HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 142-2018 (18-829)City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall,
400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
City Council
Resolution: RES 142 -2018
File Number: 18 -829 Enactment Number: RES 142 -2018
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND DETERMINING THAT
THE 2018 ADDENDUM TO THE 2015 INITIAL STUDY /MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS THE APPROPRIATE
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FOR THE OUTFRONT MEDIA
DIGITAL BILLBOARD PROJECT.
WHEREAS, Outfront Media ( "Applicant ") owns or has a legal equitable interest in a property located at
180 South Airport (APN 015- 122 -050) ( "Property"); and,
WHEREAS, Applicant has submitted a development proposal to construct, operate and maintain an
off - premise digital message center display ( "Digital Billboard ") at the Property ( "Project "); and,
WHEREAS, Applicant seeks approval of an Area Plan Amendment, a Zoning Text Amendment,
Development Agreement, and Relocation Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, approval of the Applicant's proposal is considered a "project" for purposes of the California
Environmental Quality Act, Pub. Resources Code § 21000, et seq. ( "CEQA "); and,
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2015 the City Council adopted an Initial Study /Mitigated Negative
Declaration ( "IS /MND ") (State Clearinghouse number 2013062062) in accordance with the provisions
of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, which analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the
installation of billboards along the west side of U.S. Highway 101; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum to the IS /MND was prepared
for the Project ( "2018 Addendum ") which analyzed the potential environmental impacts of billboards
along the east side of U.S. Highway 101; and,
WHEREAS, the 2015 IS /MND and the 2018 Addendum are attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on June 7, 2018, at which
time interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, to review the Project and the 2018 Addendum, as
well as supporting documents, at the conclusion of which, the Planning Commission recommended that
the City Council find the 2018 Addendum as the appropriate environmental document for the project;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on July 25, 2018 which was continued
to September 12, 2018, to take public comment and consider the 2018 Addendum, the proposed Area
Plan
City of South San Francisco Page 1
File Number: 18 -829 Enactment Number: RES 142 -2018
Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment, Development Agreement, and Relocation Agreement for the
Project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council exercised its independent judgment and analysis, and considered all
reports, recommendations and testimony before making a determination on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it, which
includes without limitation, the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §21000,
et seq. ( "CEQA ") and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations §15000, et seq.; the
South San Francisco General Plan and General Plan EIR; the South San Francisco Municipal Code; the
Project applications; the Project Plans, as prepared by RMG Outdoor Inc., dated March 29, 2017; the
Clear Channel Billboard Project and Related Zoning Amendment Initial Study /Mitigated Negative
Declaration, including all appendices thereto; the 2018 Addendum to Initial Study /Mitigated Negative
Declaration; all site plans, and all reports, minutes, and public testimony submitted as part of the
Planning Commission's duly noticed June 7, 2018 meeting; all site plans, and all reports, minutes, and
public testimony submitted as part of the City Council's duly noticed July 25, 2018 meeting which was
continued to September 12, 2018; and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code
§21080(e) and §21082.2), the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows:
A. General Findings
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. The Exhibits attached to this Resolution, including the 2015 IS /MND (Exhibit A) and the 2018
Addendum (Exhibit B), are each incorporated by reference and made a part of this Resolution, as if set
forth fully herein.
3. The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the
Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, CA
94080, and in the custody of the Planning Manager.
B. CEQA Findings
1. The City Council, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164, subsection (d), has considered the
2018 Addendum prepared for the Project including the related environmental analysis, along with the
previously certified 2015 IS /MND.
2. The Applicant's project constitutes a minor refinement to the scope of development approved by the
City Council in 2015 and analyzed in the 2015 IS /MND.
3. Based on the 2015 IS /MND and the 2018 Addendum, the City Council finds that the proposed
Project will have the following significant impacts that can be reduced to insignificant with
implementation of mitigation measures identified in the 2015 IS /MND, as follows:
City of South San Francisco Page 2
File Number. 18 -829
Enactment Number: RES 142 -2018
i. Visual Resources. Business and Professions Code section 5403(8) defines the brightness standard
for changeable electronic variable message billboards in relation to Vehicle Code section 21466.5, which
provides:
No person shall place or maintain or display, upon or in view of any highway, any light of any color of
such brilliance as to impair the vision of drivers upon the highway. A light source shall be considered
vision impairing when its brilliance exceeds the values listed below.
The brightness reading of an objectionable light source shall be measured with a 11 /2- degree
photoelectric brightness meter placed at the driver's point of view. The maximum measured brightness
of the light source within 10 degrees from the driver's normal line of sight shall not be more than 1,000
times the minimum measured brightness in the driver's field of view, except that when the minimum
measured brightness in the field of view is 10 foot - lamberts or less, the measured brightness of the light
source in foot - lambert shall not exceed 500 plus 100 times the angle, in degrees, between the driver's
line of sight and the light source.
Under the foregoing, the most conservative brightness limit with which the Signs would have to comply
is 500 foot lamberts, which is equivalent to 1713 nits. The Applicant proposes to operate the signs'
night -time limit in accordance with the recommendations of the Outdoor Advertising Association of
America (OAAA), which indicates that the maximum ambient light output should be 0.3 foot candles at
a distance of 250 feet from billboard facings. For a frame of reference, 0.3 foot candles is comparable
in brightness to the light emanating from a computer monitor, and the light levels emitted from the
proposed billboards would be set to adjust based upon ambient light conditions at any given time (i.e.,
nighttime versus daytime). These operational parameters (i.e., 0.3 foot candles at 250 feet) translate
into a brightness of about 300 nits, meaning that the signs would always operate at one -sixth of the
maximum brightness level for LED billboards, as set forth by California state law. As discussed in the
2015 IS /MND and 2018 Addendum, the Project would, from a conservative standpoint, have the
potential to significantly impact the environment if it operated at levels that increase lighting levels by
more than 0.3 foot candles at 250 feet. The City Council finds that implementation of Mitigation
Measure Visual -1 (as identified in the 2015 IS /MND), which requires testing to ensure light from the
Applicant's Digital Billboard, will comply with the threshold of 0.3 foot candles at 250 feet, and will
ensure impacts remain less than significant and significant impacts are avoided.
ii. Air Quality. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District ( BAAQMD) has developed screening
criteria whereby an agency can quickly determine whether a given development project has the potential
to exceed adopted pollution thresholds. A review of these screening thresholds demonstrates that neither
construction nor operation of the sign has the potential to generate significant emissions. For instance,
BAAQMD has determined that, to violate operational emissions criteria, a use more intense than a
451 -unit apartment building would have to be constructed. To exceed construction- related criteria, a
240 -unit apartment construction project would have to be undertaken. Operation of the electric sign
would not involve the generation of emissions and, while the limited amount of construction work
during the expected 1- to 2 -week construction period would not exceed (or be anywhere near) the
emissions associated with construction of a 240 -unit apartment building, the City Council finds,
conservatively, that the Project would have the potential to
City of South San Francisco Page 3
File Number: 18 -829 Enactment Number. RES 142 -2018
generate dust and other air emissions. The City Council further finds that, given the short duration of
construction, the implementation of the BAAQMD's basic construction management practices, as
identified in Mitigation Measure Air -1 of the 2015 IS /MND, would ensure that construction air
emissions are reduced to less- than - significant impacts.
'iii. Cultural Resources. Cultural resources are protected by a number of state laws and regulations,
including CEQA Guidelines sections 15064.5 and 15126.4(b)(3)(C), Government Code section 27450 et
seq, and Public Resources Code section 5097.98, which require, in part, the development and
implementation of a Data Recovery Plan that would include recommendations for the treatment of the
discovered archaeological materials. The Project site is a developed, urban infill site located in a
non - residential area of the City, adjacent to U.S. Highway 101. However, the Project entails digging a
foundation for the Applicant's Digital Billboard, and therefore there is a moderate potential that
construction workers would encounter undiscovered cultural, paleontological, tribal, or other resources.
The City Council finds that adherence to applicable law and implementation of Mitigation Measure
Cultural -1, which sets forth procedures that construction workers must follow in the event that cultural
resources are encountered, and which includes adherence to a monitoring and mitigation plan prepared
by a qualified expert, would reduce impacts to a less- than - significant level.
iv. Hazardous Materials. The Project entails the removal of aging signs that could contain asbestos and
other hazardous materials. All construction activities would be required to conform to Title 49 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, US Department of Transportation (DOT), State of California, and local
laws, ordinances and procedures. These include, without limitation, California Health and Safety Code
section 19827.5, Cal /OSHA Lead Construction Standards, BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, Title 22,
California Code of Regulations, Section 66261.24, Title 8, California Code of Regulations, Section
1532.1, and Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 745. The Project also is subject to the City's
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, which requires best management
practices for reduction of erosion, sediment and pollutants in runoff waters. The City Council finds that,
with adherence to applicable law and Mitigation Measure Haz -2, as set forth in the 2015 IS /MND,
impacts would be less than significant and significant impacts are avoided.
u Transportation. As identified in the 2015 IS /MND and 2018 Addendum, significant effects could
occur if the Applicant's Digital Billboard did not comply with restrictions regarding location, intensity of
light, light trespass, or other restrictions, or includes visual effects of driver interaction that would cause
driver distraction. The City Council finds that the proposed Digital Billboard is designed to comply with
all applicable law, and that its 8- second dwell time would not have the potential to cause driver
distraction, but that implementation of Mitigation Measure Traf -1, which requires annual reports on the
operation of the sign, and Mitigation Measure Traf -2, which prohibits the display of moving or flashing
lights and prohibits the installation of certain technologies, would ensure impacts remain
less- than - significant and significant impacts are avoided.
4. Upon consideration of the 2018 Addendum, the City Council finds that the proposed Project will not
result in any of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines section 15162 that would require further
City of South San Francisco Page 4
File Number. 18 -829
Enactment Number. RES 142 -2018
environmental review through preparation of a subsequent EIR. More specifically:
i. There are no substantial changes proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environment effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. The applicant seeks to implement the
project as originally evaluated in the 2015 IS /MND with only minor refinements. Allowing signs on the
east side of U.S. Highway 101 would result in digital billboards located approximately 200 feet away
from areas originally designated for the placement of digital billboards on the west side of U.S. Highway
101. Moreover, the Applicant's proposed sign is within the development standards, including heights and
area, as originally evaluated in the 2015 IS /MND. The Federal Aviation Administration has reviewed the
plans for the Applicant's Digital Billboard and, on June 5, 2017, determined it did not constitute a hazard
to air navigation. Therefore, the project's impacts have already been analyzed as required under CEQA,
no major revisions to the 2015 IS /MND are required, and no new significant effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects would occur.
ii. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the negative declaration due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects. There have been no significant changes in surrounding developments, development
patterns, or highway and circulation networks in the vicinity of the proposed Project that would bear on
the impacts of operating a digital billboard. Therefore, there exists no changed circumstances that would
require major revisions to the 2015 IS /MND, or would result in new significant effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
'iii. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known
with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous negative declaration was adopted, does
not exist that shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the 2015 IS/MND. The
Applicant seeks to develop a project that was within the scope of activity already evaluated in the 2015
IS /MND and the Applicant's Digital Billboard is proposed in an area in the vicinity of the project area
previously studied, is designed similarly, and would be subject to the same operational parameters.
Moreover, digital sign technology during this time period has not significantly changed. Accordingly,
there is no new information of substantial importance that was not known at the time the 2015 IS /MND
was adopted that would show the project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
2015 IS /MND.
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous
negative declaration. The Applicant seeks to develop a project that was within the scope of activity
already evaluated in the 2015 IS /MND and, as explained above, the Applicant's Digital Billboard is
proposed in an area in the vicinity of the project area previously studied, is designed similarly, and
would be subject to the same operational parameters.
City of South San Francisco Page 5
File Number. 18 -829
Enactment Number. RES 142 -2018
Moreover, digital sign technology during this time period has not significantly changed. Accordingly,
there is no new information of substantial importance that was not known at the time the 2015 IS /MND
was adopted that would show the project would have significant effects previously examined that would
be substantially more severe.
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and
would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents
decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. The Applicant seeks to develop a project that
was within the scope of activity already evaluated in the 2015 IS/MND and, as explained above, the
Applicant's Digital Billboard is proposed in an area in the vicinity of the project area previously studied,
is designed similarly, and would be subject to the same operational parameters. Moreover, digital sign
technology during this time period has not significantly changed. Accordingly, all impacts of Project
development would be less than significant with the application of mitigation measures originally
identified in the 2015 IS /MND, and no substantial changes in the feasibility of any of the original
mitigation measures have been identified, and no further mitigation is necessary. The applicant would be
required to comply with the specified measures as conditions of approval.
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the
negative declaration would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but
the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. The Applicant seeks to
develop a project that was within the scope of activity already evaluated in the 2015 IS /MND and, as
explained above, the Applicant's Digital Billboard is proposed in an area in the vicinity of the project
area previously studied, is designed similarly, and would be subject to the same operational parameters.
Moreover, digital sign technology during this time period has not significantly changed. Accordingly, all
impacts of Project development would be less than significant with the application of mitigation
measures originally identified in the 2015 IS /MND, and no mitigation measures or alternatives which are
considerably different than the original mitigation measures are necessary to reduce Project impacts to
less than significant. Nor have any mitigation measures or alternatives been identified, and that the
Applicant has declined to adopt, that would substantially reduce significant effects of the Project on the
environment.
5. The Project will not create any new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts as
compared to those already identified and analyzed in the 2015 IS /MND. Further, the City Council finds
that there is no new information of substantial importance that demonstrates new or substantially more
severe significant effects, as compared to those identified in the prior CEQA documents. Nor are any
new or additional mitigation measures required to mitigate any impacts of the Project.
6. Accordingly, the City Council finds that CEQA Guidelines section 15162 does not require any
further CEQA review, and that the 2018 Addendum, prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15164, is the appropriate environmental document for approval of the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South San
City of South San Francisco Page 6
File Number. 18 -829 Enactment Number. RES 142 -2018
Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution, and makes a determination that the
2018 Addendum is the appropriate environmental document for approval of the Project and no further
environmental review is required.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and adoption.
At a meeting of the City Council on 9/12/2018, a motion was made by Mark Addiego, seconded by Pradeep
Gupta, that this Resolution be approved. The motion passed.
