 15, and 20 of the Municipal Code. e) and f) Safety Hazards Due to Nearby Airport or Airstrip The City is located just north of the San Francisco International Airport, and within the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission's (ALUC) jurisdiction. The ALUC allows development within ALUC boundaries, provided that development is below a prescribed height limit. In 1981, the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan, in coordination with Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77, established a 211-foot height limit for some buildings within ALUC jurisdiction. The South El Camino Real area is located approximately two miles from SFO, and is situated directly below one of the principal flight paths. Consequently, the area is subject to airport-related height limitations. In addition, new construction of residential development in the area must be insulated such that normal aircraft operations will not result in indoor noise levels greater than 65 dB CNEL. Whereas current height limits, as set by the City's General Plan, are substantially less than would be permissible under the airport-related height restrictions (ranging from 161 to 361 feet), and whereas substantial residential development exists in the vicinity of the South El Camino Real area that has been sufficiently insulated to meet noise standards, proximity to the airport is not expected to be a binding constraint that would prevent medium to high density residential development in the South El Camino Real area. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-27 May 15,2009 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following policy from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to airport-related hazards and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element: . Policy 4-4: The City shall require new residential developments to comply with the Aircraft Noise/Land Use Compatibility Standards for the San Francisco International Airport Plan Area, as contained in the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan. (Existing Policy 5-4) Municipal Code. Title 20 of the Municipal Code outlines the Airport Related District Use regulations and the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 20 of the Municipal Code. g) Conflict with Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan In 1995, the City prepared an Emergency Response Plan, integrated with the San Mateo Area/ County Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. The City's plan is in compliance with existing law. The objectives of the plan are to reduce life, injury, and property losses through effective management of emergency forces. The City's plan also defines the duties of the Operations, Planning, Logistics and Finance Units, and defines the roles of the South San Francisco Emergency Operations Center and other emergency services organizations. In addition, it describes the operations and procedures that should occur during the pre-emergency, emergency, and recovery periods; and establishes rules affecting registration and use of volunteer disaster service workers. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to the Emergency Response Plan: . Policy 8.6-G-]: Use the City's Emergency Response Plan as the guide for emergency management in South San Francisco. . Policy 8.6-1-]: Maintain and update the City's Emergency Response Plan, as required by State law, to minimize the risk to life and property of seismic and geologic hazards, flooding, hazardous materials and waste, and fire. . Policy 8.6-1-3: Coordinate regular emergency drills with emergency organizations, including City and County Fire, Police, Emergency Medical Services, and Public Works; San Francisco International Airport; and California Environmental Protection Agency. h) Exposure of People or Structures to Wildland Fires Many areas of open space within the City pose a substantial risk of fire hazard to surrounding resources. Topographic, climatic, and land use conditions create fire hazards, along with accumulations of unmaintained vegetation and poor access to public infrastructure. Sign Hill, the Hillside School area, and the area along Dundee Drive have the highest fire risk due to a combination of fuel characteristics, infrastructure, and adjacent uses. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-28 May 15,2009 General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to wildland fires: . Policy 8.4-G-]: Minimize the risk to life and property from fire hazards in South San Francisco. . Policy 8.4-]-2: Explore incentives or programs as part of the comprehensive fire hazard management program to encourage private landowners to reduce fire hazards on their property. . Policy 8.4-1-3: Require site design features, fire retardant building materials, and adequate access as conditions for approval of development or improvements to reduce the risk of fire within the City. 2007-2014 Housing Element. Policy 4-1 from the 2007-2014 Housing Element, as aforementioned, applies to wildland fires and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the Municipal Code outlines building and construction requirements and Chapter 15.24 provides the fire code that new buildings must adhere to. The development under Housing Element would adhere to Title 15 of the Municipal Code. Finding: Compliance with the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan and Municipal Code Titles 8 and 15 would ensure that future development under the Housing Element would comply with federal and State laws in regard to hazards and hazardous materials. As such, the proposed project would not be impacted by hazards and hazardous materials. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-29 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 8. Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or D D D lEI waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater D D D lEI table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a D D D lEI stream or river, in a manner which would result in sub stantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase D D D lEI the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or D D D lEI provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water D D D lEI quality? g) Place housing within a l00-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood D D D lEI Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or D D D lEI redirect flood flows? City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Page Vl-30 Draft May 15,2009 Potentially Significant ImIDct Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant ImIDct No ImIDct i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? D D D lEI D D D lEI Discussion: a) Violation of Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements The City is a member of the San Mateo Countywide Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP), an organization of the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) of San Mateo County holding a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm Water Discharge permit. STOPPP's goal is to prevent polluted storm water from entering creeks, wetlands, and the San Francisco Bay. The City requires the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for new development and construction as part of its storm water management program, as levied through standard City conditions of project approval. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements: . Policy 7.2-G-]: Comply with the San Francisco Bay RWQCB regulations and standards to maintain and improve the quality of both surface water and groundwater resources. . Policy 7.2-1-]: Continue working with the San Francisco Bay RWQCB in the implementation of the NPDES, and continue participation in STOPPP for the protection of surface water and groundwater quality. . Policy 7.2-1-2: Review and update the Best Management Practices adopted by the City and in STOPPP as needed. . Policy 8.2-1-]: Continue working with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in the implementation of the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP). Municipal Code. In addition, Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines water and sewage regulations; Chapter 14.04 discusses stormwater management and discharge control and Chapter 14.08 discusses water quality control. The development under Housing Element would adhere to Title 14 of the Municipal Code. In addition, Title 19 of the Municipal Code outlines the process for the City Council City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-31 May 15,2009 to determine if a subdivision has violated water quality standards through disposal of its wastewater. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 14 and 19 of the Municipal Code. b) Deplete or Inteifere Substantially with Groundwater The area southwest of Colma Creek is underlain by a portion of the San Mateo Groundwater Basin, which stretches from Daly City to Menlo Park. Groundwater flows from Lake Merced easterly toward the San Francisco Bay. Much of the alluvium that underlies the lowland areas of the City is capable of transmitting groundwater, especially in the southwestern portion of the City. Low elevation and the Colma Creek flood plain in the eastern part of the City provide conditions conducive to relatively high groundwater, especially in areas near the creek. In the southern part of the City, groundwater is found throughout the year just a few feet below ground surface. A small portion of the City's potable water supply is derived from eight groundwater wells in the vicinity of Chestnut and Mission Streets. The Colma/Merced aquifers lie at a depth of 200 to 300 feet and are capable of providing about 1,530 acre-feet per year of water. The Colma/Merced aquifers have some high levels of nitrate and manganese, but otherwise have good water quality. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject Policies 7.2-G-l and 7.2-1- 1, above, with regard to groundwater. Municipal Code. In addition, Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines water and sewage regulations; Chapter 14.04 discusses stormwater management and discharge control and Chapter 14.08 discusses water quality control. The development under Housing Element would adhere to Title 14 of the Municipal Code. In addition, Title 19 of the Municipal Code outlines the process for the city council to determine if a subdivision has violated water quality standards through disposal of its wastewater. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 14 and 19 of the Municipal Code. c) and d) Alter Existing Drainage Patterns: Erosion and Siltation Effects and Flooding Effects Colma Creek, the City's main natural drainage system, is a perennial stream with a watershed of about 16.3 square miles that trends in a roughly southeasterly direction through the center of the City. The basin is bounded on the northwest by San Bruno Mountain and on the west by the ridge traced by Skyline Boulevard. Colma Creek is almost entirely channelized west of the Bayshore Freeway. There are some sedimentation basins, but no other impoundments on Colma Creek. Drainage is controlled by a series of lined creek beds and storm drains. Runoff in the hills is relatively rapid because of steep slopes and clay soils, and is slower in the flat lowland areas. Runoff is collected in storm drains and is discharged to Colma Creek or the San Francisco Bay. Some infiltration into the ground occurs, but because the City is largely developed with high proportions of impermeable surface, runoff is relatively high. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would generally be in the flatland areas and would not significantly alter existing drainage patterns. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-32 May 15,2009 Municipal Code. Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines water and sewage regulations; Chapter 14.04 discusses stormwater management and discharge control and Chapter 14.08 discusses water quality control. Title 15 outlines building and construction requirements and Chapter 15.54 provides flood damage protection regulations. In addition, Title 19 of the Municipal Code outlines the process for the city council to determine if a subdivision has violated water quality standards through disposal of its wastewater. The development under Housing Element would adhere to Title 14, 15, and 19 of the Municipal Code, regarding drainage patterns. e) andf) Runoff Exceeding Drainage Capacity/Increased Polluted Runoff and Otherwise Degrade Water Quality Discharges into the water from fixed points, known as point sources, consist mostly of effluent discharges from industrial facilities and municipal wastewater systems. Waste discharges are regulated through NPDES permits, with specific requirements established in each NPDES permit. Requirements are mandated by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and in South San Francisco specifically by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. Nonpoint sources of pollution include general pollutants entrained in runoff from streets, open areas, and urban lands in which runoff is not collected and directed into a wastewater treatment plant. In general, nonpoint source pollution has been difficult to manage. General Plan. In addition to the aforementioned Policies 7.2-G-l, 7.2-1-1, 7.2-1-2, and 8.2-1-1, development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to increased polluted runoff and overall water quality: . Policy 7.2-G-2: Enhance the quality of surface water resources and prevent their contamination. . Policy 7.2-G-3: Discourage use of insecticides, herbicides, or toxic chemical substances within the city. Municipal Code. Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines water and sewage regulations; Chapter 14.04 discusses stormwater management and discharge control and Chapter 14.08 discusses water quality control. Title 15 outlines building and construction requirements and Chapter 15.54 provides flood damage protection regulations. In addition, Title 19 of the Municipal Code outlines the process for the city council to determine if a subdivision has violated water quality standards through disposal of its wastewater. The development under Housing Element would adhere to Title 14, 15, and 19 of the Municipal Code, regarding drainage patterns. g) - i) Flood Hazards Periodic flooding occurs in South San Francisco, but is confined to certain areas along Colma Creek. Colma Creek handles much of the urban runoff generated in the City; since South San Francisco is highly urbanized, runoff levels are high and there is increased potential for flood conditions during periods of heavy rainfall. The principal flooding problem in the city is an inadequate culvert and City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-33 May 15,2009 channel system where Colma Creek runs under the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) line. Peak flood flows in Colma Creek back up and pond east of the tracks, and water moves away from the creek along city streets. Flood depth during a 100-year storm is two to three feet in the ponding area at the tracks. Many homes in South San Francisco may be exposed to this hazard as they were constructed with insufficient elevation to remain above even shallow floodwaters. New development west of the SPRR right-of-way may be constrained by potential flooding, but careful design could minimize flooding hazards and damage. . Policy 8.2-G-]: Minimize the risk to life and property from flooding in South San Francisco. . Policy 8.2-1-2: Use the City's development review process to ensure that proposed development subject to the 100-year flood provides adequate protection from flood hazards, in areas identified in Figure 8-3 of the General Plan. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following policy from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to hydrology and water quality and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element: . Policy 4-]: The City shall prohibit new residential development in areas containing major environmental hazards (such as floods, and seismic and safety problems) unless adequate mitigation measures are taken. (Existing Policy 5-1) Municipal Code. Title 15 outlines building and construction requirements and Chapter 15.54 provides flood damage protection regulations. In addition, Title 19 of the Municipal Code outlines the process for the city council to determine if a subdivision has violated water quality standards through disposal of its wastewater. The development under Housing Element would adhere to Title 15 and 19 of the Municipal Code, regarding drainage patterns. j) Tsunami Hazards Earthquakes can cause tsunami (tidal waves) and seiches (oscillating waves in enclosed water bodies) in the Bay. As portions of the City are located adjacent San Francisco Bay, and are low-lying, tsunami or seiche inundation is a possibility. Wave run-up is estimated at approximately 4.3 feet (mean sea level ["msl"]) for tsunami with a 100- year recurrence and 6.0 feet (msl) for a 500-year tsunami. Earthquake damage inflicted on structures and infrastructure within the city is not only a function of the seismic risks outlined above, but also of the form, structural design, materials, construction quality, and location of the structure. Since the 1970s, the Uniform Building Code ("UBC") in California has incorporated minimum strength standards to which a building must be designed. New construction in South San Francisco is required to meet the requirements of the 1994 UBC, and buildings of special occupancy are required by the State to meet more stringent design requirements. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-34 May 15,2009 Finding: Compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and Municipal Code Titles 14 and 15 would ensure that future development would comply with federal and State laws with regard to hydrology and water quality. Future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to adhere to regulations pertaining to hydrology and water quality. As such, the proposed project would result in no impact to hydrology and water quality. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-35 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 9. Land Use and Planning Would the project: a) Physically divide an established D D D lEI community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general D D D lEI plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community D D D lEI conservation plan? Discussion: a) Division of an Established Community Development under the Housing Element would not divide established communities and would adhere to all applicable goals, policies, and programs. b) Conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect As indicated in the 2007-2014 Housing Element, among the government constraints to development of adequate housing are the General Plan's existing land use designations. Future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to be consistent with the City's General Plan. Concurrent with the adoption of the 2007-2014 Housing Element, the City is exploring GPAsIZoning Ordinance changes, which would alter portions of the City's land use designations and zoning within the South El Camino Real and Downtown areas and facilitate fulfillment of the Housing Element's goals. At the South El Camino Real area, this would include a change in the land use designation to a mix of uses ("mixed-use"), which could include residential development of up to 60 du/ac. At the Downtown area, this would also include a change in the land use designation to mixed use, while exploring the possibility of increased density. Both areas currently allow for up to 30 dulac, with one opportunity site within the Downtown area allowing density of up to 40 du/ac. Though not proposed as part of the Housing Element, the Housing Element acknowledges that achievement of such densities could require the raising of the height limitations in the zoning of the opportunity sites. To the extent required, future planning and development proposals, including pending General Plan Amendments, will be required to evaluate the impacts of such increases in height restrictions. Discrepancies between City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-36 May 15,2009 the existing and proposed land use designations and zoning can be found in Tables 2 and 3 of this document. For example, Site 10 (within Table 2) is currently designated for retaillcornmercial uses, with a maximum density of up to 30 du/ac. Upon adoption and implementation of the South El Camino Real General Plan Update (described in Section V of this document), the land use designation will change to mixed-use, with a maximum density of up to 60 du/ac. Under a separate action from its 2007-2014 Housing Element, the City is currently evaluating the environmental effects (CEQA compliance) of the GP AIZoning Ordinance changes to the South El Camino Real and Downtown areas. This process is expected to be completed in approximately three to six months, and the aforementioned GPAsIZoning Ordinance changes will not occur until this process is complete. Hence, the existing land use designations constitute a government constraint to achievement of the allotted housing needs articulated in the 2007-2014 Housing Element. However, the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be consistent with and subject to several existing General Plan policies (including the following), and would not obstruct achievement of remaining General Plan policies. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation: . Policy 2-G-]: Preserve the scale and character of established neighborhoods, and protect residents from changes in non-residential areas. . Policy 2-G-2: Maintain a balanced land use program that provides opportunities for continued economic growth, and building intensities that reflect South San Francisco's prominent inner bay location and excellent regional access. . Policy 2-G-3: Provide land use designations that maximize benefits of increased accessibility that will result from BART extension to the city and adjacent locations. . Policy 2-G-4: Provide for continued operation of older industrial and service commercial businesses at specific locations. . Policy 2-G-5: Maintain Downtown as the City's physical and symbolic center, and a focus of residential, commercial, and entertainment activities. . Policy 2-G-6: Maximize opportunities for residential development, including through infill and redevelopment, without impacting existing neighborhoods or creating conflicts with industrial operations. . Policy 2-G-7: Encourage mixed-use residential, retail, and office development in centers where they would support transit, in locations where they would provide increased access to neighborhoods that currently lack such facilities, and in corridors where such developments can help to foster identity and vitality. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-37 May 15,2009 . Policy 2-G-8: Provide incentives to maximize community orientation of new development, and to promote alternative transportation modes. . Policy 2-1-]: Update the City's Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations contained in the Municipal Code for consistency with the General Plan. . Policy 2-1-2: Establish height limitations for specific areas as delineated on Figure 2-3 (of the City's General Plan). For these specific areas, do not regulate heights separately by underlying base district uses. . Policy 2-1-3: Undertake planned development for unique projects or as a means to achieve high community design standards, not to circumvent development intensity standards. . Policy 2-1-8: As part of establishment of design guidelines and standards, and design review, improve the community orientation of new development. . Policy 2-1-9: Ensure that any design and development standards and guidelines that are adopted reflect the unique patterns and characteristics of individual neighborhoods. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following goal, policies, and programs from the 2007-2014 Housing Element would lead to enforcement of existing codes, revitalization, rehabilitation, and redevelopment of blighted properties, furthering preservation of existing communities. . Goal]: Promote the provision of housing by both the private and public sectors for all income groups in the community. (Existing Goal 1) . Policy ]-7: The City shall encourage a mix of residential, commercial and office uses in the areas designated as Downtown Commercial, mixed Cornmunity Commercial and High Density Residential, mixed Business Commercial and High Density Residential, mixed Business Commercial and Medium Density Residential in the General Plan and in the South San Francisco BART Transit Village Zoning District. (Existing Policy 1-7) . Program ]-7A: Increased Residential Densities in the Downtown Area. . Policy] -9: The City shall maximize opportunities for residential development, through infill and redevelopment of underutilized sites, without impacting existing neighborhoods or creating conflicts with industrial operations. . Program ]-9A: Through the Zoning Ordinance update, South El Camino Real General Plan update, the El Camino Real/Chestnut Specific Plan, the City will identify opportunities for residential development through infill and redevelopment of underutilized sites. . Policy 3-6: The City shall ensure that rehabilitation efforts promote quality design and harmonize with existing neighborhood surroundings. (Existing Policy 2-7) City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-38 May 15,2009 Municipal Code. Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's zoning regulations. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 20 of the Municipal Code. c) Conflict with Conservation Plans Any development under the Housing Element would comply with the San Bruno Mountain and Sign Hill HCPs; however, none of the opportunity sites are located within these HCP-protected areas. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to conservation plans: . Policy 2-1-]3: As part of development review in environmentally sensitive areas specific environmental studies and/or review as stipulated in Section 7.1: Habitat and Biological Resources Conservation. Municipal Code. Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's guidelines requiring that construction of projects is consistent with the City's habitat conservation plan. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 20 of the Municipal Code. Finding: Compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and the Municipal Code would ensure that development under the Housing Element would not divide an established community or conflict with conservation plans. While the Housing Element identifies opportunity sites that are not currently designated and/or zoned for residential use, or not currently zoned at the densities proposed in the Housing Element, in accordance with state law, the Housing Element has identified local efforts (most of which are already underway) to remove these government constraints on meeting the regional housing need. Further, because the Housing Element will advance (and be subject to) several existing General Plan policies, without hindering achievement of the remaining policies, the Housing Element does not conflict with the General Plan. Nor does the Housing Element conflict with other applicable plans. As such, the Housing Element would have no impact to land use and planning. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-39 May 15,2009 Potentially Significant ImIDct Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant ImIDct No ImIDct 10. Mineral Resources Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? D D D lEI D D D lEI Discussion: a) and b) Loss of Mineral Resources There are no known mineral resources at the opportunity sites. The CGS Mineral Resource Zones and Resource Sectors San Francisco and San Mateo Counties map classifies the opportunity sites as MRZ- 1, which constitutes an area "where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence." According to the CGS maps, the nearest mineral deposit classified areas are Sector NN, which is less than 1 mile north of Downtown South San Francisco, and Sector X, which is approximately 1 mile north of Downtown South San Franc isco.' Finding: The opportunity sites do not contain any locally or regionally-significant mineral resources. As such, the Housing Element would have no impact on the loss of mineral resources. 9 California Geological Survey, Special Report] 46 - Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the San Francisco-Monterey Bay Area, Part II: Classification of Aggregate Resource Areas South San Francisco Bay Production-Consumption Region, Plates 2.42, and 2.3. 1983. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-40 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 11. Noise Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or D D D lEI noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or D D D lEI groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project D D D lEI vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the D lEI D D project vicinity above levels existing without the 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, D D D lEI would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? D D D lEI Discussion: a) - c) Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Noise Levels in Excess of Standards, Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Excessive Groundbome Noise Levels, a Substantial Temporary or Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity above Levels Existing Without the Project. Noise is an important and complex issue in South San Francisco. The City has a comparatively high level of noise exposure, stemming from aircraft flyovers and proximity to major roadways, including U.S. 101, 1-280, Skyline Boulevard, Junipero Serra Boulevard, Westborough Boulevard, El Camino Real, and Hickey Boulevard. In addition, BART, Caltrain, and Southern Pacific freight trains create City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-41 May 15,2009 noise and vibration impacts within the community. Noise is primarily a concern with regard to noise- sensitive uses such as residences, schools, churches, and hospitals. Although noise is also controlled around commercial, industrial, and recreational uses, community noise levels rarely exceed maximum recornmended levels for these uses. According to the Noise Element of the General Plan, residential areas should have a range of less than 65 dBA. If the noise level is between 65 to 70 dBA, development would require analysis of noise reduction requirements and noise insulation as needed. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to an increase in noise levels: . Policy 9-G-]: Protect public health and welfare by eliminating or minimizing the effects of existing noise problems, and by preventing increased noise levels in the future. . Policy 9-G-2: Continue efforts to incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions, and guide the location and design of transportation facilities to minimize the effects of noise on adjacent land uses. . Policy 9-1-4: Ensure that new noise-sensitive uses, including schools, hospitals, churches, and homes, in areas near roadways identified as impacting sensitive receptors by producing noise levels greater than 65 dB CNEL (Figure 9-3 of the City's General Plan), incorporate mitigation measures to ensure that interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dB CNEL. . Policy 9-1-5: Require that applicants for new noise-sensitive development in areas subject to noise generators producing noise levels greater than 65 dB CNEL, obtain the services of a professional acoustical engineer to provide a technical analysis and design of mitigation measures. . Policy 9-1-6: Where site conditions permit, require noise buffering for all noise-sensitive development subject to noise generators producing noise levels greater than 65 dB CNEL. This noise attenuation method should avoid the use of visible sound walls, where practical. . Policy 9-1-7: Require the control of noise at source through site design, building design, landscaping, hours of operation, and other techniques, for new developments deemed to be noise generators. Standard Conditions and Limitations. The following Standard Conditions and Limitations is applicable to the Housing Element: . Item] 4: The construction and permitted use on the property shall be so conducted as to reduce to a minimum any noise vibration or dust resulting from the operation. Municipal Code. In addition, Title 8 of the Municipal Code, Health and Welfare, provides a chapter on noise regulations (Chapter 8.34). This chapter outlines the regulations pertaining to noise levels and compliance. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 8 of the Municipal Code. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-42 May 15,2009 d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Project construction at the opportunity sites would most likely result in temporary short-term noise increases due to the operation of heaving grading and demolition equipment. Noise levels from grading operations typically range from about 94 to 97 dBA at 25 feet for certain types of earthmoving and impact equipment. Construction noise would be lower ranging, from 75 to 85 dBA at 25 feet for most types of construction equipment. The following mitigation measure would reduce the temporary increase in ambient noise levels due to construction to a less-than-significant level: NO-] Implement best management practices to reduce construction noise. The project sponsor shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project construction contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g., surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), would not require major equipment redesign: a. Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: . Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; . Use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; . Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and . Minimize backing movements of equipment. b. Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible. c. Impact equipment (e.g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools. Compressed air exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment. Other quieter procedures, such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible. d. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e. Select routes for movement of construction-related vehicles and equipment in conjunction with the City's Planning Department so that noise-sensitive areas, including residences and schools, are avoided as much as possible. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-43 May 15,2009 f. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. Municipal Code. In addition, Title 8 of the Municipal Code, Health and Welfare, provides a chapter on noise regulations (Chapter 8.34). This chapter outlines the regulations pertaining to noise levels and compliance. In addition, Title 20 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's standards and regulations for construction noise. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Titles 8 and 20 of the Municipal Code. e) and f) Aircraft Noise South San Francisco lies in the flight path of a large portion of departures from the San Francisco International Airport (SFIA), particularly large, heavy aircraft climbing slowly over the coast range for Pacific Rim destinations. Aircraft flyovers comprise the City's major noise source. The SFIA Airport Land Use Plan, prepared by the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission, identifies standards for different types of development in areas impacted by aircraft noise. These standards have been adopted by the City. In addition, the City has joined other San Mateo County jurisdictions in a Memorandum of Understanding with SFIA for aircraft noise mitigation efforts, to be funded by SFIA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Average aircraft noise levels measured in 1997 indicates that areas in the southwestern part of the City experience noise levels in excess of 65 dB CNEL. A smaller area in the vicinity of El Camino Real near the San Bruno border has noise levels in excess of 70 dB CNEL. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to aircraft noise: . Policy 9-1-]: Work to adopt a pass-by (single event) noise standard to supplement the current 65 dB CNEL average noise level standard as the basis for aircraft noise abatement programs. . Policy 9-1-2: Work to adopt a lower average noise standard for aircraft-based mitigation and land use controls. 2007-2014 Housing Element. Implementation of the following policy and programs from the 2007- 20]4 Housing Element will further implement the City's continued efforts of abating noise associated with it close proximity to SFIA: . Policy 4-4: The City shall require new residential developments to comply with the Aircraft Noise/Land Use Compatibility Standards for the San Francisco International Airport Plan Area, as contained in the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan. (Existing Policy 5-4) . Program 4-4A: Review all new residential development for compliance with the County Airport Land Use Plan. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-44 May 15,2009 . Program 4-4B: Support the Airport Noise Insulation Program. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines real estate transfer disclose regarding airport noise. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 15 of the Municipal Code. Finding: Compliance with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Title 8 of the Municipal Code and the implementation of Mitigation Measure NO-l would ensure that future development would comply with federal, State, and local noise standards. As such, the Housing Element would have a less-than- significant impact regarding noise generation. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-45 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 12. Population and Housing Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or D D D lEI indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction D D D lEI of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of D D D lEI replacement housing elsewhere? Discussion: With a population of nearly 64,000 residents, South San Francisco is the fourth largest City in the County. Between 1990 and 2000, the City's population grew at a rate that was similar to the region, averaging an increase of 1.09 percent per year. Since 2000, growth in the City has slowed substantially, reflecting its increasingly developed character. Between 2000 and 2008, average annual population growth in the City was just 0.64 percent, still faster than the population growth rate for the County (0.56 percent), but substantially slower than the region-wide population growth rate of 0.92 percent per year. Consistent with these data, the City has continued to account for a somewhat outsized share of population growth within the County. Between 2000 and 2008, South San Francisco accounted for 9.9 percent of countywide population growth, although it accounts for only 8.6 percent of total countywide population. a) Population Growth The potential development of approximately 1,200 dwelling units under the City's 2007-2014 Housing Element, of which 805 dus need to be developed by the City to meet its remaining RHNA allocation, would be subject to the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan (including the 2007- 2014 Housing Element), Municipal Code (which includes the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance), and Standard Conditions and Limitations (for multi-family residential projects). All of the goals, policies, and programs outlined in the 2007-2014 Housing Element are designed to allow the City utilize its existing housing stock in the most efficient and inclusive ways possible. This includes the acquisition of blighted and underutilized properties within the Planning Area. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-46 May 15,2009 The potential development of approximately 1,200 dus over the remammg duration of the current planning period (2009 to 2014) would not induce substantial population growth, but rather would be built to meet the City's housing needs in accordance with ABAG's RHNA. b) and c) Displacement of Housing or People The 2007-2014 Housing Element does not include any measures that would displace any of its residents; instead, it works to make more housing available to its current and future (projected) residents. This would not, however, cause a direct increase in the City's population, as the purpose of the 2007-2014 Housing Element is to meet the needs of the RHNA's future projections. Municipal Code. Title 19 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Relocation assistance plan. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. Finding: The Housing Element would have no impact to population and housing or displacement of people. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-47 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 13. Public Services Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, 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? D D D lEI Police protection? D D D lEI Schools? D D D lEI Parks ? D D D lEI Other public facilities? D D D lEI Discussion: a) i) Fire Protection The South San Francisco Fire Department works to prevent or reduce the loss of life and property due to fire, sub-standard building construction, natural disasters, hazardous materials, and emergency medical incidents by means of direct response, public education and code development and enforcement. The 85 members of the South San Francisco Fire Department provide residents with fire suppression, emergency medical services, code enforcement, fire investigation, and public education. The South San Francisco Fire Department provides a full emergency medical services program for our citizens with certified paramedics on the fire engines and quints as well as staffing two full time Advanced Support ambulances. The department staffs three engine companies, two quints (combination fire engine and fire truck), and a battalion chief in addition to the two ambulances. Minimum on-duty staffing at one time is 20 persons. 10 10 City of South San Francisco Fire Department, "Fire Department Mission Statement", accessed at http://www.ci.ssf.ca.us/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=258 on April 28, 2009. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-48 May 15,2009 General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to fire protection services: . Policy 8.4-G-2: Provide fire protection that is responsive to citizens' needs. Municipal Code. Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's Fire Code. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 15 of the Municipal Code. a) ii) Police Protection The South San Francisco Police Department's jurisdictional area includes the entire City. Two unincorporated pockets, including the California Golf and Country Club, are under the jurisdiction of the San Mateo County Sheriff's office. As of 1999, when the General Plan was published, the Department had a total of 122 employees, with 80 sworn officers and 37 police units. The ratio of officers in 1999 was 1.4 per 1,000 residents. The Police, Fire, and Parks and Recreation departments share facilities within the City's Municipal Building. The Police Department also has one station, located in the Municipal Building at 33 Arroyo Drive. The Department is generally able to respond to high-priority calls within two to three minutes. These times are within the department's response time goals. The entire City is patrolled except for the undeveloped Sierra Point area. The Department typically works a four-beat system, but the watch supervisor has the discretion to deploy his personnel as he sees fit to accomplish daily goals and objectives. Each beat is typically staffed by a one-officer unit with between six and nine other officers consisting of traffic, K-9, training, float, and supervisory units available for backup and overlap. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to police protection services: . Policy 8.5-G-]: Provide police services that are responsive to citizen's needs to ensure a safe and secure environment for people and property in the community. . Policy 8.5-1-]: Ensure adequate police staff to provide rapid and timely response to all emergencies and maintain the capability to have minimum average response times. . Policy 8.5-1-3: Reduce crime by strengthening the police/community partnership. . Policy 8.5-1-5: Continue to coordinate law enforcement planning with local, regional, State and federal plans. Municipal Code. Title 2 of the City's Municipal Code states that the City's police department will adhere to State Standards. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 2 of the Municipal Code. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-49 May 15,2009 a) iii) Schools South San Francisco Unified School District operates all public schools serving the City, the Serramonte area of Daly City, and a small area of San Bruno. The District is the largest school district in San Mateo County. The District operates 16 schools, including 6 elementary (K-5), 3 middle (6-8), and 2 high schools. The District also runs a continuation high school, an adult school, a preschool child care center, and three day care schools. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to schools: . Policy 5.2-G-]: Support efforts by the South San Francisco Unified School District to maintain and improve educational facilities and services. . Policy 5.2-1-2: Investigate creation and application of a single-purpose school zone to all school sites. a) iv) Parks Despite the relatively small quantity of parkland in South San Francisco, a broad range of outdoor recreation opportunities exist, each reflecting the variety of the city's landscape and pattern of development. These range from shoreline open space on San Francisco Bay, to Sign Hill Park, situated at an elevation of more than 600 feet. In addition, the San Bruno Mountain County Park, which is a major regional open space resource and prominent visual landmark, lies directly north of the city. As of 1999, when the General Plan was published, South San Francisco included 319.7 acres of parks and open space, or 5.4 acres per 1,000 residents, for public use. This includes 70 acres of developed parkland (community, neighborhood, mini, and linear parks), 168.5 acres of open space, and 81.2 acres of school lands. While the overall amount of parkland appears adequate to meet the community's needs, closer analysis reveals that only 1.2 acres of developed parkland, excluding school parks and open space, is available per 1,000 residents. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to parks: . Policy 5. ]-1-2: Maintain parkland standards of 3.0 acres of community and neighborhood parks per 1,000 new residents, and of 0.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 new employees, to be located in employment areas. . Policy 5.] -1-3: Prefer in-lieu fees to dedication, unless sites offered for dedication provide features and accessibility similar in comparison to sites shown on Figure 5-1 of the General Plan. . Policy 5. ]-1-5: Use the PROS Master Plan process to achieve additional parkland acreage, as necessary, to meet the residential parkland need at General Plan buildout. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-50 May 15,2009 . Policy 5.]-1-9: Review the current regulations for the dedication of parkland in subdivisions to ensure that requirements are adequate to meet the standards of the General Plan at Plan build out. Municipal Code. Title 19 of the City's Municipal Code outlines requirements for subdivisions and Chapter 19.24 discusses improvements, including recreational facility dedication and in lieu fees, to be made by the developers. These regulations provide strict guidelines for dedication of land, payment of fees, or both, for park and recreation land in subdivisions. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. a) v) Other Public Facilities Other Public Facilities in the City include libraries and community centers. There are two libraries in the City and a Cornmunity Learning Center. These services are available to all South San Francisco residents. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following policy from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to public services and would be followed with the implementation of the Housing Element: . Policy 2-2: The City shall ensure the availability of adequate public facilities, including streets, water, sewerage, and drainage, throughout the residential areas of the city. Residential development will be encouraged, as designated on the General Plan Land Use Map, where public services and facilities are adequate to support added population or where the needed improvements are already committed. All dwelling units will have adequate public or private access to public rights-of-way. (Existing Policy 1-13) Finding: Compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and Municipal Code Title 19 would ensure that future development under the Housing Element would comply with federal and State laws in regards to public services. Future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to provide adequate police, fire, school, and parks services. As such, the Housing Element would have no impact to public services. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-51 May 15,2009 Potentially Significant ImIDct Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation Less Than Significant ImIDct No ImIDct 14. Recreation 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) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? D D D lEI D D D lEI Discussion: a) and b) Recreation Community and recreation centers provide many classes and services that are central to South San Francisco's recreation programs. The City has six cornmunitylrecreation buildings, some of which are used for specialized services such as senior programs at the Magnolia Center, public meetings at the Municipal Services Building, and Boys and Girls Club programs at the Paradise Valley Recreation Center. The City also has an indoor public pool at Orange Park. Outdoor pools at South San Francisco High School and El Camino High School supplement Orange Pool in the summer. The City offers a variety of recreation and special programs, ranging from pre-school day care to senior activities. Both indoor and outdoor recreational programs occur in a combination of school and City facilities. The types of programs offered range from recreational and competitive swirnming to classes and performances in the cultural and performing arts. The City offers programs geared toward specific age groups, such as teenagers or seniors, and day camp, preschool, and after-school programs for children. General Plan. Development of up to 1,200 residential units under the Housing Element could increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and recreational facilities. Therefore, development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to recreation: . Policy 5. ]-1-2: Maintain parkland standards of 3.0 acres of community and neighborhood parks per 1,000 new residents, and of 0.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 new employees, to be located in employment areas. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-52 May 15,2009 . Policy 5.] -1-3: Prefer in-lieu fees to dedication, unless sites offered for dedication provide features and accessibility similar in comparison to sites shown on Figure 5-1 of the General Plan. . Policy 5. ]-1-5: Use the PROS Master Plan process to achieve additional parkland acreage, as necessary, to meet the residential parkland need at General Plan buildout. . Policy 5.]-1-9: Review the current regulations for the dedication of parkland in subdivisions to ensure that requirements are adequate to meet the standards of the General Plan at Plan build out. Municipal Code. Title 19 of the City's Municipal Code outlines requirements for subdivisions and Chapter 19.24 discusses improvements, including recreational facility dedication and in lieu fees, to be made by the developers. These regulations provide strict guidelines for dedication of land, payment of fees, or both, for park and recreation land in subdivisions. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 19 of the Municipal Code. Finding: The additional of residential development could increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks, as well as other recreational facilities. However, compliance with the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and Municipal Code Title 19 would ensure that future development under the Housing Element would comply with federal and State laws in regards to public services. Future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be required to provide adequate recreational areas for present and future residents of South San Francisco. As such, the proposed project would have no impact to recreation. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-53 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 15. Transportation/Traffic Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial D D D lEI increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion D D D lEI management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic D D D lEI levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or D D D lEI dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e. g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D D lEI f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? D D D lEI g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative D D D lEI transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Discussion: a) and b) Increase in Traffic in Relation to Existing Traffic Load and Street System Capacity The 1995 Congestion Management Program for San Mateo County reports 1-280 operating at Level of Service (LOS) F and U.S. 101 operating at LOS D in the vicinity of South San Francisco during peak cornmute hours. Levels of service were calculated for the City's roadway segments with current daily volume counts. Current congestion on South San Francisco streets occurs along the Oyster Point Boulevard, East Grand Avenue, Dubuque Avenue, and Airport Boulevard corridors, and on Westborough Boulevard near the 1-280 interchange and the Junipero Serra Boulevard intersection. Other locations with congestion include the intersection of El Camino Real with Westborough City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-54 May 15,2009 Boulevard/Chestnut Avenue and the Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue/U.S. 101 interchange. During the evening peak commute period, East Grand Avenue under the U.S. 101 overpass has some back up. In general, the City's transportation system can adequately serve existing travel demand. Most travel is conveyed by automobile and the roadway system within the City has capacity to accommodate additional growth. However, traffic volumes on the regional roadways that provide access to the City, U.S. 101, and 1-280, are projected to exceed their capacities during cornmute periods. General Plan. The addition of up to 1,200 residential units under the Housing Element would likely result in an increase in vehicular traffic. However, development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies related to transportation and traffic: . Policy 4.2-G-5: Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities and, through the arrangement of land uses, improved alternate modes, and enhanced integration of various transportation systems serving South San Francisco, strive to reduce the total vehicle-miles traveled. . Policy 4.2-G-7: Provide fair and equitable means for paying for future street improvements including mechanisms such as development impact fees. (Amended by City Council Resolution 98- 2001, September 26,2001) . Policy 4.2-G-8: Strive to maintain Level-of-Service ("LOS") D or better on arterial and collector streets, at all intersections, and on principal arterials in the CMP during peak hours. . Policy 4.2-G-9: Accept LOS E or F after finding that: 1) There is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and 2) The uses resulting in the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit. . Policy 4.2-G-]0: Exempt development within one-quarter mile of a Caltrain. . Policy 4.2-1-7: Continue to require that new development pays a fair share of the costs of street and other traffic and transportation improvements, based on traffic generated and impacts on service levels. . Policy 4.2-1-]0: Design roadway improvements and evaluate development proposals based on LOS standards. . Policy 4.3-1-8: Adopt a Transportation Demand Management ("TDM") program or ordinance which includes, but is not limited to, the following components: 1) Establishment of baseline TDM requirements for all new projects generating more than 100 peak period trips; 2) Establishment of additional requirements for all new projects seeking a FAR bonus; 3) An ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure TDM measures are actually implemented; 4) Reduce parking requirements for new projects implementing a TDM Program. (Amended by City Council Resolution 98-2001, Adopted September 26,2001) City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-55 May 15,2009 . Policy 4.3-1-9: Favor TSM programs that limit vehicle use over those that extend the commute hour. Municipal Code. Title 11 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's standards and regulations for traffic and vehicles. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 11 of the Municipal Code. c) Alter Air Traffic Patterns South San Francisco lies in the flight path of a large portion of departures from SFIA, particularly heavy aircraft that climb over the coast range for Pacific Rim destinations. However, the Housing Element would not affect or alter existing air traffic patterns that are already in place. d) Hazards Due to Design Features or Incompatible Uses The Housing Element does not implement the construction or modification of any roadway, or the addition of incompatible uses. e) Emergency Access Municipal Code. The Housing Element would be required to comply with the Building Code provisions for emergency access as prescribed by law. Title 15 of the Municipal Code discusses regulations pertaining to buildings and construction. f) Parking The City's Zoning Ordinance has parking requirements to ensure that adequate numbers of parking spaces are provided onsite for most uses. The Downtown area has a parking district: instead of each property owner providing their own parking, parking is consolidated into City-owned lots. In general, the amount of parking in the Downtown area is currently sufficient; however, there are a few locations with capacity shortages. The industrial areas of the City experience on-street truck parking. The parked trucks and the loading/unloading activities frequently interfere with vehicular circulation. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to parking: . Policy 4.3-1-11: Establish parking standards to support trip reduction goals by allowing parking reductions for projects that have agreed to implement trip reduction methods, such as paid parking. (Amended by City Council Resolution 98-2001, Adopted September 26,2001) . Policy 4.3-1-12: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to reduce minimum parking requirements for all projects proximate to transit stations and for projects implementing a TDM program. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-56 May 15,2009 . Policy 4.3-1-]3: Investigate opportunities for shared parking facilities whenever possible to reduce the number of new parking stalls required. Municipal Code. Title 11 of the City's Municipal Code outlines requirements vehicles and traffic while Chapters 11.40 (Stopping, Standing, or Parking) and 11.56 (Parking Lots, Parking Meters, and Parking Zones) specifically discusses parking. In addition, Title 20, Zoning Ordinance, discusses parking regulations in individual districts. These regulations outlined in the Municipal Code provide strict guidelines for parking in the City. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 11 of the Municipal Code. g) Alternative Transportation Shuttle buses, vanpools, bicycle facilities, pedestrian facilities and informal carpools, also serve the travel needs of South San Francisco. These modes provide an alternative to the single-occupant automobile. South San Francisco is also served by public transportation, such as SamTrans, Caltrain, and BART. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan policies with regard to alternative transportation: . Policy 4.3-G-]: Develop a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation. . Policy 4.3-G-2: Provide safe and direct pedestrian routes and bikeways between and through residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers. . Policy 4.3-G-3: In partnership with employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle operations. . Policy 4.3-G-4: In partnership with the local business community, develop a transportation systems management plan with identified trip-reduction goals, while continuing to maintain a positive and supportive business environment. . Policy 4.3-1-]: Prepare and adopt a Bikeways Master Plan that includes goals and objectives, a list or map of improvements, a signage program, detailed standards, and an implementation program. . Policy 4.3-1-4: Require provision of secure covered bicycle parking at all existing and future multifamily residential, commercial, industrial, and office/institutional uses. . Policy 4.4-G-]: Promote local and regional public transit serving South San Francisco. . Policy 4.4-G-2: Explore mechanisms to integrate various forms of transit. Municipal Code. Title 11 of the City's Municipal Code outlines requirements vehicles and traffic; Chapter 11.24 discusses pedestrian regulations and Chapter 11.44 discusses bicycle licenses. These regulations provide strict guidelines for alternative modes of transportation. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 11 of the Municipal Code. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-57 May 15,2009 Finding: The general plan policies listed above are extensive, and have been crafted to ensure that future development would comply with federal and State laws in regards to transportation/traffic. Policy 4.2- G-9 would ensure that development of future projects under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would not create significant traffic impacts on a project or cumulative level. In addition, almost 60 percent of future development under the 2007-2014 Housing Element would be for low/moderate income households, with convenient access to bus and commuter rail service, likely reducing the amount of vehicle trips the average new household would make. Under the Housing Element, there would be no change in air traffic patterns, hazardous designs, emergency access, parking capacity, and applicable plans and policies supporting alternative transportation. As such, the Housing Element would have no impact to transportation/traffic. In addition, per the City's General Plan, Policy 4.3-1-8 (described above) the City has adopted a TDM which includes a methodology to determine eligibility for land use intensity bonuses, procedures to ensure continued maintenance of measures that result in intensity bonuses, requirements for off-site improvements, and reduced parking requirements. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-58 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDct Incorporation ImIDct ImIDct 16. Utilities and Service Systems Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional D D D lEI Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing D D D lEI facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the D D D lEI construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing D D D lEI entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it D D D lEI has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the D D D lEI projects solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid D D D lEI waste? Discussion: The construction of up to 1,200 residential unites in South San Francisco would increase the demand for water, waste water treatment, and solid waste removal. To the extent that housing is developed on vacant parcels, an increase in impervious surfaces could increase storm water runoff. However, development under the Housing Element would be subject to General Plan polices and the Municipal Code. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-59 May 15,2009 a), b), and e) Water and Wastewater Treatment Standards, Facilities, and Capacity Potable water is provided for the City and much of County by the California Water Service Company ("CWSC"), which purchases most of its supply from the San Francisco Water Department ("SFWD"). The City's sanitary sewer system has an interconnecting network of gravity sewers, force mains, and nine pump stations, which function together to bring wastewater from individual homes and businesses to the wastewater treatment plant. All wastewater produced within the City is treated at the City's Water Quality Control Plant ("WQCP"), which is located at the end of Belle Air Road, near the edge of the San Francisco Bay. The WQCP is jointly owned by the cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno, and it treats all wastewater generated within the two cities. The WQCP also has contracts to treat most of the wastewater produced by the City of Colma and a portion of the wastewater produced by the City of Daly City. The 1999 General Plan EIR indicated that major water delivery, and major wastewater treatment facilities were adequate, or would be improved, in order to meet project water and wastewater demand growth. General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan polices with regard to water and wastewater treatment standards, facilities, and capabilities. . Policy 5.3-G-]: Promote the orderly and efficient operation and expansion of the water supply system to meet projected needs. . Policy 5.3-G-3: Promote the equitable sharing of the costs of associated with providing water service to new development. . Policy 5.3-G-4: Promote the orderly and efficient operation and expansion of the wastewater system to meet projected needs. . Policy 5.3-G-5: Promote the equitable sharing of the costs of associated with providing wastewater service to new development. . Policy 5.3-G-6: Maintain environmentally appropriate wastewater management practices. . Policy 5.3-1-]: Work with California Water Service Company and Westborough County Water District to ensure coordinated capital improvements with respect to the extent and timing of growth. . Policy 5.3-1-3: Ensure that future residents and businesses equitably share costs associated with providing water service to new development in South San Francisco. . Policy 5.3-1-4: Ensure coordinated capital improvements with respect to the extent and timing of growth. . Policy 5.3-1-5: Ensure that future residents and businesses equitably share costs associated with providing wastewater service to new development in South San Francisco. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Geneml Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Element - 1nitiol Study/Mitigated Negative Dec/amtion Draft Page Vl-60 May 15,2009 . Policy 5.3-1-6: Monitor industrial discharges to ensure that wastewater quality continues to meet various federal, State, and regional standards; treatment costs should remain affordable. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following policy from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to waste water facilities and would be followed with the implementation of the proposed project: . Policy 2-2: The City shall ensure the availability of adequate public facilities, including streets, water, sewerage, and drainage, throughout the residential areas of the city. Residential development will be encouraged, as designated on the General Plan Land Use Map, where public services and facilities are adequate to support added population or where the needed improvements are already committed. All dwelling units will have adequate public or private access to public rights-of-way. (Existing Policy 1-13) Municipal Code. Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines water and sewage regulations; Chapter 14.04 discusses stormwater management and discharge control and Chapter 14.08 discusses water quality control. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 14 of the Municipal Code. c) Storm Water Drainage Facilities Colma Creek, the City's main natural drainage system, is a perennial stream with a watershed of about 16.3 square miles that trends in a roughly southeasterly direction through the center of the City. The basin is bounded on the northwest by San Bruno Mountain and on the west by the ridge traced by Skyline Boulevard. Colma Creek is almost entirely channelized west of the Bayshore Freeway. There are some sedimentation basins, but no other impoundments on Colma Creek. Drainage is controlled by a series of lined creek beds and storm drains. 