Yes: 4 Mayor Normandy, Mayor Pro Tern Matsumoto, Councilmember Gupta, and
Councilmember Addiego
Absent:
Atte
City of South San Francisco Page 7
ISMNDNITIALTUDYANDITIGATEDEGATIVEECLARATION
101TCCCBPERMINALOURTLEARHANNELILLBOARD ROJECT
RZAANDELATEDONINGMENDMENT
PFREPAREDOR
CSSFITYOFOUTHAN RANCISCO
DECDEPARTMENTOFCONOMICANDOMMUNITYEVELOPMENT
315MAAPLEVENUE
SSF,CA94080OUTHANRANCISCO
PB: REPAREDY
LiGAMPHIERREGORY
1944E MBARCADERO
O,CA94606AKLAND
J2013UNE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
IntroductiontothisDocument ................................................................................................................. 1
ProjectInformation .................................................................................................................................. 2
MitigatedNegativeDeclaration ............................................................................................................. 13
Potentially SignificantImpactsRequiringMitigation ........................................................................ 13
ProposedFindings .............................................................................................................................. 17
InitialStudyChecklist ............................................................................................................................ 19
EnvironmentalFactorsPotentiallyAffected ....................................................................................... 20
LeadAgencyDetermination ............................................................................................................... 21
EvaluationofEnvironmentalImpacts ................................................................................................ 22
Aesthetics ....................................................................................................................................... 22
Agricultural andForestResources ................................................................................................. 32
AirQuality ..................................................................................................................................... 33
BiologicalResources ..................................................................................................................... 37
CulturalResources ......................................................................................................................... 40
GeologyandSoils .......................................................................................................................... 41
Greenhouse GasEmissions ............................................................................................................ 43
HazardsandHazardous Materials ................................................................................................. 44
HydrologyandWaterQuality ........................................................................................................ 46
LandUseandPlanning .................................................................................................................. 48
MineralResources ......................................................................................................................... 49
Noise .............................................................................................................................................. 50
PopulationandHousing ................................................................................................................. 51
PublicServices ............................................................................................................................... 52
Recreation ...................................................................................................................................... 53
Transportation/Traffic .................................................................................................................... 54
Utilities andServiceSystems ........................................................................................................ 59
MandatoryFindingsofSignificance .............................................................................................. 60
DocumentPreparers ............................................................................................................................... 62
Sources ................................................................................................................................................... 62
ATTACHMENTS
AttachmentA: BiologicalImpactsAssessment
AttachmentB: NorthwestInformation CenterRecordsSearchResults
h
FIGURES
Figure1: ProjectLocation ................................................................................................................. 7
Figure2: Proposed BillboardSitePlan ............................................................................................. 9
Figure3: Proposed BillboardDesign .............................................................................................. 11
Figure4: ExistingViewfromU.S. 101, facingnorth ..................................................................... 23
Figure5: ProposedBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingnorth (70’ height) ......................................... 23
Figure6: ExistingViewfromU.S. 101, facingnorth ..................................................................... 25
Figure7: ProposedBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingsouth (70’ height) ......................................... 25
Figure8: ReducedHeightBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingnorth (55’ height) .............................. 27
Figure9: ReducedHeightBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingsouth (55’ height) .............................. 27
ii
INTRODUCTION TOTHIS DOCUMENT
ThisdocumentservesastheInitialStudyandMitigatedNegativeDeclaration (IS/MND) fortheproposed
Project, preparedinaccordancewiththeCalifornia Environmental QualityAct (CEQA) (Public
ResourcesCodeSections1500etseq.).
PerCEQAGuidelines (Section15070), aMitigatedNegativeDeclarationcanbepreparedtomeetthe
requirements ofCEQAreviewwhentheInitialStudyidentifiespotentiallysignificant environmental
effects, butrevisionsintheProjectand/orincorporation ofmitigationmeasureswouldavoidtheeffectsor
mitigatetheeffectstoapointwhere clearlynosignificanteffectswould occur.
Thisdocumentisorganizedinthree sectionsasfollows:
IntroductionandProjectInformation. Thissectionintroducesthedocumentanddiscussedthe
projectdescriptionincludinglocation, setting, andspecificsoftheleadagencyandcontacts.
MitigatedNegativeDeclaration. Thissection liststheimpactsandmitigationmeasuresidentified
intheInitialStudyandproposesfindingsthatwouldallowadoptionofthisdocumentasthe
CEQAreviewdocumentfortheproposedproject.
InitialStudyChecklist. ThissectiondiscussestheCEQAenvironmental topicsandchecklist
questionsandidentifiesthepotential forimpactsandproposedmitigationmeasurestoavoidthese
impacts.
101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project Page 1
PROJECTINFORMATION
1. ProjectTitle: 101TerminalCourtClearChannelBillboard Projectand
RelatedZoningAmendment
2. LeadAgencyContact: CityofSouthSanFrancisco
GerryBeaudin, PrincipalPlanner
Department ofEconomic andCommunity Development
CityofSouthSanFrancisco
315MapleAvenue
SouthSanFrancisco, CA 94083
[email protected]
3. ProjectLocation: InthePark NFlyparkinglotat101TerminalCourt
APN015-116-240) adjacenttohighway101inSouth
SanFrancisco.
4. ProjectApplicant'sNameandAddress: PatrickPowers
ClearChannelOutdoor, Inc.
NorthernCalifornia Division
55512thStreet, Suite950
Oakland, CA94607
510) 835-5900x7219
5. GeneralPlanDesignation: CommunityCommercial
6. Zoning: FreewayCommercial (FC)
7. SiteandVicinity: TheregionallocationisshowninFigure1andthespecificlocationonthissiteis
shownonFigure2. TheProjectsiteislocatedwithinthepavedparkingareaoperatedprivatelyby
ParkNFlyasoff-siteairportparking.
Anapproximately40-footwidelandscapestripislocatedbetweentheProjectsiteandthehighwayto
theeast, consistinglargelyofshrubsandgrasses. Farthereast, atapproximately275feettotheother
sideofthehighway, islocatedacommercial complexwithsomeretailandhotels. Beyondthatare
largelyindustrialusesandResearchandDevelopment/officecomplexes.
ThesiteisborderedtothewestbytheGoldenGate ProduceTerminal, whichhousesmultiple
producepurveyorsintwolargebuildings. Aseparate off-siteairportparking useislocatedfartherto
thenorth.
TheParkNFlysiteextendsfornearly800feettothesouthfromthelocationofthebillboard. Atthe
southernboundaryofthesiteisanapproximately 150-footwideunnamedchannelandbufferarea, on
theothersideofwhichislocatedlightindustrialandretailuses.
Theclosest residentialareasarelocatedapproximately 2,300feettothesouthwest, 3,000feettothe
northwestand3,800feettothesouth. Therearenoresidencesinthevicinity totheeast.
8. Project Description:
DigitalBillboard
TheProjectinvolvesconstructionandoperationofonenewdouble-sidedoutdooradvertisingLED
billboardlocatedinSouth SanFrancisco, California. Thebillboardisproposedtoreachamaximum
heightof70feet. Itispossiblethat, throughthe Cityapprovalprocess, includingthedesignreview,
thebillboardheightcouldbereduced. ReducedheightisdiscussedintheAesthetics section.
An “LEDbillboard” consistsofadisplay surfacethatsupportsanimagegeneratedbyrowsoflight
Page 2 101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project
emittingdiodes (LED). Theimageonthebillboardisstaticforaperiodoftime, notlessthaneight
seconds, beforecyclingtothenextimage. Operationaldetailsprovided bytheapplicantincludethe
following:
Each LEDdisplaywouldbe48feetwideby14feettallmountedonacolumn sothattheoverall
heightisapproximately70feetabovegrade. Thetwodisplayfaceswillbeorientedina “V”
shapesuchthatthedisplays facethetwodirections ofhighwaytraffic. Thedesignofthe
billboardisshowninFigures2and3.
Brightnessofeachdigitaldisplay: Lightinglevelsoneachfaceofthedigitalbillboardwillnot
exceed 0.3footcandlesoverambient levels, asmeasured usingafootcandlemeterata250’
distanceaccordingtotheguidelinesoftheOutdoorAdvertisingAssociation ofAmerica
OAAA).
Power: Central breakerpanelwithaprimaryfeedof200ampsat120/240singlephaseor200
ampsat208Y/120threephaseprimaryfeed; electricalconnectionswouldbeULandIEC-
approved.
Signage wouldbecontrolledremotelyandwouldhaveremotemaintenance software, andthe
applicantwillimmediatelyshutoff, orgoto “fullblack” intheeventofamalfunction.
Lightsensorswouldbeinstalledwitheachfaceofthebillboardtomeasureambient lightlevels
andtoadjustlightintensitytorespondtosuchconditions. Currently, “beehive” lightsensor
enclosuresareutilized, incorporatingtwolightsensorsintotheenclosure.
Thebillboardwillbeprogrammed fornighttimereduced (4percentofpeakpower) power
operation.
LEDlightinghasadirectionalnatureandtheprojected viewinganglevaluesfortheproposed
billboard is ± 30° verticallyand ± 60° horizontally. Shaderswillbelocated aboveeachrow of
LEDstopreventlightfromprojectingupwardintothesky.
ZoningCodeAmendment
DigitalbillboardsarecurrentlynotallowedundertheCity’sZoningCode. BecauseaZoningCode
amendmentisrequired forapprovaloftheproposedbillboard, thisamendment, includingthe
followingassumptions, hasbeenincluded aspartoftheProjectdescriptionanalyzedinthis
document. Whilethefinalwordingoftheamendmentwasnotavailableatthetimeofdraftingofthis
report, theCity’sintentisthatnomorethan 3digitalbillboardscouldbeallowedalongthehighway
inconjunctionwithnegotiated RelocationAgreements. Thelocationofproposeddigitalbillboards
wouldbeconstrained tothewesternsideofthehighwaybetweenSisterCitiesBoulevard andthe
City’ssouthern boundaryandotherwisefollowingbillboardlocatingrestrictions (suchasCaltrans
ruleof500 feetbetweenbillboards, discussedinmoredetailunderitem11, RegulatoryProvisions).
Approvalandconstructionofanydigitalbillboardwouldrequireanegotiated RelocationAgreement
involvingremovalofmultiple similarly-sizedexistingbillboardswithintheCity.
Construction oftheBillboard
Thefollowinginformationregarding theprocessinvolvedininstallingadigitalbillboardisbasedon
discussions withrepresentativesofClearChannel, andistheprocesstypicallyfollowed. The
followingdescriptionofactivitieshasbeenincludedhereasgeneralprojectinformation, andhasbeen
usedasthebasis forevaluatingpotentialconstruction-periodimpacts forairqualityandnoise. The
specificsoftheprocedurecouldbemodifiedifrecommended bythestructuralengineerbasedupon
theresultsofasite-specificsoilstudy. Theconstruction wouldbesubjecttotheBuildingCode, anda
BuildingPermitwouldberequired forconstructionactivities. Theconstructiontypicallyproceedsas
describedbelow.
Day1: Onthefirstdayatthesite, acrewarriveswithadrillingriganddrillsahole5’ indiameter and
101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project Page 3
32’ deep. Atrench plateisplacedovertheholebeforethecrewleavesthesite.
Day2: Thecolumnforthebillboardisdeliveredtothesite. Thecolumnistypically42” indiameter.
Thecolumn isliftedintoplaceinthefoundationholebyacrane, andismaintained inplacebyI-
beamsthatareweldedtothecolumn. Abuildinginspectionisrequiredatthispoint, andthecompany
attemptstoarrangefortheinspection earlyenoughinthedaytoallowpouringofconcreteonDay2.
Day5: After theconcretecuresforthreedays, thecrewreturnstothesite. TheI-beamweldsare
groundoffandtheI-beamsremoved. Theupperstructurecomponentsaredelivered tothesiteand
assembledonthegroundbythecrew (usually4-5persons). Thecranereturnstothesiteandliftsthe
upperstructureintoplaceatopthecolumn.
Electricalservice: Arrangementstoextendelectricalservicetothesitearemadeinadvanceofthe
construction activities. Undergroundelectricalservicewillbeextendedtothebillboardthrough
trenching, usingasleevethatwillaccommodatetheelectricalserviceinsideaconcretefoundation.
Thetypicalelectricalserviceis200ampsforsinglephase, and100ampsfor3-phase.
9. RequiredApprovalsApprovaloftheProjectwillrequire aZoningCodeamendment, Relocation
Agreement, andDesignReviewfromtheCityofSouthSanFrancisco. Additionally, thefollowing
reviewsandapprovalswouldberequired:
Appropriate clearance throughCaltrans isalsorequiredforhighway-orientedsigns. Thismayrequire
arelocation agreement ifthefreewaysegmentisdeterminedtobeclassified asa “landscaped
freeway” (asdiscussedunderRegulatoryProvisions).
Constructionactivitieswillrequireappropriateadministrativepermits.
TheCityandapplicantmayalsoenterintoaDevelopment Agreement.
10. RegulatoryProvisions: Thefollowingregulations areapplicabletoinstallationofbillboardsand
compliancehasbeenassumedinanalysis ofthisProject.
Federal
ThefederalHighwayBeautification Actof1965 (23U.S.C. 131) providesforcontrolofoutdoor
advertising, includingremovalofcertain typesofsigns, alongtheinterstatehighwaysystem. TheAct
isenforcedbytheFederalHighwayAdministration (FHWA).
Aspartofitsenforcementeffort, FHWAhasenteredintoagreements regardingtheActwithstate
departmentsoftransportation. TheagreementswithCaliforniaaredescribedundertheState
provisions, below.
State
TheCalifornia DepartmentofTransportation (Caltrans) isinvolvedinthecontrolof “off-premise”
displaysalongstatehighways. Suchdisplaysadvertiseproductsorservicesofbusinesseslocatedon
propertyotherthanthedisplay. Caltrans doesnotregulateon-premisedisplays. (CaltransLandscape
ArchitectureProgram, 2008)
Californiahasenteredintotwoagreements withFHWAaspartoftheimplementation oftheHighway
BeautificationAct: onedatedMay29, 1965, andasubsequentagreementdatedFebruary15, 1968.
TheagreementsgenerallyprovidethattheStatewillcontroltheconstructionofalloutdoor
advertisingsigns, displaysanddeviceswithin660feetoftheinterstatehighwayright-of-way. The
agreementsprovidethatsuchsignsshallbeerectedonlyincommercialorindustrialzonesandare
subjecttothefollowingrestrictions:
Nosignsshallimitateorresembleanyofficialtrafficsign, signalordevice, norshallsigns
obstructorinterferewithofficialsigns;
Nosignsshallbeerectedonrocksorothernaturalfeatures;
Page 4 101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project
Signsshall benolargerthan25feetinheight and60feetinwidth, excludingborder, trimand
supports;
Signsonthesamesideofthefreewaymustbeseparatedbyatleast500feet; and
Signsshallnotincludeflashing, intermittentormovinglights, andshallnotemitlightthatcould
obstructorimpairthevisionofanydriver.
California regulatesoutdooradvertisingintheOutdoorAdvertisingAct (BusinessandProfessions
Code, Sections5200etseq.) andtheCaliforniaCodeofRegulations, Title4, Division6 (Sections
2240etseq.), whichincorporatetheFederal HighwayBeautificationActbyreference. Caltrans
enforcesthelawandregulations. Caltransrequiresapplicantsfornewoutdoorlightingtodemonstrate
thattheowner oftheparcel consentstotheplacementofthesign, thattheparcelonwhichthesign
wouldbelocatediszoned commercial orindustrial, andthatlocalbuildingpermitsareobtainedand
complied with. Adigitalbillboardisidentifiedasa “messagecenter” inthestatute, whichisan
advertisingdisplaywherethemessageischangedmorethanonceeverytwominutes, butnomore
thanonceeveryfourseconds. (BusinessandProfessionsCode, Section5216.4)
Inbrief, off-premises changeableelectronic variablemessagesigns (CEVMS) adjacenttocontrolled
routesshallincorporatestandardspertainingto:
1. DurationofMessage
2. TransitionTime
3. Brightness
4. Spacing
5. Locations
MostimportantlyasaresultofFHWArecommendations, toensuredriversafety, nobillboard
manufacturers presentlyusemovingdisplaysorlessthana4seconddurationtimebetweenmessages.
Somefreewaysareclassifiedas “landscapedfreeways.” Alandscapedfreewayisdefinedasonethat
isnow, ormayinthefuturebe, improvedbytheplantingoflawns, trees, shrubs, flowersorother
ornamentalvegetationrequiringreasonable maintenance ononeorbothsidesofthefreeway
GovernmentCode §5216). Off-premisedisplays arenotallowedalonglandscapedfreewaysexcept
whenapprovedaspartofRelocationAgreementspursuantto §5412oftheOutdoorAdvertisingAct.
ItappearstheProjectsiteiswithina segmentof U.S. 101whichisconsideredaclassified
landscapedfreeway, thoughsuchadetermination wouldbemadeduringtheapprovalprocesswith
1Caltrans.
TheOutdoorAdvertising Actcontainsanumberofprovisionsrelatingtotheconstructionand
operationofbillboards:
Thesignmustbeconstructedtowithstandawindpressureof20poundspersquarefeetof
exposedsurface (§5401);
Nosignshalldisplayanystatementsorwordsofanobscene, indecentorimmoralcharacter
5402);
Nosignshalldisplayflashing, intermittentormovinglightorlights (§5403(h));
Signsarerestrictedfromareaswithin300feetofanintersectionofhighwaysorofhighwayand
railroadright-of-ways, butasignmaybelocatedatthepointofinterception, aslongasaclear
1 Classified “LandscapeFreeways” CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation, July13, 2011, , availableat
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/lsfwy/pdf/class_ls_fwy.pdf.
101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project Page 5
viewisallowedfor300feet, andnosignshallbeinstalledthatwouldprevent atravelerfrom
obtaining aclearviewofapproachingvehiclesforadistanceof500feetalongthehighway
5404); and
Messagecentersignsmaynotincludeanyilluminationormessagechangethatisinmotionor
appearstobeinmotionorthatchange orexposeamessageforlessthanfourseconds. No
messagecentersignmaybelocated within500 feetof anexistingbillboard, or1,000feetof
anothermessagecenterdisplay, onthesamesideofthehighway (§5405).
Additionalrestrictionsonoutdoorsignage arefoundintheCaliforniaVehicle Code. Section21466.5
prohibitstheplacingofanylightsource “…ofanycolorofsuchbrilliance astoimpairthevision of
driversuponthehighway.” Specificstandardsformeasuring lightsourcesareprovided. The
restrictions maybeenforcedbyCaltrans, theCaliforniaHighwayPatrolorlocalauthorities.
Page 6 101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project
ProposedBillboard
Figure1: ProjectLocation
Source: GoogleInc., GoogleEarthimagerydate10/31/2011, withprojectlocationnotedbyLamphier-Gregory.
101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project Page 7
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 8 101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project
Figure2: ProposedBillboardSitePlan
Source: VincentKevinKelly & Assoc., Inc. fortheapplicant, datedMay1, 2012
101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project Page 9
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 10 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
Figure3: ProposedBillboardDesign
Source: VincentKevinKelly & Assoc., Inc. fortheapplicant, datedMay1, 2012
Notes:
Thespecificsofthedecorativepolecovercouldberevisedperthedesignreviewprocess.
Thedesignreview/approvalprocesscouldalsoresultinaloweredoverallheight, potentiallya55’ totalheight. The70’ height
wasutilizedinthisanalysisbecauseitisthemaximumheight thatisbeingconsidered. SeetheAestheticssectionforadiscussion
andvisualmodelingofboththe70’ and55’ overallheights.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 11
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 12 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PD,L,SROJECTESCRIPTIONOCATIONANDETTING
ThisMitigated NegativeDeclarationhasbeenpreparedforthe101TerminalCourtClearChannel
BillboardProjectandrelatedcodeamendments. SeetheIntroductionandProjectInformationsectionof
thisdocumentfordetailsoftheProject.
PSIRMOTENTIALLYIGNIFICANTMPACTSEQUIRING ITIGATION
ThefollowingisalistofpotentialProjectimpacts andthemitigationmeasuresrecommendedtoreduce
theseimpactstoaless-than-significantlevel. RefertotheInitialStudyChecklistsectionofthisdocument
foramoredetailed discussion.
Thedigitalbillboardtechnologyhasthepotentialtooperateatlevelsbrighterthanthosespecifiedasthe
operationallimits. Impactswouldremainlessthansignificantunderspecifiedoperatingconditions, which
arerequiredtobetestedunderMitigationMeasureVisual-1, below.
MitigationMeasure
Visual-1: BillboardBrightness FieldTesting. TheApplicantshalldemonstrate throughfield
testingcompliancewitha0.3footcandleincreaseoverambientlightat250feet
duringnighttimeconditionsuponinitialstart-up, at6monthsofoperationandatthe
requestoftheCityforthelifeofthebillboard. TheApplicantshallfundfieldtesting
byanindependentcontractororCitystafftrainedintheuseofahandheld photometer
todemonstratecontinuedcompliance. TheCityshallconsidercitizencomplaints
consistingofdirectpersonalimpactsascauseforrequestingfieldtesting.
Ifincreasesinambientlightarefoundtobeabovethe0.3footcandle level, the
dimming levelshallbeadjusteduntilthislevelcanbedemonstrated. Thismustbe
completedanddemonstrated throughfollow-upfieldtestingwithin24hours orthe
billboardshallnotbeoperated untilthelightinglevelscanbebroughtinto
compliance.
Ifnoabove-thresholdlevelshavebeenmeasuredinthepriorthreetests, fieldtesting
shallberequestednomoreoftenthantwiceyearly. Otherwise, fieldtestscanbe
requesteduptoonce monthly.
Projectairqualityemissionswouldbebelowapplicablethresholdlevels. However, thelocalAirDistrict,
BAAQMD, recommends implementationofconstructionmitigation measurestoreduceconstruction-
related emissionsandfugitivedustforallprojects. ThesebasicmeasuresareincludedinMitigation
MeasureAir-1, belowandwouldfurtherreducealreadylessthansignificantconstruction-periodcriteria
pollutantimpacts.
MitigationMeasure
Air-1: BasicConstructionManagement Practices. TheProjectshalldemonstrate
proposedcompliancewithallapplicableregulationsandoperating procedures prior
toissuanceofdemolition, buildingorgradingpermits, includingimplementation of
thefollowingBAAQMD “BasicConstructionMitigationMeasures”:
Allexposedsurfaces (e.g., parkingareas, staging areas, soilpiles, gradedareas, i)
andunpavedaccessroads) shallbewateredtwotimesperday.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 13
Allhaultruckstransporting soil, sand, orotherloosematerialoff-siteshallbeii)
covered.
Allvisiblemudordirttrack-outontoadjacentpublicroadsshallberemovediii)
usingwetpowervacuumstreetsweepersatleastonceperday. Theuseofdry
powersweepingisprohibited.
Allvehiclespeeds onunpavedroadsshallbelimitedto15mph. iv)
Allroadways, driveways, andsidewalkstobepavedshallbecompletedassoonv)
aspossible. Buildingpadsshallbelaidassoonaspossibleaftergradingunless
seedingorsoilbindersareused.
Idlingtimesshallbe minimizedeitherbyshuttingequipmentoffwhennotinusevi)
orreducingthemaximumidlingtimeto5minutes (asrequiredbytheCalifornia
airbornetoxicscontrolmeasureTitle13, Section2485ofCaliforniaCodeof
Regulations [CCR]). Clearsignageshallbeprovidedforconstructionworkersat
allaccesspoints.
Allconstruction equipmentshallbemaintainedandproperlytunedinaccordancevii)
withmanufacturer’sspecifications. Allequipmentshallbechecked byacertified
mechanicanddeterminedtoberunninginproperconditionpriortooperation.
Postapubliclyvisiblesignwiththetelephonenumberandperson tocontactatviii)
theLeadAgencyregardingdustcomplaints. Thispersonshallrespondandtake
correctiveactionwithin48hours. TheAirDistrict’sphonenumbershallalsobe
visibletoensure compliancewithapplicableregulations.
Giventhesitecharacteristics, coupledwiththeregionalarchaeologicalsensitivity, thereisamoderate
potentialofunrecordedNativeAmericanresources (especiallyburieddepositswithnosurface
indications) within theproposedProjectarea. Ifpresent, thesewould belocatedbelowanyartificialfillat
thesurface, butpotentially withinthe35footdepthoftheproposeddisturbance. Preparationand
implementationofaculturalmonitoringandmitigation planwouldassurethatdiscoveryofanycultural
resourceswouldbeidentifiedandtreatedappropriately andthereforethatanyimpactinthisregard would
belessthansignificant.
MitigationMeasure
Cultural-1: CulturalMonitoringandMitigationPlan TheProjectapplicantshallfund
preparationandimplementation of aculturalmonitoringandmitigation planbya
qualifiedarchaeologisttoaddressthepotentialforpresenceanddisturbanceofNative
American archaeologicalresources orremainsduringexcavationofthebillboard
polefooting. Thiswillincludeataminimummonitoringduringexcavationofthe
billboardpolefootingandmayalsoincludebutisnotlimitedtoadditionalarchival
research, handaugersampling, shoveltestunits, geoarchaeologicalanalysis, orother
commonmethodsusedtoidentifythepresenceofarchaeologicalresources tobe
determined pertherecommendationofthequalifiedarchaeologist. Thearchaeologist
andconstruction contractors shallfollowtheappropriateprocedures shouldany
culturalresourcesorhumanremainsbediscoveredduringgrounddisturbance.
Thesitehasnotbeenassessedforthepotentialpresenceofhazardousmaterials. Duringtheinstallation
processofthebillboard, holeswouldbedrilledandtheexcavatedsoilwouldbetransportedoffsite. The
Projectwillalsoincludetrenchingtoconnecttoelectricalsupply. WithimplementationofMitigation
MeasureHaz-1, thesitewillbeassessedforthepresence ofhazardousmaterialspriortoconstruction
activities, which, ifpresent, wouldbehandled appropriatelytoensuretheimpact wouldremainlessthan
significant.
Page 14 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
MitigationMeasure
Haz-1: PhaseIand/orPhaseIIReports. Priortoissuanceofconstructionpermits, theCity
ofSouthSanFranciscoshallrequire theProjectapplicanttosubmitaPhaseI
environmentalsiteassessment report, andaPhaseIIreportifwarrantedbythePhase
IreportfortheProjectsite. Thereportsshallmakerecommendationsforremedial
actioninaccordancewithStateandFederallaws, ifappropriate, andshouldbesigned
byaRegisteredEnvironmental Assessor, ProfessionalGeologist, orProfessional
Engineer. TheApplicantshallcomplywiththeserecommendations.
MitigationMeasure
Haz-2: E-WasteDisposal. Electronic components ofthebillboardmaycontainmaterials
considered “e-waste” whendisposedofduetopotentiallyhazardous metals, flame
retardants, andotherchemicals. Theoperatorshallberequired tofollowapplicable
regulations regardingproperdisposaland/orrecycling, asappropriate, ascomponents
arereplacedorremovedovertime.
Significanteffectscouldoccuriftheproposeddigitalbillboarddidnotcomplywithrestrictionsregarding
location, intensityoflight, lighttrespass, orotherrestrictionsorincludesvisualeffectsordriver
interactionthatwouldcausedriverdistraction. WithimplementationoftheseMitigationMeasuresTraf-
1andTraf-2, theCitywillreceiveaccurate informationfromtheoperatorregardingcompliance onan
ongoingbasisto ensurethatimpactsontransportation andtrafficsafetywouldbelessthansignificant.
MitigationMeasure
Traf-1: AnnualReport. TheoperatorofthedigitalbillboardshallsubmittotheCity, within
thirtydaysfollowingJune30ofeachyear, awrittenreportregardingoperationof
eachdigitalbillboard duringtheprecedingperiodofJuly1toJune30. Theoperator
maysubmitacombinedreport forallsuchdigitalbillboardsoperatedbysuch
operatorwithintheCitylimits. Thereportshall, whenappropriate, identifyincidents
orfactsthatrelatetospecificdigitalbillboards. Thereportshallbesubmittedtothe
DirectoroftheEconomicandCommunityDevelopment Departmentandshall
includeinformationrelatingtothefollowing:
a. Statusoftheoperator’slicenseasrequiredbyCaliforniaBusinessand
ProfessionsCode §§5300etseq.;
b. Statusoftherequiredpermitforindividual digitalbillboards, asrequiredby
CaliforniaBusiness andProfessions Code §§5350etseq.;
c. Compliance withtheCaliforniaOutdoorAdvertisingAct, CaliforniaBusiness
andProfessionsCode §§5200andallregulations adoptedpursuant tosuchAct;
d. Compliance withCaliforniaVehicleCode §§21466.5and21467;
e. Compliance withprovisions ofwrittenagreements betweentheU.S. Department
ofTransportationandtheCalifornia Department ofTransportationpursuantto
thefederalHighwayBeautification Act (23U.S.C. §131);
f. CompliancewithmitigationmeasuresidentifiedintheMitigatedNegative
Declaration adoptedaspartofProjectapproval;
g. Eachwrittenororalcomplaintreceived bytheoperator, orconveyedtothe
operatorbyanygovernment agencyoranyotherperson, regardingoperationof
eachdigitalbillboardincludedinthereport;
h. Eachmalfunctionorfailureofeachdigitalbillboardincludedinthereport,
whichshallincludeonlythosemalfunctions orfailuresthatarevisible tothe
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 15
nakedeye, includingreason forthemalfunction, durationandconfirmationof
repair; and
i. Operating statusofeachdigitalbillboardincludedinthereport, including
estimateddateofrepairandreturntonormaloperationofanydigitalbillboard
identifiedinthereportasnotoperating innormalmode.
MitigationMeasure
Traf-2: OperationalSafety. Theoperationofthedigitalbillboardshallcomplywiththe
followingatalltimes:
a. Nospecialvisualeffectsthatincludemovingorflashinglightsshallaccompany
anymessageorthetransitionbetweentwo successivemessages;
b. Theoperator shallnot installorimplementanytechnology thatwouldallow
interactionwithdrivers, vehiclesoranydevicelocatedinvehicles, including, but
notlimitedtoaradiofrequencyidentification device, geographic positions
system, orotherdevicewithoutpriorapprovaloftheCityofSouthSan
Francisco, takingintoconsiderationtechnicalstudiesandCalTrans orUSDOT
policiesandguidanceavailableatthetimeoftherequest.
Page 16 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
PFROPOSEDINDINGS
TheCityofSouthSanFranciscohasdeterminedthatwiththeimplementationofmitigation measures
identifiedinthisMitigatedNegativeDeclaration, theproposed Projectwillnothaveasignificanteffect
ontheenvironment. IfthisMitigatedNegativeDeclarationisadoptedbytheCityofSouthSanFrancisco,
therequirements ofCEQAwillbemetbythepreparationofthisMitigatedNegativeDeclaration andthe
Projectwillnot requirethepreparation ofanEnvironmental ImpactReport. Thisdecisionissupported by
thefollowingfindings:
a.TheProjectdoesnothavethepotentialto degradethequalityoftheenvironment, substantiallyreduce
thehabitatoffishorwildlifespecies, causeafishorwildlifepopulationtodropbelowself-sustaining
levelsorthreaten toeliminateaplantoranimalcommunity. Itdoesnotreducethenumberorrestrict
therangeofarareorendangeredplantoranimal. Itdoesnoteliminate importantexamplesofthe
majorperiodsofCalifornia historyorpre-history, sincethereisnoidentifiedareaattheProjectsite
whichishabitatforrareorendangeredspecies, orwhichrepresentsuniqueexamplesofCalifornia
historyorprehistory. TheProjectdoesnothaveanysignificant, unavoidableadverseimpacts.
Implementation ofspecifiedmitigationmeasures willavoidorreducetheeffectsoftheProjectonthe
environmentandtherebyavoidanysignificantimpacts.
b.TheProjectdoesnotinvolveimpactswhichareindividuallylimitedbutcumulativelyconsiderable,
becausethedescribedProjectwillincorporate mitigationmeasures toavoidsignificantimpactsofthe
Projectinthecontextofcontinuedgrowth anddevelopmentintheCityofSouthSanFrancisco.
c.TheProjectdoesnothaveenvironmental effectsthatwillcausesubstantialadverseeffectsonhuman
beings, eitherdirectlyorindirectly, becausealladverseeffectsoftheProjectwillbemitigatedtoless
thansignificantlevels.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 17
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 18 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
INITIALSTUDY CHECKLIST
EFPANVIRONMENTALACTORSOTENTIALLY FFECTED
EnvironmentalfactorsthatmaybeaffectedbytheProject arelistedalphabeticallybelow. Factorsmarked
withan “X” () weredeterminedtobepotentiallyaffectedbytheProject, involvingatleastoneimpact
thatrequiredmitigationtoreducetheimpacttolessthansignificantlevels, asindicated inthe
Environmental EvaluationFormChecklistandrelateddiscussionthatfollows. Unmarkedfactors ()
weredeterminedtonotbesignificantly affected bytheProject, basedondiscussion providedinthe
Checklist, includingtheapplication ofmitigationmeasureswhichtheapplicanthasagreedtoimplement.