2007-2014 Housing Element. Policy 2-2, as aforementioned, from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to drainage facilities and would be followed with the implementation of the proposed project. Municipal Code. Title 14 of the Municipal Code outlines water and sewage regulations; Chapter 14.04 discusses stormwater management and discharge control and Chapter 14.08 discusses water quality control. d) Water Supply South San Francisco has two water suppliers. The CWSC serves the portion of the City east of Interstate 280, which represents the majority of South San Francisco's area, including the opportunity sites. The CWSC also serves San Carlos and San Mateo with no restrictions on water allocation among these communities. The five-year average growth in the number of accounts is the basis for the utility's projections of the number of water users through 2020. Water use projections for 2020 range from 5.9 million gallons per day ("MGD") to 9.1 MGD. Assuming the SFWD contract allocation is not modified during the remaining contract period, the CWSC has adequate supply to meet even the highest projected demand. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-61 May 15,2009 General Plan. In addition to Policies 5.3-G-1, 5.3-G-3, 5.3-1-1, and 5.3-1-3, above, development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan polices with regard to water supp ly: . Policy 5.3-G-2: Encourage water conservation measures for both existing and proposed development. . Policy 5.3-1-2: Establish guidelines and standards for water conservation and actively promote the use of water-conserving devices and practices in both new construction and major alterations and additions to existing buildings. 2007-2014 Housing Element. The following policy from the 2007-2014 Housing Element applies to drainage facilities and would be followed with the implementation of the proposed project: . Policy 7-]: The City shall continue to promote the use of energy conservation features in all new residential structures. (Existing Policy 6-1) . Program 7-]B: Complete Green Building Ordinance: The City shall complete the ongoing Green Building Ordinance to assure that new dwelling units and significant remodels incorporate green building practices and materials into the design. f) and g) Solid Waste Disposal and treatment of solid and hazardous waste is overseen by San Mateo County. Solid waste is collected from South San Francisco homes and businesses and then processed at the Scavenger Company's materials recovery facility and transfer station (MRF/TS). Materials that cannot be recycled or composted are transferred to the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill, located along State Route 92 between Half Moon Bay and the City of San Mateo. Allied Waste Industries, formerly Browning- Ferris Industries, owner of the Ox Mountain Landfill, has a permit for forward expansion of the Corinda Los Trancos Canyon at Ox Mountain. When the permit expires in 2016, either Corinda Los Trancos will be expanded further or Apanolio Canyon will be opened for fill. The Ox Mountain Landfill currently has a maximum disposal rate of 3,598 tons per day. 11 In 2007, household waste disposal from South San Francisco was 9,697 tons, with an overall waste disposal from the City of 88, 194 tons. 12 11 California Integrated Waste Management Board, "Active Landfills Profile for Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill (41-AA-0002),'' accessed at: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Profiles/Facility/LandFill/LFProfile1.asp? COID=41&FACID=41-AA-0002, accessed on April 28, 2009. California Integrated Waste Management Board, "Jurisdiction Profile for City of South San Francisco," accessed at: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/profiles/Juris/JurProfile1.asp?RG= C&JURID = 511&JUR = South + San + Francisco, accessed on April 28, 2009. 12 City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-62 May 15,2009 General Plan. Development under the Housing Element would be subject to the following General Plan polices with regard to solid waste. . Policy S.3-G-]: Reduce the generation of solid waste, including hazardous waste, and recycle those materials that are used, to slow the filling of local and regional landfills, in accord with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. . Policy S.3-1-]: Continue to work toward reducing solid waste, increasing recycling, and complying with the San Mateo County Integrated Waste Management Plan. Municipal Code. Title 8 of the City's Municipal Code outlines the City's health and welfare regulations, and Section 8.16 discusses the solid waste requirements of the City. These guidelines establish strict guidelines for the handling of solid waste. Development under the Housing Element would adhere to Title 8 of the Municipal Code. Finding: Compliance with development under the Housing Element would be subject to the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan, and Titles 8 and 14 of the Municipal Code. Adherence to these regulations would ensure that future development would provide adequate water and wastewater collection and treatment and solid waste removal for present and future residents of South San Francisco. As such, the Housing Element would have no impact to utilities and services systems. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-63 May 15,2009 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImIDet Incorporation ImIDet ImIDet 16. Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a D D D lEI plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal 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 D D D lEI 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 which will cause substantial D D D lEI adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion: Development at the opportunity sites identified in the 2007-2014 Housing Element would occur as infill, in an urbanized and built-out City. In addition, biological and cultural resources would be subject to the regulations outlined in the Biological and Cultural Resources sections of this document, which would ensure compliance with federal and State regulations protecting sensitive biological and cultural resources. Compliance with the City's Building Code, General Plan Policy 8.1-G-1 (discussed in the Geology and Soils Section), and 2007-2014 Housing Element Policy 4-1 (discussed in the Hazards/Hazardous Materials Section) would ensure no adverse environmental effects would occur to human beings through pre-construction investigations, regulation of project placement, and adherence to building standards. The 2007-2014 Housing Element is a forecast of all current and future residential growth within the City, and the analysis contained in this document takes into account all of the effects of this growth. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-64 May 15,2009 As has been stated throughout this document, all current and future development will be subject to the goals, policies, and programs of the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, and Standard Conditions and Limitations, in addition to all federal and State regulations. While such issues and traffic, emissions, and noise may increase incrementally, the policies and regulations already in place at time of implementation of the proposed project, and the mitigation measures outlined below, will ensure that future development under the proposed project would not have a significant cumulative impact. Air Quality: Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and AQ-2 would reduce the impact associated with air quality plans to a less-than-significant level: AQ-] Implement feasible control measures for construction emission of PM-]O. The project sponsor shall ensure implementation of the following mitigation measures during project construction, in accordance with BAAQMD standard mitigation requirements: . Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. . Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. . Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. . Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. AQ-2 Green Building Measures for New Construction. The following green building measures shall be incorporated, at the discretion of the Planning Department, into new residential construction: . Trees and other shade structures shall be incorporated to maximize summer shade and to minimize winter shade. Canopy cover shall extend over 50 percent of non-permeable surfaces following a ten-year growth period. . Residential construction shall use "green" cement, which contains recycled materials (slag or fly-ash) and is produced using emission-reducing technologies, if available, structurally appropriate for the intended use, and where feasible and practicable. . New construction shall use energy efficient lighting, to the extent feasible and appropriate. At the minimum, all buildings shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in energy use associated with lighting over existing Title 24 standards. . Residential buildings shall include passive solar design features that include roof overhangs or canopies that block summer shade, but that allow winter sun, from penetrating south facing windows. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-65 May 15,2009 . Roofing materials used in commercial/retail buildings shall be Energy Star@ certified. All roof products shall also be certified to meet A TSM high emissivity requirements. . Where feasible, recycled, rapidly renewable, reclaimed and/or certified components shall be used in the construction of new residential buildings. Cultural Resources: Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 would reduce impacts to paleontological/ geological features and human remains to a less-than-significant level: CR-] Protect unique paleontological/geological features. Should a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature be identified at an opportunity site during any phase of construction, the project sponsor shall cease all construction activities at the site of the discovery and immediately notify the City. The project sponsor shall retain a qualified paleontologist to provide an evaluation of the find and to prescribe mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for paleontological resources or geologic features is carried out. The project sponsor shall be responsible for implementing any additional prescribed mitigation measures prescribed by the paleontologist and approved by the City. CR-2 Protect human remains. If human remains are discovered at any project construction sites during any phase of construction, all ground-disturbing activity within 100 feet of the resource shall be halted and the City and the County Coroner shall be notified immediately, according to Section 5097.98 of the State Public Resources Code and Section 7050.5 of the State Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by the County Coroner to be Native American, the NAHC shall be notified within 24 hours, and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. The project sponsor shall also retain a professional archaeologist with Native American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the project site, and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any, identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant, including the excavation and removal of the human remains. The City shall be responsible for approval of recommended mitigation as it deems appropriate, taking account of the provisions of State law, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(e), and Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98. The project sponsor shall