Aesthetics Agricultural andForestResources AirQuality
BiologicalResources CulturalResources Geology/Soils
GreenhouseGasEmissions Hazards/HazardousMaterials Hydrology/WaterQuality
LandUse/Planning MineralResources Noise
Population/Housing PublicServices Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Utilities/ServiceSystems
MandatoryFindingsofSignificance
Therearenoimpactsthatwouldremainsignificant withimplementation oftheidentifiedmitigation
measures.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 19
EEEVALUATIONOFNVIRONMENTAL FFECTS
TheChecklistportionoftheInitialStudybeginsbelow, withexplanationsofeachCEQAissuetopic.
Fouroutcomesarepossible, asexplainedbelow.
1.A “noimpact” responseindicatesthatnoactionthatwouldhaveanadverseeffect ontheenvironment
wouldoccur duetotheProject.
2.A “lessthansignificant” responseindicatesthatwhiletheremaybepotentialforanenvironmental
impact, therearestandardprocedures orregulationsinplace, orotherfeaturesoftheProjectas
proposed, whichwouldlimittheextentofthis impacttoalevelof “lessthansignificant.”
3.ResponsesthatindicatethattheimpactoftheProjectwouldbe “lessthansignificant withmitigation”
indicatethatmitigationmeasures, identifiedinthesubsequentdiscussion, willberequiredasa
conditionofProjectapprovalinorder toeffectivelyreducepotentialProject-relatedenvironmental
effectstoalevelof “lessthansignificant.”
4.A “potentiallysignificant impact” responseindicatesthatfurtheranalysisisrequiredtodeterminethe
extentofthepotentialimpactandidentifyanyappropriatemitigation. Ifanytopicsareindicatedwith
a “potentiallysignificant impact,” thesetopicswouldneedtobeanalyzedinanEnvironmentalImpact
Report.
Notethatthisdocument doesnotindicatethatanyenvironmental topicswouldbeconsidered tobe
potentially significant” afterapplication ofmitigationmeasures identifiedinthisdocument andasagreed
tobytheProjectapplicant.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 21
1. AESTHETICS
Would theproject:
a) Havea substantialadverseeffectonascenicvista?
b) Substantially damage scenicresources, including, butnotlimited to, trees,
rockoutcroppings, andhistoric buildingswithinastatescenichighway?
c) Substantially degrade theexistingvisualcharacter orquality ofthesiteand
itssurroundings?
d) Createanewsourceofsubstantial lightorglarewhichwouldadverselyaffect
dayor nighttimeviews inthearea?
a) ScenicVistas. The siteandsurroundingareaispredominatelydeveloped withindustrialusesandis
notascenicresourceorvista. TheProjectislocatedonaflatareanearthehighwaywithno
substantial viewsoftheBayfromoracrossthesite.
SignHill, whichcontainstheprominent concrete “SouthSanFranciscoTheIndustrialCity” signon
thehillside, andSanBrunoMountainarevisiblefromU.S. 101acrossthesitetothenorth. Distant
viewsoftheridgealongSkylineBoulevardarevisiblefromU.S. 101across thesitetothe
south/southwest.
Figures 4 6 FiguresandshowexistingviewsfromU.S. 101towardthesitetothenorthandsouthand
57andshowvisualmodelsoftheproposedbillboardintheseviews. ViewstowardSignHill, San
BrunoMountainandtheSkylineBoulevardridgefromU.S. 101arealreadypartiallyand
intermittentlyobscuredbyexisting development, signageandlandscaping. Ascanbeinferredfrom
thesefigures, theproposedbillboard wouldcontributetotemporaryobstructionoftheseviewsasa
driverprogressestowardandpastthebillboard.
TherearenospecificpoliciestoprotectviewsofSignHillfromU.S. 101andneither SignHill, San
BrunoMountain, norSkylineBoulevard ridgearedesignated asscenicvistasorscenicviews. The
locationsfromwhichviewsareaffectedarenotplaceswherepeoplewouldspecificallygatherin
ordertogainaviewoftheselandmarks. BlockageofviewstowardSanBrunoMountainandSkyline
Boulevardridgewouldnotbeconsideredapotentially significantenvironmentalimpact. However,
SignHillisidentifiedasanationalhistoriclandmarkandregionallandmarkthatisclearlyvisibleto
2travelersonnearbyfreeways, soisconsidered ascenicresourceforpurposesofthisanalysis.
TheproposedbillboardwouldcontributetoblockageofviewstowardSignHillfromthepointof
viewofavehicledrivingnorthalongU.S. 101. Thisinterruptionofviewswouldbetemporaryinthat
thebillboardwouldonlyblockviewsforashort periodasthevehicleprogressestowardthebillboard.
Signsinthisareaarenotuncommonthoughcumulativeblockageofviewswouldbeintermittent, as
viewstowardSignHillwouldbeavailablebetweensignsasavehicleprogressesnorth.
Figures 89andadditionallyshowthebillboardataheightofonly55’, whichiscurrentlybeing
consideredasamodification totheProject. Whilethesearestaticphotos, itisimportant toconsider
theperceptionofrelativesize. Asapersonapproaches anobject, theobject’sperceivedsizewill
2CityofSouth SanFrancisco, prepared byDyettandBhatia, SouthSanFrancisco GeneralPlan, 1999, p. 240.
Page 22 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
Figure4: ExistingViewfromU.S. 101, facingnorth
Figure5: ProposedBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingnorth (70’ height)
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 23
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 24 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
Figure6: ExistingViewfromU.S. 101, facingsouth
Figure7: ProposedBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingsouth (70’ height)
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 25
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 26 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
Figure8: ReducedHeightBillboardfromU.S. 101, facingnorth (55’ height)
Figure9: ReducedHeightBillboardfrom U.S. 101, facingsouth (55’height)
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 27
Thispageintentionallyleftblank
Page 28 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
increase. Thisiswhyapersonstanding acrossafootballfieldfromyoucanbecoveredinyourvision
byyourownoutstretched hand. Weperceivesomethingfartherawayassmaller (andtherefore
shorter). InthecaseofthisProject, thenearerobject (thebillboard) willappeartogrow tallerrelative
tothemoredistantobject (SignHill) asitisapproached. Ataheightof55’, theproposedbillboard
wouldstillbetallenoughtoblockviewstowardSignHillfromU.S. 101, thoughthelanepositionand
distanceofthevehiclefromthebillboard wouldbedifferentthanwheretheblockagewouldoccurfor
abillboardata70’ height. Becausealowerbillboardwouldbeobservedastallenoughtoblockviews
whentheobserverisclosertoitthana70’ billboard, amarginally shortertimewouldpassduring
whichviewsareblockedforthe55’ billboard. Therefore, itcanbeassumedthatthisheight reduction
wouldresultinasimilar, thoughmarginallyreducedimpacttoanalreadylessthansignificantimpact
onSignHillviews.
TheProjectalsoincludesamendingtheZoning Codetopotentially allowupto3digital billboards,
includingthisone, alongthewesternsideofU.S. 101withinthecitylimitsthroughRelocation
Agreements. WithRelocation Agreements, billboardscouldbelocatedasclosetogetheras500feet
anddigitalbillboards ascloseas1,000feettoeachother.
Thetwoadditionalallowabledigitalbillboardscouldcontributetointermittentblockageofviews
towardSignHill. Thespecificproposalsfortheothertwobillboardshavenotyetbeensubmitted and
wouldhavetoundergoappropriatereview. However, anyproposedbillboardswouldberequiredto
conformtoCaltransspacingregulations, whichwouldensurespacebetweensignsandthereforeonly
intermittentblockageofviewswouldresult.
Takingboththeregulatoryandspecificlocational/sceniccontextintoaccount, aswellasthe
temporary andintermittentnatureoftheobstructionfromthepointofviewofamovingvehicle, the
Project’simpactonscenicvistas, includingviewsofSignHillfromU.S. 101, wouldbeconsidereda
lessthansignificantimpact.
TheCityandapplicantareconsideringareducedheightbillboard, whichwouldreachamaximum
heightof55’ insteadoftheproposed 70’. Reducingtheheightwouldresultinimpactsthataresimilar
totheProjectattheproposedheightandwouldnotrequireadditionalenvironmental review. A
reducedheightbillboardwouldmarginally reduceanalready less-than-significantimpact relatedto
blockageofviewstowardSignHill.
b) ScenicHighways. U.S. 101isnotadesignatedoreligibleStateScenicHighway corridorinthe
3vicinityoftheProjectnorisitidentifiedasasceniccorridorintheSouthSanFranciscoGeneralPlan.
TheProjectwouldhavenoimpactonastatescenichighwayorscenicresourcesviewablefromsucha
highway.
c) Visual Character. Theproposeddigitalbillboardsiteislocated alongafreewayintheLindenville
areaofSouthSanFrancisco, whichischaracterizedbywarehousinganddistributionandlight
industrialusesincluding storage, automobilerepair, manufacturing, andsmallbusinessparks. The
Projectsiteandsurroundingareaisanticipated intheGeneralPlantoultimatelytransitiontoRegional
Commercial uses.
ThenewbillboardwouldbevisibleprimarilytodriversalongU.S. 101aswellasadjacentandacross-
highwayindustrial, hotel, andcommercialuses. Itisexpectedthebillboardwouldbevisiblein some
mid- andlong-rangeviewsfromfarthercommercial andresidential areasthatarehighenoughtohave
viewsacross thearea. Thevicinitywherethebillboardisproposedalreadysupportssomehighway-
orientedon-sitesignage, billboards, androadwaysignage. Theproposedbillboardisnotinconsistent
withthecharacteroftheareainwhichitisproposed.
3California Departmentof Transportation, StateScenicHighway MappingSystem,
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 29
Additionally, Citystaffwillreview theproposeddesignaspartoftheapprovalprocess, anddesign
parameterswouldbeimposedbytheCity.
Therefore, giventhecontextoftheproposed billboard, theimpactrelatedtodegradingvisual
characterwouldbeconsidered lessthansignificant.
Theadditionaltwodigitalbillboards, includingamaximumoffourbillboard faces, thatcouldbe
allowedundertheZoningCodeamendmentwouldbeconstrainedtothewesternsideofU.S. 101
adjacenttothefreewayandbetweenSisterCities BoulevardandthesouthernboundaryoftheCity.
Therearenumerouscommercialorindustrialareasinwhichtheycouldbelocated, particularly
consideringrelocation orremovalofexistingbillboards. Thereisnocurrentproposalforthe
additional billboards, sothespecificlocationscannotbeanalyzed. If/whenadditional digital
billboardsareproposed, theCitywouldperformtheappropriatereview. TheZoningCodeamendment
thatcouldallowtwoadditionaldigital billboards wouldnotchangethisimpactconclusion.
ItisalsoimportanttonotethatundertheproposedZoningAmendment, adigitalbillboard wouldonly
beallowedpursuanttoaRelocationAgreement, whichwouldresultintheremovalofoneormore
otherbillboardswithintheCityforeachproposed digitalbillboard. Thiscouldresultinanet
reductioninthetotalnumberofbillboardswithintheCity.
d) LightandGlare. DigitalbillboardsrelyonLEDtechnologytodisplaymessagesonalitscreen. The
lightingisdesignedtomakethemessage displaysvisibletopassingmotorists.
ThebrightnessoftheLEDdisplayonthebillboardfaceissubjecttoadjustmentbasedonambient
conditionsmonitoredbymultiplelightsensors. Thedisplay, forexample, isbrighterinthedaytime
thanindarkness, andrespondstochangesintheambientlightconditions. Restrictionsondigital
billboards, imposedandenforcedbyCaltrans, precludelightingthatwouldbedirectedatmotorists
thatissodirectedorintensethatitcouldblindorconfusedrivers, orcreate conditionsthatmake
recognitionoftheroadwayorofficialsignagedifficult.
Caltranshasimposedtheserestrictionsfortrafficsafetyreasons, andtheyarediscussedinmoredetail
intheTransportationsection. Theresultingcontrols, however, effectivelyregulatelightandglareto
ensurethattheoperation ofanydigitalbillboarddoesnotcreateasubstantial newsourceoflightor
glare.
Thebillboardswouldalsocomplywithguidelines oftheOutdoorAdvertisingAssociationofAmerica
OAAA). Theseguidelinesspecifythatlightinglevelsfromadigitalbillboardwillnotexceed0.3
footcandlesoverambientlevels, asmeasured usingafootcandle meteratapre-setdistancebased on
4thesizeofthebillboardface. Forthe14’ by48’ billboards, thiswouldbe250feet. Itisanticipated
5thattheilluminancewouldbenegligiblebeyond500feet.
TheIlluminatingEngineering SocietyofNorthAmerica (IESNA) LightingHandbook 10thEdition
recommendations areinunitsof “nits,” whichareappropriate whenlightisbeingbounced offa
surface, asisthecasewithaconventional billboard, butisnotthecasewithanLEDbillboard. With
assumptionsaboutcontent, “nits” andfootcandlescanbeconvertedforcomparisonofLED
illuminance toconventionalbillboard luminance. Conversion ofnitsusingconservativeassumptions
80% reflectance) andIESNAHandbookrecommendationsforbrightsurroundsresultsin
recommendationsof0.256footcandlesat250feet. Thisissimilartodigitalbillboard-specific
recommendationsof0.3footcandles. 6
4 OAAAMethodology toDetermineBillboardLuminance LevelsAccordingto , providedbyClearChannel.
5 ComparisonofDigitalandConventionalBillboardsOAAApreparedbyLightSciencesInc., November29, 2006, .
6 ComparisonofDigitalandConventionalBillboardsOAAApreparedbyLightSciencesInc., November29, 2006, .
Page 30 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
Thevalueof0.3footcandlesisutilizedherebecause, whilerelatively low, itispracticaltomeasure
withahandheldphotometer andthereforetoverifyfollowinginstallationandduringoperation. This
0.3footcandle levelwouldbeperceptible, butatthelowend, tothehumaneye, overambientlighton
asurface. Itwouldbeequivalent toaverage residentialstreetilluminationprovidedbylowwattage
streetlights (i.e., similartoambient conditions inthevicinity).
MitigationMeasure
Visual-1: BillboardBrightness FieldTesting. TheApplicantshalldemonstrate throughfield
testingcompliancewitha0.3footcandleincreaseoverambientlightat250feet
duringnighttimeconditionsuponinitialstart-up, at6monthsofoperationandatthe
requestoftheCityforthelifeofthebillboard. TheApplicantshallfundfieldtesting
byanindependentcontractor orCitystafftrainedintheuseofahandheld photometer
todemonstratecontinuedcompliance. TheCityshallconsidercitizencomplaints
consistingofdirectpersonalimpactsascauseforrequestingfieldtesting.
Ifincreasesinambientlightarefoundtobeabovethe0.3footcandle level, the
dimming levelshallbeadjusteduntilthislevelcanbedemonstrated. Thismustbe
completedanddemonstrated throughfollow-upfieldtestingwithin24hours orthe
billboardshallnotbeoperated untilthelightinglevelscanbebroughtinto
compliance.
Ifnoabove-thresholdlevelshavebeenmeasuredinthepriorthreetests, fieldtesting
shallberequestednomoreoftenthantwiceyearly. Otherwise, fieldtestscanbe
requesteduptoonce monthly.
Therearenoresidences within500feetoftheproposedbillboard, atwhichpointtheincreasesin
illuminancewouldbenegligible. Hotelusesarelocatedbetween250and500feetfromthebillboard,
whereilluminance increasesfromthebillboardwouldbebarelyperceptibleandconsistentwiththe
existingurbanconditions. WithimplementationofMitigationMeasureVisual-1, lightlevelsfrom the
proposedbillboardwillbeassuredtoremainattheselowlevelsandpotentialimpactsrelated tolight
andglarewouldbelessthansignificant.
Theadditional twodigitalbillboards thatcouldbeallowedundertheZoningCodeamendment
throughRelocationAgreementscouldbeascloseas500feettothecurrentlyproposedbillboard. As
notedabove, theincreaseinilluminanceisnegligibleat500feetandbarelyperceptible at250feet.
Thepotentialformultipledigitalbillboardsinthefuture, asallowedundertheZoningCode
amendment, wouldnotsubstantiallycontributetocumulativelightandglareimpactsandwouldnot
changetheimpactconclusion. Thespecificlocationsoftheothertwobillboardsarenotyetproposed.
Billboard-specificlightandglareimpactsofthesefuture billboardswouldneedtobeassessed in
respecttoanylight-sensitiveusesintheir vicinity.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 31
2. AGRICULTUREANDFORESTRY RESOURCES
Indetermining whetherimpacts toagricultural resources aresignificantenvironmental
effects, leadagenciesmay refertotheCalifornia Agricultural Land Evaluationand
SiteAssessment Model (1997) prepared bytheCaliforniaDept. ofConservationasan
optional model tousein assessing impacts onagricultureand farmland. In
determiningwhether impactstoforestresources, including timberland, aresignificant
environmental effects, leadagencies may refertoinformation compiledbythe
CaliforniaDepartment ofForestryandFireProtection regardingthestate’sinventory
offorest land, including theForestandRange Assessment Project andtheForest
Legacy Assessment project; andforestcarbonmeasurementmethodologyprovidedin
ForestProtocolsadoptedbytheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard. Would theproject:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, UniqueFarmland, orFarmland ofStatewide
Importance (Farmland), asshown onthemapsprepared pursuantto theFarmland
MappingandMonitoring Program oftheCalifornia Resources Agency, tonon-
agriculturaluse?
b) Conflict withexistingzoningforagricultural use, oraWilliamson Act contract?
c) Conflict withexisting zoningfor, orcause rezoningof, forest land (asdefinedin
PublicResources Codesection12220(g)), timberland (asdefinedbyPublic
Resources Codesection4526), ortimberland zonedTimberlandProduction(as
definedbyGovernment Codesection 51104(g))?
d) Result inthelossof forestland orconversionofforestlandtonon-forestuse?
e) Involve otherchanges inthe existingenvironment which, duetotheirlocation or
nature, could resultinconversion ofFarmland, tonon-agricultural useor
conversion offorest landtonon-forest use?
a-e) AgricultureandForestryResources. TheProjectsiteislocatedinadevelopedurbanareaadjacentto
ahighway. Nopartofthesiteiszonedfororcurrentlybeingusedforagriculturalorforestrypurposes
oraresubjecttotheWilliamson Act. Therewouldbenoimpacttoagricultureandforestryresources
asaresultofthisProject.
Page 32 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
3. AIRQUALITY
Where available, thesignificancecriteriaestablished bytheapplicableair quality
management orairpollutioncontroldistrictmay berelieduponto makethe
followingdeterminations. Would theproject
a) Conflict withorobstructimplementation oftheapplicable airquality plan?
b) Violate anyairqualitystandardorcontribute substantially toan existing or
projectedairqualityviolation?
c) Resultina cumulatively considerablenetincrease ofanycriteria pollutantfor
whichthe projectregion isnon-attainment under anapplicablefederalorstate
ambientair qualitystandard (includingreleasing emissions whichexceed
quantitative thresholdsforozoneprecursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptorsto substantialpollutantconcentrations?
e) Createobjectionable odorsaffectingasubstantialnumber ofpeople?
a)AirQualityPlan. TheProjectsiteissubjecttotheBay AreaCleanAirPlan, firstadoptedbytheBay
AreaAirQualityManagement District (BAAQMD) (inassociationwiththeMetropolitan
Transportation CommissionandtheAssociationofBayAreaGovernments) in1991tomeetstate
requirements andthoseoftheFederalCleanAirAct. Asrequiredbystatelaw, updatesaredeveloped
approximatelyeverythreeyears. Theplanismeanttodemonstrate progresstowardmeetingtheozone
standards, butalsoincludes otherelementsrelatedtoparticulatematter, toxicaircontaminants, and
greenhousegases. Thelatestupdatetotheplan, whichwasadoptedinSeptember2010, iscalledthe
BayArea2010CleanAirPlan.
Aprojectwouldbejudgedtoconflictwithorobstructimplementationoftheregionalairqualityplan
ifitwouldbeinconsistentwithregional growthassumptionsorimplementation ofcontrolstrategies.
TheProjectwouldhavenoeffectongrowth ofpopulation orvehicletravelandtheCleanAirPlan
doesnotrecommendmeasuresdirectlyapplicabletothistypeofuse. TheProject, therefore, wouldbe
generallyconsistentwiththeCleanAirPlanandhavealessthansignificantimpactinthisregard.
b-c) AirQualityStandards/CriteriaPollutants. Ambientairqualitystandards havebeenestablishedby
stateandfederalenvironmental agenciesforspecificairpollutants mostpervasiveinurban
environments. Thesepollutants arereferredtoascriteriaairpollutantsbecausethestandards
establishedforthemweredevelopedtomeetspecifichealthandwelfare criteriasetforthinthe
enabling legislationandincludeozone (O) precursors (NOxandROG), carbonmonoxide (CO), and3
suspendedparticulate matter (PM andPM). TheBayAreaisconsidered “attainment” forallofthe102.5
nationalstandards, withtheexceptionofozone. Itisconsidered “nonattainment” forStatestandards
forozoneandparticulate matter.
Past, presentandfuturedevelopmentprojects contributetotheregion’sadverseairqualityimpacts on
acumulative basis. Byitsverynature, airpollutionislargelyacumulative impact. Nosingleproject
issufficientinsizeto, byitself, resultinnonattainmentofambientairqualitystandards. Instead, a
project’sindividual emissionscontributetoexistingcumulativelysignificantadverseairquality
impacts. Ifaproject’scontributiontothecumulative impactisconsiderable, thentheproject’simpact
7onairqualitywouldbeconsideredsignificant.
7 CaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActAirQualityGuidelinesBAAQMD, May2011, , p. 2-1.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 33
BAAQMD’supdatedCEQAGuidelinesincludingthresholdsofsignificancewereadopted onJune2,
2010. OnMarch5, 2012theAlamedaCountySuperiorCourt issuedajudgmentfindingthat
BAAQMDhadfailedtocomplywith CEQAwhenitadoptedits2010Thresholds. Thecourtdidnot
determinewhethertheThresholdswerevalidonthemerits, butfoundthattheadoptionofthe
Thresholds wasaprojectunderCEQA. ThecourtissuedawritofmandateorderingBAAQMD toset
asidetheThresholds andceasedissemination ofthemuntilBAAQMDhadcompliedwithCEQA.
The2010 Thresholdsaremoreconservative thantheprevious1999versionandhavebeenusedin
thisanalysisforaconservativedeterminationofimpactsignificance. Currentthresholdsof
significanceforCriteriaAirPollutants aresetbyBAAQMDassummarizedbelow:
BAAQMDCPTSRITERIAOLLUTANTHRESHOLDSOFIGNIFICANCE
Pollutant Construction-RelatedOperational-Related
AverageDailyEmissions AverageDailyEmissions MaximumAnnual
lbs./day) (lbs./day) Emissions (tpy)
ROG 54 54 10
NOX 54 54 10
PM10 82 (exhaust only) 82 15
PM2.5 54 (exhaust only) 54 10
PM10/PM2.5 Best Management None
fugitive dust) Practices
Source: BAAQMDAdoptedAirQualityCEQAThresholdsofSignificance - June2, 2010
Project-relatedairqualityimpactsfallintotwocategories: short-termimpactsthatwouldoccurduring
constructionoftheProjectandlong-termimpactsduetoProjectoperation.
ConstructionEmissions
BAAQMDpresents screeningcriteria intheirCEQAGuidelines thatidentifyprojectsizesbytype
thatcouldhavethepotentialtoresultinemissionsovercriterialevels. Forexample, thistable
includesaconstruction-periodcriteriapollutantscreeninglevelof114singlefamilydwellingunits or
8277,000square feetofretailuses. While construction ofbillboardsisnotspecifically listedonthis
screeningtable, itcanbereasonablyconcludedfromacomparisontotheentries onthistablethatthe
minimalconstructionactivitiesrequiredforthisProject, includingonlyafewdaysofactivity, would
bewellbelowthresholdlevels.
However, BAAQMDrecommendsimplementationofconstruction mitigationmeasurestoreduce
construction-relatedemissionsandfugitivedustforallprojects, regardless ofthesignificance levelof
construction-periodimpacts. ThesebasicmeasuresareincludedinMitigationMeasure Air-1, below
andwouldfurtherreduceconstruction-periodcriteriapollutantimpacts.
MitigationMeasure
Air-1: BasicConstructionManagement Practices. TheProjectshalldemonstrate
proposedcompliancewithallapplicableregulationsandoperatingprocedures prior
toissuanceofdemolition, buildingorgradingpermits, includingimplementation of
thefollowingBAAQMD “BasicConstruction MitigationMeasures”.
Allexposedsurfaces (e.g., parkingareas, staging areas, soilpiles, gradedareas, i)
andunpavedaccessroads) shallbewateredtwotimesperday.
Allhaultruckstransporting soil, sand, orotherloosematerialoff-siteshallbeii)
covered.
8 CaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActAirQualityGuidelinesBAAQMD, May2011, , pp. 3-2to3-3.
Page 34 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
Allvisiblemudordirttrack-outontoadjacentpublicroadsshallberemovediii)
usingwetpowervacuumstreetsweepersatleastonceperday. Theuseofdry
powersweepingisprohibited.
Allvehiclespeeds onunpavedroadsshallbelimitedto15mph. iv)
Allroadways, driveways, andsidewalkstobepavedshallbecompletedassoonv)
aspossible. Buildingpadsshallbelaidassoonaspossibleaftergradingunless
seedingorsoilbindersareused.
Idlingtimesshallbe minimizedeitherbyshuttingequipmentoffwhennotinusevi)
orreducingthemaximumidlingtimeto5minutes (asrequiredbytheCalifornia
airbornetoxicscontrolmeasureTitle13, Section2485ofCaliforniaCodeof
Regulations [CCR]). Clearsignageshallbeprovidedforconstructionworkersat
allaccesspoints.
Allconstruction equipmentshallbemaintainedandproperlytunedinaccordancevii)
withmanufacturer’sspecifications. Allequipmentshallbechecked byacertified
mechanicanddeterminedtoberunninginproperconditionpriortooperation.
Postapubliclyvisiblesignwiththetelephonenumberandperson tocontactatviii)
theLeadAgencyregardingdustcomplaints. Thispersonshallrespondandtake
correctiveactionwithin48hours. TheAirDistrict’sphonenumbershallalsobe
visibletoensure compliancewithapplicableregulations.
OperationalEmissions
Similartotheanalysisforconstruction-periodimpactsabove, theProjectwascomparedtoBAAQMD
screeningcriteriaforoperationalpollutants. Asitrelatestooperationalpollutants, thistableincludes
screeninglevelsof325singlefamilydwellingunitsor99,000squarefeetofregionalshoppingcenter
9 Theseexampleuseswouldutilizeover1,000,000kilowatt-hoursperyear.10uses.
In2010 (themostrecentdataavailable), ClearChannelbillboardsaverageannualusagefordouble-
sideddigitalbillboardsofthesamesizeasthatproposedwas86,400kilowatt-hours (kwh), orless
thanonetenththeemissionsofaprojectthatwouldbeexpectedtohaveemissions abovethreshold
levels.
While operationofdigitalbillboardsisnotspecificallylistedonthisscreeningtable, itcanbe
reasonablyconcludedfromacomparisontotheBAAQMDscreeningtablethatoperationalemissions
resultingfromthisProjectwouldbewell belowthresholdlevels.
Additionally, BAAQMDpresentsasscreeningcriteriaforcarbonmonoxideimpactstraffic-based
criteria. AsoperationoftheproposedProjectwouldnotimpacttrafficlevels, theProjectwouldbe
belowcarbonmonoxidethresholdlevels.
Therefore, theProjectimpactrelatedtooperational pollutantemissionswouldbelessthan
significant.
d)SensitiveReceptors
Forthepurposeofassessing impactsofaproposedProjectonexposureofsensitivereceptorstorisks
andhazards, thethresholdofsignificanceisexceededwhentheproject-specificcancerriskexceeds
10inonemillionorthenon-cancerriskexceedsaHazardIndexof1.0. Examples ofsensitive
9 CaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality ActAirQualityGuidelinesBAAQMD, May2011, , pp. 3-2to3-3.
10CalculatedusingenergyutilizationratesfromBAAQMD’sGreenhouseGasModel (BGM).
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 35
receptorsareplaceswherepeoplelive, playorconvalesceandinclude schools, hospitals, residential
areasandrecreationfacilities.
TheProjectitselfisnotconsideredasensitivereceptorandoperationoftheProjectwould notbe
consideredasourceofhazardous emissions. However, construction activitythatusestraditional
diesel-poweredequipmentresultsintheemissionofdieselparticulatematter, whichisconsidereda
toxicaircontaminantandpotentialhealthrisk. Thegenerationoftheseemissionswouldbe
temporary, confinedtotheconstruction-periodofafewactivedaysateachsite.
BAAQMDprovidesadocument titledScreeningTablesforAirToxicsEvaluationduring
Constructiontoestimatethepotentialforsignificant airqualityhealthriskimpactsassociatedwith
constructionactivitybased ongeneralprojectcharacteristics, suchastypeandsize, utilizingworst-
caseandconservative assumptions. Thetableisnotintendedtobeusedforprojectssubstantially
11differentfromthedescribedresidential, commercial andindustrialprojects. Therefore, thetable
cannotbeuseddirectlyforthisProject. However, abriefcomparisonoftheBAAQMDScreening
TabletoProjectcharacteristics isusedtoanalyzethehealthriskimpacts. Thesmallestprojects
identifiedintheScreeningTableinclude constructionofa5unitresidentialprojecton1.7acresand
construction ofa5,000squarefootcommercialprojecton0.2acres. Thescreeningtablereportsthat
underworst-caseconditions, thereisthepotentialforsignificanthealthriskifasensitivereceptoris
locatedwithin95or100meters (upto328feet) ofsuchaconstruction site.
Thenearest sensitivereceptortotheProject siteisover2,300feetaway. Additionally, BAAQMD
ScreeningTablesforAirToxicsEvaluation useatwo-yearconstructionperiodforscreening
purposes, theshortestperiodtheyrecommend withthehealthriskmodeling. Whileitisinappropriate
tousethistable toquantifyanapproximate riskforsuchadifferentprojectthanthoselisted, itis
reasonable toconcludethatemissions andtheresultanthealthrisksfromanexposureperiodofonlya
fewdayswouldbesubstantiallylessthanemissionsovera2yearperiod. Thehealthriskmodelsand
methodsarenotconsideredaccurateforsuchshortdurationsastheconstruction-periodofthis
Project.
Giventhedistancetosensitiveusesandthattheexposureduration wouldbeshorterthanthatableto
beaccuratelymodeledaswellassubstantiallyshorter thanprojectsinBAAQMD’sScreening Table,
itcanreasonablybeassumed thatthepotentialhealthriskfromconstruction-periodemissions would
belessthansignificant.