implement approved mitigation, to be verified by the City, before the resumption of ground disturbing activities within 100 feet of where the remains were discovered. Noise: Mitigation Measure NO-1 would reduce the impact associated with construction noise to a less- than-significant level: NO-] Implement best management practices to reduce construction noise. The project sponsor shall incorporate the following practices into the construction documents to be implemented by the project construction contractor. These control measures, such as installation of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers), selection of quieter machinery, and other noise control measures (e.g., City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-66 May 15,2009 surrounding stationary equipment with noise barriers), would not require major equipment redesign: a. Maximize the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors. Such separation includes, but is not limited to, the following measures: . Use heavy-duty mufflers for stationary equipment and barriers around particularly noisy areas of the site or around the entire site; . Use shields, impervious fences, or other physical sound barriers to inhibit transmission of noise to sensitive receptors; . Locate stationary equipment to minimize noise impacts on the community; and . Minimize backing movements of equipment. b. Use quiet construction equipment whenever possible. c. Impact equipment (e. g., jack hammers and pavement breakers) shall be hydraulically or electrically powered wherever possible to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically-powered tools. Compressed air exhaust silencers shall be used on other equipment. Other quieter procedures, such as drilling rather than using impact equipment, shall be used whenever feasible. d. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. e. Select routes for movement of construction-related vehicles and equipment in conjunction with the City's Planning Department so that noise-sensitive areas, including residences and schools, are avoided as much as possible. f. The construction contractor shall send advance notice to neighborhood residents within 50 feet of the project site regarding the construction schedule and including the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site. City of South San FlW"I!:isco Genemt Plan - 2007-2014 Housing Etement - lnitinl Study/Mitigated Negative Dectamtion Draft Page VI-67 May 15,2009 Appendices Appendix A Standard Conditions and Limitations for Commercial Industrial and Multi-Family Residential Projects STANDARD CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AND MUL TI-FAMIL Y RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS 1. Unless the use has commenced or related building permits have been issued within two (2) years of the date this permit is granted, this permit will automatically expire on that date. A one year plan extension may be granted in accordance with provisions ofthe SSFMC. 2. The permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the property owner or a duly authorized representative files an affidavit, prior to the issuance of a building permit, stating that the property owner is aware of, and accepts, all of the conditions ofthe permit. 3. The permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted by the permit shall lapse, if any ofthe conditions are violated, or if any law, statute or ordinance is violated, provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease the violation and has failed to do so for a period of 30 days. 4. Minor changes or deviations from the Conditions of Approval ofthe permit may be approved by the Chief Planner. Major changes require approval of the Planning Commission, or final approval body ofthe City. 5. Neither the granting of this permit nor any conditions attached thereto shall authorize, require or permit anything contrary to, or in conflict with any ordinances specifically named therein. 6. Prior to construction, all required building permits shall be obtained from the City=s Building Division. 7. All conditions ofthe permit shall be completely fulfilled to the satisfaction ofthe affected City Departments and Divisions Planning and Building Divisions prior to occupancy of any building. Any request for temporary power for testing equipment will be issued only upon substantial completion ofthe development. 8. All exterior lights shall be installed in such a manner that there shall be no illumination on adjacent properties or streets which might be considered either objectionable by adjacent property owners or hazardous to motorists. 9. No additional signs, flags, pennants or banners shall be installed or erected on the site without prior approval. 10. Adequate trash areas shall be provided and enclosed by a six (6) foot high decorative masonry wall. Adequate solid gates and vehicular access to such areas shall be provided. Standard Condition (cont.) 11. All ducting for air conditioning, heating, blower systems, accessory mechanisms and all other forms of mechanical or electrical equipment which are placed on or adjacent to the building shall be screened from public view. 12. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turn-around areas and landscaping areas shall be kept free of debris, litter and weeds at all times. Site, structures, paving, landscaping, light standards, pavement markings and all other facilities shall be permanently maintained. 13. There shall be no open storage materials of materials or equipment on the subject property, except as approved by each permit. 14. The construction and permitted use on the property shall be so conducted as to reduce to a minimum any noise vibration or dust resulting from the operation. 15. All sewerage and waste disposal shall be only by means of an approved sanitary system. 16. Prior to anyon-site grading, a grading permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer. 17. All existing utility lines, underground cable conduits and structures which are not proposed to be removed shall be shown on the improvement plans and their disposition noted. 18. Landscape Maintenance a. All landscape areas shall be watered via an automatic irrigation system which shall be maintained in fully operable condition at all times. b. All planting areas shall be maintained by a qualified professional; the landscape shall be kept on a regular fertilization and maintenance program and shall be maintained weed free. c. Plant materials shall be selectively pruned by a qualified arborist; no topping or excessive cutting-back shall be permitted. Tree pruning shall allow the natural branching structure to develop. d. Plant materials shall be replaced when necessary with the same species originally specified unless otherwise approved by the Chief Planner. Revised February 1999 * Appendix B Greenhouse Gas Calculations Electricity Cales p ro/eet A re a Electricity Generation Rate' Use Subtotal 805 units 5,626.50 kWH/year/unit Residential 4,529,333 sf 53.3 kWH/year/sf Grocery sf 47.45 kWH/year/sf Restaurant sf 21.7 kWH/year/sf Hospital sf 11.55 kWH/year/sf University sf 10.5 kWH/year/sf High School sf 5.9 kWH/year/sf Elementary School sf 12.95 kWH/year/sf Office sf 9.95 kWH/year/sf Hotel sf 4.35 kWH/year/sf Warehouse sf 13.55 kWH/year/sf Retail sf 10.5 kWH/year/sf Miscellaneous Total 4,529,333 kWH/year . From SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (use other rates as appropriate) Natural Gas Cales p rOlee tA re a Natural Gas Generation Rate' Use Subtotal (kwh/year) 805 sf 5.9 cf/uniVmonth Single-family Residential 56,994 sf 12.95 cf/uniVmonth Multi-family Residential customers 9.95 cf/customer/month Industrial sf 4.35 cf/sf/month Hotel sf 13.55 cf/sf/month Retail sf 10.5 cf/sf/month Office Total 56,994 cf/year . From SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (use other rates as appropriate) or 569.94 therms/yeal Solid Waste Cales p rOlee tA re a Solid Waste Generation Rate' Use Subtotal (tons/year) sf 0.01 Ibs/sf/day Office sf 0.025 Ibs/sf/day Shopping Center sf 0.0312 Ibs/sf/day Department Store sf 0.0142 Ibs/sf/day Man ufactu ri ng/warehouse sf 0.007 Ibs/sf/day School beds 16 Ibs/bed/day Hospital 805 unit 10 Ibs/uniVday Single-family Residential 1,469 unit 4 Ibs/uniVday Multi-family Residential Total 1,469 tons/year . CIWMB Estimate Solid Waste Generation Rates (use other rates as appropriate) Greenhouse Gas Emission Worksheet Operational Emissions Project: Indirect Emissions from Electricity Use Total Project Annual KWh: 4,529,333 kWH/year Project Annual MWh: 4,529 MWH/year Emission Factors for Electricity Use: C02' CH4* N20' 724.12 IbslMWh/year 0.0302 IbslMWh/year 0.0081 Ibs/MWh/year Total Annual Operational Emissions (metric tons) = (Electricity Use (kWh) x EF)! 2,204.62 Ibs/metric ton Conversion to Carbon Dioxide Equivalency (C02e) Units based on Global Warming Potential (GWP) CH4 21 GWP N20 310 GWP Annual Emissions from Electricity Use: Total Emissions 1487.6851 metric tons 0.0620 metric tons 0.0166 metric tons IProject Total Total C02e Units 1487.7 metric tons C02e 1.3 metric tons C02e 5.2 metric tons C02e 1,494 metric tons C02e C02 emissions: CH4 emissions: N20 emissions: References . California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol. Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, Appendix C, January 2009. Indirect Emissions from Natural Gas Use Total Project Usage: 570 thermslyear** Emission Factors for Natural Gas Use: C02 CH4 N20 11.67 Ibs/therm 0.001 Ibsltherm 0.00002 Ibs/therm Annual Emissions from Natural Gas Use: Total Emissions 3.0169 metric tons 0.0003 metric tons 0.0000 metric tons IProject Total Total C02e Units 3.0 metric tons C02e 0.0 metric tons C02e 0.0 metric tons C02e 3 metric tons C02e C02 emissions: CH4 emissions: N20 emissions: References Emission factors for N02, CH4, and N20 taken from CCAR General Reporting Protocol, Version 3.1, January 2009: Appendix C. Sources: California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol. Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, January 2009. Third Assessment Report, 2001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, 1990-2000 (April 2002). Indirect Emissions from Solid Waste Source Project (Operational) Solid Waste tons/year 1.469 GHG Emissions Landfill Gas (metric tons/year) tons/year C02 CH4 166.7 106.1 60.6 C02 Equivalent Emissions Emissions (metric tons/year) C02 CH4 Total 106.1 1,273.31 1,379lmetric tons C02e Methodology and emission factors from State Workbook: Methodologies for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions (pages 5-1 to 5-3). 81 '" N ,.-: <0 OJ o 81 '" N ,.-: <0 OJ o ~I I'- ~I I'- <Xl <Xl C'"i C'"i ~I I'- ~I I'- ro co co 0 0 OJ N N C <JJ C 0 t: @I ~ @I ~ <JJ ~ ~ ..- C 0 0 N 0 oj .00 c .<!l 81 OJ 81 OJ 0 E .~ w CD " " Q) 0 N N > ro 0 I'- :J N 0 C 0 C > N <{ 0 .<!l .2 Z ~I 0 ~I 0 E C') N N Q) - CJJ -e 0 N W ::J Q. > f- OJ I'- <( a: 0 :;;; :>, 0 >= N ro " ~I 0 CJJ ~I 0 .E I'- N W N E 0 0 z 0 E E 0 N 0 :J W 0 Ui C/) <{ ~ c 0 CJJ :;;; 0 a: w .00 f- W lJ.. <( (;j lJ.. ...J :;;; <( > 0 >= z c c CJJ 0 C 0 0 w >= OJ :>, Z <( C "0 "0 E OJ OJ 0 a: :J <JJ <JJ Ui W ~ 0 '" '" (L w 0 a:l a:l ~ 0 0 :;;; "0 "0 OJ <JJ <JJ Q) 0 Q) c OJ c c w 1ii z 1ii .00 ro 0 0 w OJ <( OJ :J :;;;: .00 .00 :e :e 0 .<!l .<!l ...J E w E I c E E ~ c U c :;: lJ.. '" W W I :J a: :J (L C/) C/) w Iii ::J Iii <Xl C/) C OJ OJ C- O c:1 <3 <3 Q) CJJ Q) 0 E E ...J >0 <( >0 ~ OJ ~ <( "in "in ..- E OJ OJ Z c W c -<i " > > a: OJ '" 0 0 g <( g '" E z ...J "0 "0 >= 0 '" '" CJJ LL CJJ 0 '" ti ti 0 0 <( ...J 0 ...J OJ '" Z OJ OJ a: a: a: ~ ~ OJ (;; ~ .0 .0 C t2: w :;;; '" '" 0:: 0:: (L 0 ::J 0 0- " ii: 0 0 0 f- CJJ f-