Additionally, asrecommended bytheBAAQMD, standardconstructionBestManagementPractices
wouldbeimplemented toreduceemissionsasoutlinedinmitigation measureAir-1. Thiswould
furtherreducedieselandparticulatematteremissions.
e) ObjectionableOdors. Operationofthebillboardwouldnotresultinobjectionable odors. During
construction, diesel-poweredvehiclesandequipmentwouldcreateodorsthatsomemayfind
objectionable. However, theseodorswould betemporary andnotlikelytobenoticeablemuchbeyond
theProject site’s boundaries. Therefore, thepotentialforobjectionableodorimpacts isconsidered
lessthansignificant.
11 ScreeningTablesforAirToxicsEvaluation DuringConstructionBAAQMD, May2010, , Version1.0.
Page 36 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
4. BIOLOGICALRESOURCES
Would theproject:
a) Have asubstantialadverse effect, eitherdirectlyorthroughhabitat
modifications, onanyspecies identifiedas acandidate, sensitive, orspecial
statusspeciesin localorregional plans, policies, or regulations, orbythe
CaliforniaDepartment of FishandGame orU.S. FishandWildlife Service?
b) Haveasubstantialadverse effect onanyriparianhabitat orothersensitive
naturalcommunity identifiedin localorregionalplans, policies, or
regulations, orbytheCaliforniaDepartment ofFish andGameorUSFish
andWildlife Service?
c) Haveasubstantial adverseeffect onfederallyprotected wetlands asdefined
bySection404oftheCleanWater Act (including, butnotlimited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) throughdirectremoval, filling, hydrological
interruption, orother means?
d) Interferesubstantiallywiththemovement ofanynativeresidentor
migratory fishorwildlifespecies or withestablishednative resident or
migratorywildlife corridors, orimpede theuseof nativewildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict withanylocalpolicies orordinances protectingbiological
resources, suchasatree preservationpolicy orordinance?
f) Conflictwith theprovisionsofan adopted Habitat ConservationPlan,
Natural CommunityConservation Plan, or otherapprovedlocal, regional, or
statehabitat conservationplan?
a-c) SpecialStatusSpeciesandHabitatandWetlands. Abiologicalassessment wasconducted byH.T.
Harveyandassociates, asincludedinfullasAttachmentA. Thisincludedbothdaytimeandevening
sitevisitsonAugust27, 2012andanotherdaytimevisitonAugust31, 2012.
TheProjectsiteislocatedontheperimeterofalargecommercialparkinglot. Theprojectsiteis
pavedandcompletelydevoidofvegetationintheimmediatevicinityoftheproposedbillboard.
Achain-linkfenceseparatestheProjectsitefromanapproximately45-ftwidestripofruderal (i.e.,
disturbance-associated) vegetationthatoccupiestheareabetweentheProjectsiteandU.S. 101tothe
east. Dominantspeciespresent intheadjacentruderalhabitatincludecypress (Cupressus sp.), toyon
Heteromelesarbutifolia), andnon-native Frenchbroom (Cytisusmonspessulanus). Theruderal
habitatimmediatelyeastoftheProjectsite (approximately26fteastoftheproposedbillboardpole)
alsosupportsawetlandwithadense standofhorsetail (Equisetumsp.). Thiswetlandappearstobe
supportedbyrunofffromtheadjacentparkinglot, andmeetsthephysicalcriteriaandregulatory
definitionof “watersoftheUnitedStates”.
DirectEffects ofBillboard Installation
DuetothehighlydisturbednatureoftheProjectsiteandtheimmediatelysurroundingvicinity, itis
extremelyunlikelythatanyspecial-statusspecieswouldoccurintheProjectarea. Thevastmajority
ofplantandanimalspeciesoccurringhereareverycommonspeciesassociatedwithurban,
developed, andruderalconditionsthroughouttheSanFrancisco Bayarea. Therewasnoevidencethat
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 37
sensitive specieswerepresentontheProjectsiteandnohabitatcapableofsupporting sensitive
speciesispresentwithinorimmediatelyadjacenttothesite.
Nowetlands, riparianhabitats, orothersensitivehabitatsarepresentwithintheimmediate Project
site. Thus, sinceconstruction doesnotextendintothehorsetail-linedwetlandtotheeast, nosensitive
habitatswouldbeimpactedbytheconstruction ofthebillboard. Further, nospecial-statusplantor
wildlifespecies areexpectedtooccurwithintheProject area. Theonlywildlifespeciesthatmaybe
usinghabitatsintheimmediate vicinityoftheProjectsiteduringconstructionarecommonbirdssuch
asthehousefinch (Carpodacusmexicanus), American robin (Turdusmigratorius), andnorthern
mockingbird (Mimuspolyglottos). Thesespeciesarelocallyandregionallyabundant, andProject
effectsonthesespecieswillnotbesignificantundertheCEQA.
Theimpactrelatedtodirecteffectsonspecial-statusspeciesandhabitatswouldbelessthan
significant.
IndirectEffectsofIlluminanceonOff-SiteAreas
Thepotentialforimpactsrelatedtoilluminanceofthebillboardonwildlifeinoff-siteareaswas
assessed. Someanimalsareextremelysensitivetolightqueues, whichinfluencetheirphysiologyand
shapetheirbehaviors, particularlyduringbreedingseason. Artificiallightingmayindirectlyimpact
mammalsandbirdsbyincreasing thenocturnal activityofpredators and/orcausing avoidanceof
well-litareasresultinginanetlossofhabitatavailabilityandquality.
TheProjectsiteiscompletelysurroundedbyurbanhabitatsthatdonotsupportsensitivespeciesthat
mightbesignificantlyimpactedbyilluminancefromtheproposedLEDbillboard. Similarly, thesmall
wetlandimmediatelyadjacenttotheProjectsiteisnotexpectedtosupportsensitivespecies. TheSan
FranciscoBaytotheeastprovidessuitablehabitatforavarietyofwildlife, including thefederallyand
statelistedCaliforniaclapperrail (Ralluslongirostrisobsoletus), andthefederallylistedmissionblue
butterfly (Ariciaicarioidesmissionensis) hasbeenobservedatSignHillParktothenorth ofthe
Projectsite. However, thesehabitatsarelocatedtoofarfromtheProjectsitetobeaffected by
illuminancefromtheproposed LEDbillboard. Similarly, ColmaCreektothenorthoftheProjectsite
andtheunnamedchanneltothesoutharelocatedtoofarfromtheProjectsitetobeaffectedby
illuminancefromtheproposed billboard. Theindirectimpactofilluminancefrom thebillboard on
sensitive habitatsandspeciesislessthansignificant.
d) WildlifeCorridors. Thephysicalstructureofthebillboarditselfwouldnotimpactthemovementof
anywildlifespecies. However, avianflight behaviorcouldbeimpactedbyartificialilluminance. The
primarywayinwhichtheluminanceofanLEDbillboardmightimpactthemovementsofbirdsinthe
Projectareaisthroughthedisorientationofnocturnallymigratingbirds. Suchbirdsmayaltertheir
orientation uponsightingthelightandbecomedrawntowardthebillboard, potentiallystriking
objectssuchasbuildings, adjacentpowerlines, oreventhebillboarditself.
Thevisibility oftheproposedLEDbillboard tobirdsinflight, andthustherisktheyposetoflying
birds, dependsprimarilyonthebeamangleofthebillboardsrelativetotheflightlinesofbirds andon
theluminance (brightness) ofthebillboardsasperceived bythebirds. ThedirectionalnatureofLED
lightingandtheprojectedviewing anglevalues of ± 30° verticallyand ± 60° horizontallysuggest that
theviewingangleofthebillboardswill benarrowenoughtoprecludeattractingmigratingbirdson
clear nights, whentheyflyhighenoughtobeoutsidetheviewingangleofthebillboard. Shaders
locatedaboveeachrowoflightswillpreventlightfromprojectingupwardintothesky. Asaresult,
birdsflyingmorethan30° abovethecenter ofthebillboard’sbeamanglewillnotbeaffectedbylight
fromthebillboard. However, migratingbirdsareforcedtoflylowduringfoggy andrainyconditions,
whichmaybringthemintotheviewingangleofthebillboard.
TheLEDdisplayonthebillboardfacecanbechanged every8secondsfromastaticimagetoastatic
image, resultinginachanginglightsource. Colorsandpatternsofcoloronthebillboardwouldthus
Page 38 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
bechanging, and birdsflyingnearthebillboardwouldnotperceiveitasafixed, unchanginglight, the
typeoflightthatappearstobemostattractivetobirds.
Itispossiblethatsomebirdsthatfindthemselves nearthecenterofthebeamanglemaybeattracted
tothebillboard. However, thisisnotexpectedtoresultinlong-termconsequences, suchasincreased
bird-strikemortalitiesorsubstantial interferencewithbirdmovements becausethebillboardwillbe
focusedonthehighway, notonairspaceabovethehighway. Thus, arelativelylimitedareaatlow
altitudeaboveU.S. 101willbewithinthecenterofthebillboard’sbeamangle.
Becausetheareasurroundingthebillboardisheavilyurbanizedandcontainsnohabitatsofvalueto
estuarinebirdsusingtheSanFrancisco Bayhabitatstotheeast, wedonotexpect largenumbersof
birds (especiallyspeciesofconservationconcern) tobeflyinginanorth-southdirection, andatlow
altitudesthatwouldbewithinthebeam, close enoughtothebillboard fordisorientationtooccurat
all. Therefore, itisnotexpectedthatbirdsmovingthroughoraroundtheProjectareatobeattracted
tothebillboardforsuchalongdurationthatbird-strikemortalityoccursorsubstantial interference
withbirdmovementsoccurs.
Giventheconfigurationofbirdhabitatsinthevicinityofthesite (whichdoesnotlenditselfto
directedbirdflightstowardthebillboard), thechanging imagesthatwillbedisplayedontheLED
billboard, thenarrowviewingangle, andtheuseofshaders topreventlightfromprojectingupward
intothesky, theProject’simpactsonavianflightbehaviorwouldbelessthansignificant.
d) LocalPoliciesandOrdinances. Therearenolocalpoliciesorordinances directlyapplicabletothis
Project. ThelandscapingontheadjacentCaltranssetback ismaintainedbyCaltranswithbillboard
visibilitytakenintoconsiderationandwouldcontinuetooperatethatway. Notreeremovalis
proposed withthisProject. Therefore, theProjectwouldhavenoimpact regardingconflictswith
localpolicies andordinances, includingtreepreservation.
e) HabitatConservationPlan. Thereisno HabitatConservationPlanapplicabletotheProject site.
Therefore, theProjectwouldhavenoimpact inthisregard.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 39
5. CULTURALRESOURCES
Would theproject:
a) Causeasubstantial adversechangein thesignificance ofahistorical resource
asdefined inPublic ResourcesSection 15064.5?
b) Causeasubstantial adverse changeinthesignificanceofanarchaeological
resourcepursuanttoPublicResources Section 15064.5?
c) Directly orindirectly destroy auniquepaleontological resourceorsiteor
uniquegeologicfeature?
d) Disturb anyhumanremains, including thoseinterred outside offormal
cemeteries?
a–d) Historic, ArchaeologicalandPaleontological ResourcesandHumanRemains. TheProjectsiteis
previouslydisturbedandtherearenoknownresourcesatthesite. Arecordssearchperformed bythe
NorthwestInformationCenter (includedasAttachment D) resultedinthefollowing considerations:
Basedonanevaluationoftheenvironmentalsettingandfeaturesassociatedwithknownsites, Native
AmericanresourcesinthispartofSanMateoCountyhavebeenfoundincloseproximitytosources
ofwater (includingperennialandintermittentstreamsandsprings), nearthebaymargin andits
associatedwetlands, andnearecotones andotherproductiveenvironments. TheproposedProjectarea
islocatedwithinthelower reachesoftheColmaCreekbasin. Basedon19thcenturymaps, the
Projectareawasdominated byestuariesthathavesincebeencoveredinartificialfill. Giventhe
correlationoftheseenvironmentalfactors, coupledwiththeregionalarchaeologicalsensitivity, there
isamoderatepotentialofunrecordedNative Americanresources (especiallyburieddepositswithno
surfaceindications) withintheproposedProjectarea. Ifpresent, thesewouldbelocatedbelow any
artificialfillatthesurface, butpotentiallywithinthe35footdepthoftheproposeddisturbance. There
isalowpotentialofidentifyingothertypesofunrecordedculturalresources.
MitigationMeasure
Cultural-1: CulturalMonitoringandMitigationPlan. TheProject applicantshallfundpreparationand
implementationofaculturalmonitoring andmitigationplanbyaqualified archaeologistto
addressthepotentialforpresenceanddisturbanceofNativeAmericanarchaeological
resourcesorremainsduringexcavationofthebillboardpolefooting. Thiswillincludeata
minimummonitoring duringexcavation ofthebillboardpolefootingandmayalsoinclude
butisnotlimitedtoadditionalarchivalresearch, handaugersampling, shoveltestunits,
geoarchaeologicalanalysis, orothercommonmethodsusedtoidentifythepresenceof
archaeologicalresourcestobedeterminedpertherecommendationofthequalified
archaeologist. Thearchaeologistandconstruction contractorsshallfollowtheappropriate
proceduresshouldanyculturalresources orhumanremainsbediscovered duringground
disturbance.
Preparationandimplementationofaculturalmonitoringandmitigationplanwouldassurethat
discoveryofanyculturalresourceswouldbeidentifiedandtreatedappropriatelyandthereforethat
anyimpactinthisregardwouldbelessthansignificant.
Page 40 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
6. GEOLOGYANDSOILS
Would theproject:
a) Exposepeople orstructures topotentialsubstantial adverseeffects, including
theriskofloss, injury, or deathinvolving:
i) Rupture ofa knownearthquake fault, asdelineated on themostrecent
Alquist-Priolo EarthquakeFaultZoning Mapissuedby theState
Geologistfortheareaorbased onother substantialevidence ofaknown
fault? (RefertoDivision ofMines andGeology SpecialPublication42)
ii) Strong seismicground shaking?
iii) Seismic-relatedground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result insubstantial soilerosionortheloss oftopsoil?
c) Belocated on ageologic unitorsoilthatis unstable, orthatwouldbecome
unstableas a resultofthe project, andpotentiallyresultin on- or off-site
landslide, lateralspreading, subsidence, liquefaction orcollapse?
d) Be locatedonexpansivesoil, as definedin Table18-1-Bof theUniform
Building Code (1994), creatingsubstantialrisks tolifeorproperty?
e) Havesoilsincapable ofadequatelysupportingtheuseof septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems wheresewersarenotavailablefor
thedisposalof wastewater?
a, d) SeismicHazards. TheSanFranciscoBayAreaisaseismicallyactive regionandthestructureis
likelytoencounterstrongseismicground shakingduringitslifetime. Additionally, theProject
locationisinthelowlandzoneofSouthSanFrancisco, whichcanbeunderlainbyBayMudand
associatedwithshrink-swell, settlement, corrosivity andliquefaction.12 Thebillboardrequires
buildingpermitsandwouldbeconstructedtothecurrentbuildingcodestandards. Thesestandards
includeconsiderationofgeologicandseismicconditions. Soilconditionsatthebillboardsitewould
beidentifiedandconsidered aspartofthedesignprocess.
13TherearenoactiveearthquakefaultsknowntopassthroughthevicinityoftheProject. Therewould
benoimpactrelatedtoruptureofaknownearthquake fault.
TheProjectsiteisinanareaofrelativelyflattopographyandthepossibilityoflandslidesis
14 Therewouldbenoimpactrelatedtolandslides. considered unlikely.
Therefore, theimpactrelatedtoseismichazards wouldbelessthansignificant.
12 SouthSanFranciscoGeneral PlanCityofSouthSanFrancisco, preparedbyDyettandBhatia, , 1999, pp. 246to250.
13StateofCaliforniaDepartmentofConservation, StateofCalifornia SpecialStudiesZones (Delineatedincompliancewith
Alquist-PrioloSpecialStudiesZonesAct), SanFrancisco South, January1, 1982.
14 SouthSanFranciscoGeneral PlanCityofSouthSanFrancisco, preparedbyDyettandBhatia, , 1999, p.250.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 41
b) SoilErosion. TheProjectwouldnotinvolvesignificantgrading. TheProjectapplicantmustobtain
coverageundertheGeneralConstructionActivityStormWaterPermit (GeneralConstruction Permit)
issuedbytheStateWater ResourcesControlBoard (SWRCB), whichwilladdressanyerosion
potentialfromgrounddisturbance. Withcompliancewithapplicable regulations, theimpactrelatedto
soilerosionwouldbelessthansignificant.
c, d) UnstableorExpansiveSoil. ConstructionoftheProjectmayrequiretemporarygroundwater
pumping asgroundwatermaybeencounteredduringthedrillingofthefoundationhole. Thehole
wouldbedrilledandthefollowing day, thepolestructurewouldbeinstalledandconcretepouredto
fillthehole. Asaresultcontinuous groundwater pumpingwouldnotberequiredorcausesubsidence
tooccur. Therearenootherknownconditions thatcouldcreatesubstantialrisksrelatedtoexpansive
orunstable soils. Theimpactrelatedtounstable andexpansivesoilwouldbelessthansignificant.
e) SepticTanks. TheProjectwouldnotincludetheuseofseptictanksandassociateddisposalfacilities.
Therefore, theProjectwouldhavenoimpactinthisregard.
Page 42 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
7. GREENHOUSE GASEMISSIONS
Would theproject
a) Generate greenhouse gasemissions, either directlyorindirectly, that may
haveasignificantimpact ontheenvironment?
b) Conflict withan applicable plan, policy orregulation adoptedfor thepurpose
ofreducing theemissionsofgreenhouse gases?
a)GreenhouseGasEmissions. BAAQMD hasdeterminedthatgreenhousegas (GHG) emissionsand
globalclimatechangerepresentcumulativeimpacts. BAAQMDdoesnothave anadopted threshold
ofsignificance forconstruction-relatedGHGemissions. Theoperationalthreshold of1,100metric
tonscarbondioxideequivalent (COe) peryearwasusedforbothconstruction-periodandoperational2
periodforaconservativeanalysis.
perBAAQMD’s GHGEmissionsModelincludesaGHGemission factorof804.54lbsofCO2
megawatt-hourofelectricityusage. (OtherGHGswouldhaveanegligible contributiontooverall
GHGlevelsfromenergyusage, sowerenotcalculatedhere.) In2010, ClearChannelbillboards’
averageannualusagefordouble-sidedLEDbillboardsofthesame sizeasthecurrentproposalwas
86,400kwh. Thisresultsinemissionsof31.53metrictonsCOperyearfora14’ by48’ LED2
billboard. Thisiswellbelowthethresholdlevelof1,100metrictons.
BAAQMDdoesnotsuggestathresholdforassessment ofconstruction-periodGHGemissions
impactsorprovideascreeninglevelatwhichtocompare projects. However, withaconstruction
periodofonlyafewdays, construction-periodGHGemissions wouldbeminimalandwouldadda
negligibleamounttothelifetimeoperational GHGemissionsdiscussedabove.
Therefore, theProjectimpactrelatedtoGHGemissionswouldbelessthansignificant.
b) Greenhouse GasReductionPlans. TheProjectisnotlocatedinacommunity withanadopted
qualifiedGHGReduction Strategy, soconsistencywithsuchaplancannotbeanalyzed. GHG
emissionsassociatedwiththedevelopmentoftheproposedProjectwereanalyzed pertheBAAQMD
May2011CEQAAirQualityGuidelines. BAAQMD’sthresholdsandmethodologiestakeinto
accountimplementationofstate-wideregulationsandplans, suchastheAB32ScopingPlanand
adoptedstateregulationssuchasPavleyandthelowcarbonfuelstandard. Therefore, therewouldbe
noimpactinrelationtoconsistencywithGHGreductionplans.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 43
8. HAZARDS ANDHAZARDOUSMATERIALS
Would theproject
a) Createa significanthazard tothe publicorthe environment throughthe
routine transport, use, ordisposal ofhazardous materials?
b) Createasignificant hazard tothepublic ortheenvironment through
reasonablyforeseeableupset andaccident conditionsinvolvingtherelease
ofhazardous materials intothe environment?
c) Emithazardousemissions orhandle hazardous oracutely hazardous
materials, substances, orwastewithinone-quartermileof anexisting or
proposedschool?
d) Be located ona sitewhich isincluded on a listofhazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant toGovernment Code Section65962.5and, asaresult,
wouldit create asignificanthazard tothe public orthe environment?
e) Foraprojectlocated withinanairportlanduseplanor, where suchaplan
hasnot been adopted, withintwomilesofapublic airportorpublic use
airport, would theproject result inasafetyhazardfor people residingor
workingintheproject area?
f) Foraproject withinthevicinityofaprivateairstrip, wouldtheproject result
ina safetyhazard forpeople residingor working in theprojectarea?
g) Impair implementation of orphysicallyinterfere withanadoptedemergency
responseplanoremergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose peopleorstructurestoasignificant riskofloss, injuryordeath
involving wildlandfires, including wherewildlandsareadjacent to
urbanized areasorwhereresidencesareintermixed with wildlands?
a, b, d) HazardousMaterials. Digitalbillboards aredesigned towithstandwindforcesasrequiredbystate
law, andaresubjecttobuildingpermitrequirements thatensurecompliance withapplicablebuilding
andelectrical codes. Soilconditionsareidentifiedandconsideredinthedesignofsuchstructures. No
hazardousmaterialsareemittedduringoperationofthebillboard.
Projectoperationsarenotexpectedtocreateasignificanthazardthroughtheroutinetransport, useor
disposalofhazardousmaterials. Itisassumedthatanymaterialsusedduringconstruction activitiesor
formaintenanceofthebillboardthatwouldbeconsideredhazardous wouldbeutilizedincompliance
withapplicableregulations. Itisalsonotedthatstateandfederallawsrequireproperhandling, use
anddisposalofhazardousmaterials. Thesesamelawsandregulations requiretheprevention and
reduction ofinjurytopeopleandtheenvironmentintheeventofanaccidentalrelease. Consequently,
therearenoreasonablyforeseeableoperational upsetoraccidental conditionsthatwouldinvolvea
significantreleaseofhazardous materialsintotheenvironment.
Duringtheinstallationprocessofthebillboard, holeswouldbedrilledandtheexcavatedsoilwould
betransportedoffsite. TheProjectwillalsoincludetrenchingtoconnecttoelectrical supply. Priorto
construction activities, thesitewillbeassessed forthepresenceofhazardousmaterials, which, if
present, would behandledappropriately, asperthefollowingmitigation:
Page 44 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
MitigationMeasures
Haz-1: PhaseIand/orPhaseIIReports. Priortoissuanceofconstructionpermits, theCity
ofSouthSanFranciscoshallrequire theProjectapplicanttosubmitaPhaseI
environmentalsiteassessment report, andaPhaseIIreportifwarrantedbythePhase
IreportfortheProjectsite. Thereportsshallmakerecommendationsforremedial
actioninaccordancewithStateandFederallaws, ifappropriate, andshouldbesigned
byaRegisteredEnvironmental Assessor, ProfessionalGeologist, orProfessional
Engineer. TheApplicantshallcomplywiththeserecommendations.
Haz-2: E-WasteDisposal. Electronic components ofthebillboardmaycontainmaterials
considered “e-waste” whendisposedofduetopotentiallyhazardous metals, flame
retardants, andotherchemicals. Theoperatorshallberequired tofollowapplicable
regulations regardingproperdisposaland/orrecycling, asappropriate, ascomponents
arereplacedorremovedovertime.
Withimplementation ofMitigation MeasuresHaz-1andHaz-2, theimpactrelatingtothepossible
presence ofhazardousmaterialsatthissitewouldbelessthansignificant.
c) Hazardous MaterialsNearSchools. Noschool islocatedwithinone-quartermileoftheProjectsite.
Nohazardousmaterialswiththepotentialforreleaseduringoperationwouldbehandledonor
emittedfrom thesite. TheProjectwouldrepresentnoimpactrelativetothepotentialexposure of
studentsatnearbyschoolstohazardousmaterialsattheProjectsite.
e, f) Airport Hazards. TheclosestairportistheSanFranciscoAirport locatedapproximately1mile
southeastfromtheProjectsite. ThisiswithinthejurisdictionoftheAirport LandUsePlanforthe
SanFranciscoInternationalAirport, thoughthesiteisnotdirectlywithintheapproachpathway.
FederalAviationRegulations, Part77, limitsstructureheightsto anelevation of161feetabovemean
sealevelinthemostrestrictedareas, increasingataslope of20:1toaheightof361feetabovemean
15sealevel. Theproposedbillboardwouldriseamaximum of70feetaboveasiteapproximately11
feetabovemeansealevel. Thebillboardheightwouldbebelowapplicableheightrestrictions.
Additionally, thebillboardwouldnotbeconsideredahazardtoairnavigationasitwouldnotgenerate
smokeorrisingcolumnsofair, wouldnotattractlargeconcentrations ofbirds, wouldnotgenerate
electrical interferencethatwouldinterferewithaircraftcommunications oraircraftinstrumentation,
16wouldnotreflectsunlight, andwouldnotdirectsteadyorflashinglightstowardaircraft.
Therearenootherairports, eitherpublicorprivate, withinthevicinityoftheProject. Therewouldbe
alessthansignificantimpactrelatedtoairporthazards.
g) Emergency ResponsePlan. TheProjectwouldnotaltertrafficpatternsandwouldnotimpair
implementationofanyadoptedemergency responseplanoremergency evacuationplan. Therefore,
theProjectwouldhavenoimpact inthisregard.
h) WildlandFire. TheProjectsiteislocated inanurbanizedarearemovedfromareastypicallysubjectto
wildlandfire. Therefore, theProjectwouldhavenoimpactrelatedtowildlandfire.
15 SanMateoCountyComprehensiveAirportCity/CountyAssociation ofGovernmentsofSanMateoCounty, December1996,
LandUsePlanMapSFO-4.
16Ibid, p.V.-19.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 45
9 HYDROLOGYANDWATERQUALITY
Would theproject:
a) Resultin asignificant increaseinpollutant discharges toreceiving waters
marine, fresh, and/orwetlands) duringorfollowing construction
consideringwaterqualityparameters suchastemperature, dissolved
oxygen, turbidity, andtypicalstormwater pollutants, e.g., heavymetals,
pathogens, petroleum derivatives, syntheticorganics, sediment, nutrients,
oxygen-demanding substances, andtrash?
b) Substantially deplete groundwatersuppliesorinterfere substantially with
groundwaterrecharge suchthattherewouldbe anetdeficit inaquifer
volume ora loweringofthelocal groundwater tablelevel (e.g., the produc-
tionrateof pre-existing nearbywellswould droptoalevelwhichwould not
supportexistinglandusesorplannedusesfor whichpermitshavebeen
granted)?
c) Substantiallyaltertheexistingdrainagepattern ofthesiteorarea, including
through thealteration ofthecourse ofastreamorriver, inamanner which
wouldresultinsubstantial erosion orsiltation on- oroff-site?
d) Substantially increase therateoramountofsurface runoff (e.g., duetodue
toincreased impervious surfaces) ina mannerwhichwould result in
floodingon- oroff-site (i.e. withinawatershed)?
e) Create orcontributerunoffwaterwhich wouldexceedthe capacityof
existingorplanned stormwater drainage systemsduetochanges in runoff
flowrates or volumes?
f) Resultinan increaseinanypollutantfor which a waterbodyislisted as
impairedunderSection303(d) oftheCleanWaterAct?
g) Placehousingwithina100-yearflood hazardarea as mappedonafederal
FloodHazard Boundaryor FloodInsurance RateMaporother flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Placewithina100-yearfloodhazardareastructures, whichwouldimpedeor
redirect floodflows?
i) Exposepeople orstructures to asignificantriskofloss, injuryor death
involving flooding, includingflooding asaresult ofthefailure of aleveeor
dam?
j) Inundationbyseiche, tsunami, ormudflow?
a, f) WaterQualityandPollutants. Operation oftheProjectdoesnotinvolvetheuseofwateror
generation ofwastewater. Construction activities, suchasdrillingaholeforthefoundationand
pouringconcrete, havethepotentialtoimpactwaterquality. Theseactivitieshavethepotentialto
increasesedimentloadsinrunoffthatwouldenterthecombinedsewersystem. Fuel, oil, grease,
solvents, andotherchemicalsusedinconstructionactivitieshavethepotentialtocreatetoxicity
problemsifallowedtoenterawaterway. Constructionactivitiesarealsoasourceofvariousother
materialsincluding trash, soap, andsanitarywastes.
Page 46 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
ConstructionactivitiesattheProjectsitewouldbelimitedtoafewdaysforinstallation. Potential
impactswouldbeminimal, andcompliancewithCityandStateregulationswouldreduceany
potentialimpactstosurfacewateranddrainagetoalessthansignificant level.
b) TheproposedProject isnotexpectedtoinvolvesubstantialexcavationthatwouldimpact
groundwater. TheProjectinvolvesdrillingholesapproximately5feetindiameterwithadepthof
approximately 32feet, whichcouldresultingroundwaterbeingencountered. Intheeventthat
groundwaterisencounteredanddewateringactivitiesarerequired, itwouldbeshort-termaseachsite
installationisexpectedtotakeonlyafewdaystocompleteandtheholewouldbefilledwithconcrete
resultinginminimaleffectstogroundwater. Anydewateringactivitiesassociatedwiththeproposed
ProjectmustcomplywiththeGeneralConstructionPermitandrequirementsestablished bytheSan
FranciscoBayRegionalWaterQualityControlBoardtoensure thatsuchactivitieswouldnotresultin
substantialchangesingroundwaterfloworquality.
Followingconstruction, theProjectwouldnotsubstantially changeimpervioussurfaceareaand
wouldnothaveasubstantial impactongroundwaterrecharge.
Therefore, theproposedProjectwouldhave alessthansignificantimpactongroundwater.
c-e, g-i) Runoff, DrainageandFlooding. TheProjectwouldnotrequireserviceforwater. Existing
drainageateachsitewouldbemaintained, andnoincreases instormwaterwouldresult. TheProject
17isnotlocatedina100yearfloodzoneanddoesnotconsistofhousingorpresentariskforflooding
orredirectionoffloodflows. Therefore, therewould benoimpactsrelatedtorunoff, drainageor
flooding.
j) Inundation. TheproposedProjectislocatedover4,000feetfromtheSanFranciscoBay, andover6
milesfromthePacificOcean. Projectsiteelevationsare between10and11feetabovemeansea
level. Waverunupfromatsunami isestimatedat6feetabovemeansealevelfora500-year
tsunami.18 Climatechangeinducedsealevelriseis estimated atupto17inchesby2050and69
19inchesby2100. Therefore, thesiteisnotindangerofinundationfromatsunamiorclimatechange
inducedsealevelrise. Further, thesiteisnotlocated nearaninlandbodyofwater, norisitlocated
adjacenttoasoilslopesusceptible torapidmasswastingormudflows. Therefore, therewouldbea
lessthansignificantimpactduetoinundation byseiche, tsunami, mudfloworsealevelrise.
17 SouthSanFranciscoGeneral PlanCityofSouthSanFranciscopreparedbyDyett & Bhatia, October199, , Figure8-3.
18 SouthSanFranciscoGeneralPlan: HealthandSafetyElementCityofSouthSanFrancisco, preparedbyDyettandBhatia, ,
1999, p. 250.
19 SanFranciscoBayPlanBayConservationandDevelopmentCommission, adoptedOct6, 2011, .
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 47
10. LANDUSEANDPLANNING
Would theproject:
a) Physicallydivideanestablishedcommunity?
b) Conflictwithanyapplicable landuseplan, policy, or regulationofan
agencywithjurisdictionovertheproject (including, butnotlimitedtothe
general plan, specific plan, localcoastalprogram, orzoning ordinance)
adoptedforthepurposeofavoiding ormitigating anenvironmental effect?
c) Conflictwithanyapplicable habitatconservation plan ornaturalcommunity
conservationplan?
a) PhysicalDivisionofaCommunity. TheProjectsiteisattheboundary ofcurrentlydeveloped parcels
andhighways. Thebillboardwouldnotinvolveanyphysicalchangesthatwouldhavethepotentialto
dividetheestablishedcommunity. Thus, theProjectwould havenoimpactconcerningcommunity
division.
b) ConflictwithLandUsePlan. Digitalbillboardsarenotcurrentlyallowed underSouthSanFrancisco
ZoningCode. AmendmentoftheZoningCodeasproposedwiththisProjectcouldallowalimited
numberofdigitalbillboards (uptothreetotal) ifapprovedinconjunction withRelocation
Agreements. TheProjectwillcomplywithOutdoorAdvertisingAssociationofAmericaguidelinesto
minimize light (seetheAestheticssectionforadditionaldetail) andapplicablehighwaysafety
regulations (seetheTransportationsectionforadditionaldetail) tominimizehazards. Therefore,
assumingapprovaloftheZoningCodeamendments, theProjectwouldhavealessthansignificant
impactwith regardtolanduseplanconflicts.
c) ConflictwithConservationPlan. TheProjectsiteisnotsubjecttoaconservationplan. Itis
surrounded byurbandevelopmentandhasbeendesignatedforsuchlanduseforaconsiderableperiod
oftime. TheProjectwould, therefore, havenoimpactinrelationtothisitem.
Page 48 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
11. MINERALRESOURCES
Would theproject:
a) Resultin theloss ofavailabilityofaknownmineral resource thatwould
beofvalue to the region and theresidents ofthe state?
b) Resultinthelossofavailabilityofalocally-important mineralresource
recovery sitedelineated ona localgeneral plan, specific plan orotherland
use plan?
a, b) MineralResources. Thesitecontainsnoknown mineralresources andhasnotbeendelineatedasa
20locallyimportantmineralrecoverysiteonanylanduseplan. TheProjectwouldhavenoimpact with
regardtomineralresources.
20U.S. GeologicalSurvey, 2005, MineralResourcesDataSystem: U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. Availablethrough:
http://tin.er.usgs.gov/mrds/
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 49
12. NOISE
Wouldtheproject result in:
a) Exposureofpersonstoorgeneration ofnoise levelsin excess ofstandards
established inthelocalgeneral planor noiseordinance, orapplicable
standards ofotheragencies?
b) Exposure of persons toorgeneration of excessive groundborne vibration
orgroundbornenoiselevels?
c) Asubstantial permanentincrease inambientnoiselevels intheproject
vicinity above levels existing withoutthe project?
d) Asubstantial temporary orperiodicincreaseinambient noise levelsinthe
project vicinity abovelevels existing withouttheproject?
e) Foraproject locatedwithinanairport landuseplanor, wheresucha plan
hasnotbeenadopted, within twomiles of apublicairport orpublicuse
airport, exposureofpeople residing orworking intheprojectareato
excessivenoiselevels?
f) Foraproject in thevicinity of aprivateairstrip, exposureof people
residingor workingintheprojectarea toexcessive noiselevels?
a-d) Excessive NoiseorVibration. Noiseimpactsresultingfromconstruction dependonthenoise
generatedbyvariouspiecesofconstruction equipment, thetiminganddurationofnoisegenerating
activities, andthedistancebetweenconstruction noisesourcesandnoisesensitivereceptors.
Constructionnoiseimpactsprimarilyoccurwhen constructionactivitiesoccurduringnoise-sensitive
timesoftheday (earlymorning, evening, ornighttime hours), theconstructionoccursinareas
immediatelyadjoiningnoisesensitivelanduses, orwhenconstructiondurationslastoverextended
periodsoftime (typicallygreaterthanoneyear).
Significant noiseimpactsdonotnormallyoccurwhenstandardconstructionnoisecontrolmeasures
areenforcedattheProjectsiteandwhenthedurationof thenoisegeneratingconstruction period ata
particularreceiverorgroupofreceivers islimitedtooneconstruction seasonorless. Inthiscase, the
constructionperiodwouldspanonlyafewdays. Reasonableregulationofthehoursofconstruction,
aswellasregulationofthearrivalandoperationofheavyequipmentandthedeliveryofconstruction
material, arenecessarytoprotectthehealthandsafetyofpersons, promotethegeneralwelfareofthe
community, andmaintainthequalityoflife.
TheSouthSanFrancisco NoiseOrdinance (Chapter8.32oftheMunicipal Code, Section8.32.050)
restrictsconstruction activitiestothehoursof8:00a.m. to8:00p.m. onweekdays, 9:00a.m. to8:00
p.m. onSaturdays, and10:00a.m. to6:00p.m. onSundaysandholidays. Thisordinancealsolimits
noisegenerationofanyindividualpieceofequipmentto90dBAat25feetoratthepropertyline.
ConstructionactivitieswillcomplywiththeNoiseOrdinance.
Operationofadigitalbillboarddoesnotproducesubstantiallevelsofvibrationornoise.
Impactsfromnoiseandvibrationgeneratedbytheconstructionandoperationofthebillboardareless
thansignificant.
e-f) AirportNoise. Abillboardisnotanoisesensitiveuse. Therefore, theProjectwouldresultinno
impactunder thiscriterion.
Page 50 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
13. POPULATION ANDHOUSING
Would theproject:
a) Inducesubstantial population growth inan area, either directly (for
example, by proposingnewhomes andbusinesses) or indirectly (forexample,
throughextension of roads orotherinfrastructure)?
b) Displacesubstantial numbersofexisting housing, necessitatingthe
construction ofreplacementhousingelsewhere?
c) Displace substantialnumbers ofpeople, necessitatingtheconstruction of
replacementhousingelsewhere?
a-c) SubstantialPopulationGrowth. TheproposedProjectwouldnotinducepopulationgrowthandwould
displaceneitherexistinghousingnorpeople. Therefore, therewouldbenoimpact inthisregard.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 51
14. PUBLIC SERVICES
Wouldtheproject result insubstantialadversephysicalimpacts associatedwith
theprovisionofnew orphysicallyaltered governmental facilities, needfornew
orphysically alteredgovernmental facilities, theconstruction ofwhichcould
causesignificant environmental impacts, inordertomaintainacceptable service
ratios, response timesorotherperformance objectives forany ofthefollowing
public services?
a)Fireprotection.
b)Policeprotection.
c)Schools.
d)Parks.
e)Otherpublicfacilities.
a-e) PublicServices. TheproposedProjectwouldnotincreasethedemandforpublicservices. Therefore,
therewouldbenoimpact inthisregard.
Page 52 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
15. RECREATION
Would theproject:
a) Increasethe useofexisting neighborhood andregional parks orother
recreationalfacilitiessuchthatsubstantial physical deterioration ofthe
facility wouldoccurorbeaccelerated.
b) Includerecreational facilitiesorrequire theconstruction or expansionof
recreational facilities whichmighthave anadverse physicaleffect onthe
environment.
a-b) Recreation. TheproposedProjectwouldnotconstructorincreasetheuseofrecreationalfacilities.
Therefore, therewouldbenoimpactinthisregard.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 53
16. TRANSPORTATION
Would theproject:
a) Conflict withanapplicable plan, ordinance orpolicyestablishingmeasures
ofeffectiveness for theperformanceofthecirculation system, taking into
account allmodes oftransportation including masstransit andnon-
motorizedtravelandrelevantcomponents ofthecirculationsystem,
includingbut notlimited tointersections, streets, highwaysandfreeways,
pedestrianand bicycle paths, andmasstransit?
b)Conflictwithanapplicablecongestionmanagement program, including, but
notlimitedto levelof servicestandards and travel demand measures, or
otherstandardsestablished bythecounty congestion managementagency
fordesignated roadsorhighways?
c) Result inachangeinairtraffic patterns, including eitheranincrease in
trafficlevelsora changeinlocationthatresultsinsubstantialsafetyrisks?
d) Substantially increasehazards dueto adesign feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) orincompatibleuses (e.g., farmequipment)?
e) Result ininadequate emergencyaccess?
f) Conflict with adoptedpolicies, plans, or programsregarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrianfacilities, orotherwise decrease theperformanceor
safetyofsuch facilities?
a-c, f) VehicleandAirTrafficandAlternativeTransportation. Theoperationofdigitalbillboardswould
notresultinanyincreaseinvehicletripsorchangesinairtrafficpatternsoralternativetransportation.
Trafficgeneratedforconstructionwouldbeminimalinbothlevelandduration. Therewouldbeno
impact inthisregard.
d) Hazards. TheProjectproposestoconstructandoperateonedouble-sideddigitalbillboardandamend
theZoningCodetoalsoallowuptotwoadditionaldigitalbillboards alongU.S. 101withintheCity
limits, ifapprovedinconjunction withRelocationAgreements. Thebillboardswouldbevisiblefrom
theroadway.
DigitalbillboardsemployLEDtechnologyandallowforperiodicchangesindisplay. Thecapability
ofdigitalbillboards topresentchangingimages hasraisedconcernsregardingtheeffectofsuch
signageontrafficsafety. Theprimaryconcernhasbeeneffectsondriverattention, butconcernshave
alsobeenraised regardingthepotentialforsuchsignagetoproducelightofsuchintensityordirection
thatitcouldinterferewithdrivervision.
FHWAhasaddressedsignageissuesin general, anddigitalsignsinparticular. Aspartofits
agreementwithvariousstatespursuanttotheHighwayBeautificationAct, forexample, FHWAhas
confirmedthatnosignisallowedthatimitatesorresemblesanyofficialtrafficsign, andthatsigns
maynotbeinstalledinsuchamanner astoobstruct, orotherwisephysicallyinterferewithanofficial
trafficsign, signal, ordevice, ortoobstructorphysicallyinterferewiththevisionofdriversin
approaching, mergingorintersectingtraffic. TheseprovisionsmaybeenforcedbytheFHWA, butthe
agreementwiththeState ofCalifornia alsorequiresCaltranstoenforcetheseprovisions.
Page 54 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
TheFHWAagreement withCaliforniaincludesspecificprovisionsregarding thebrightness of
signage:
Signsshallnotbeplacedwithilluminationthatinterfereswiththeeffectiveness of, orobscuresany
officialtrafficsign, deviceorsignal; shallnotincludeorbeilluminatedbyflashing, intermittentor
movinglights (exceptthatpartnecessarytogivepublicserviceinformationsuchastime, date,
temperature, weatherorsimilarinformation); shallnotcausebeamsorraysoflighttobedirectedat
thetraveledwayifsuchlightisofsuchintensityorbrillianceastocauseglareorimpairthevisionof
anydriver, ortointerferewithanydriver’soperationofamotorvehicle. (AgreementdatedFebruary
15, 1968)
TheFHWAhasrespondedtothedevelopment ofsignsthatpresentchangingmessages, either
mechanicallyordigitally, withaninterpretationofitsagreements withthestatespursuanttothe
HighwayBeautificationAct. TheFHWAdiscussed “changeablemessage signs” inaMemorandum
datedJuly17, 1996, concludingthatastatecouldreasonablyinterprettheprovisions ofitsagreement
withtheFHWA “…toallowchangeablemessagesigns… Thefrequencyofmessagechangeand
limitationinspacingforthesesignsshouldbedeterminedbytheState.”
OnSeptember25, 2007theFHWAagainissuedaMemorandumonthesubjectofoff-premises
changeableelectronicvariablemessagesigns, orCEVMS. TheMemorandum statedthatproposed
laws, regulations andproceduresthatallowedCEVMSsubjecttoacceptablecriteriawouldnotviolate
theprohibitionon “intermittent” or “flashing” or “moving” signsasusedinthestateagreements. The
Memorandumidentified “rangesofacceptability” relatingtosuchsignage, asfollows:
Durationofmessage: Durationofdisplayisgenerallybetween4and10seconds; 8secondsis
recommended;
Transitiontime: Transitionbetweenmessagesis generallybetween1and4seconds; 1to2
secondsis recommended;
Brightness: Thesignbrightnessshouldbeadjustedtorespondtochangesinlightlevels;
Spacing: Spacingbetweenthesigns shouldbenotlessthantheminimum specifiedforother
billboards, orgreaterifdeemedrequiredforsafety;
Locations: Locationcriteriaarethesameasforothersignage, unlessitisdeterminedthatspecific
locations areinappropriate.
TheProject asproposedwillcomplywiththesecriteria.
TheMemorandumalsoreferredtootherstandardsthathavebeenfoundhelpfultoensuredriver
safety. Theseincludeadefaultdesignedtofreezethedisplayinonestillpositionifamalfunction
occurs; aprocessformodifying displaysandlightinglevelswheredirectedbyCaltranstoassure
safetyofthemotoringpublic; andrequirements thatadisplaycontainstaticmessageswithout
movementsuchasanimation, flashing, scrolling, intermittentorfull-motion video. Manufacturersand
operatorsofdigitalbillboardscurrentlyuseafull-blackscreenintheeventofamalfunction.
InadditiontotheprovisionsoftheHighway BeautificationAct (23U.S.C. §131) andtheFHWA
memorandadiscussedabove, thestate ofCaliforniahasadoptedtheOutdoorAdvertisingAct
BusinessandProfessionsCode §§5200etseq.) andregulationsimplementing itsprovisions
California CodeofRegulations, Title4, Division6, §§2240etseq.). Theseincludeprovisions that
dealspecifically with “messagecenters,” whicharedefinedas “…anadvertisingdisplaywherethe
messageischanged morethanonceeverytwominutes, butnomorethanonceeveryfourseconds.”
5216.4)
ConsistentwiththememorandaexecutedpursuanttotheHighwayBeautification Act, theOutdoor
AdvertisingActprovidesthatmessagecenterdisplaysthatcomply withitsrequirements arenot
considered flashing, intermittentormovinglight. (§5405(d)(1)) Therequirements provide thatsuch
signsmustnotdisplaymessagesthatchangemorethanonceeveryfourseconds, andthatnomessage
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 55
centermaybeplacedwithin 1,000feetofanothermessage centerdisplayonthesamesideofthe
highway.
TheCalifornia VehicleCoderegulatesthebrightnessofbillboardlighting. VehicleCode §21466.5,
whichidentifiestheapplicablestandard, maybeenforcedbyCaltrans, theCaliforniaHighwayPatrol,
orlocalauthorities. VehicleCode §21467providesthateachprohibitedsign, signal, deviceorlightis
apublicnuisanceandmayberemoved withoutnoticebyCaltrans, theCaliforniaHighwayPatrolor
localauthorities.
Caltransrequiresthatanypersonengaged intheoutdooradvertisingbusinessmustobtain alicense
fromCaltransandpaytherequiredfee. (§5300) Nopersonmayplaceanyadvertisingdisplayinareas
subjecttoCaltransauthoritywithouthavingawrittenpermitfromCaltrans. (§5350)
Theseprovisionsoflawandregulationeffectivelyregulatesignlocationandbrightness toensure that
digitalbillboards willnotbelocated insuchamannerastocreatehazardsduetolightingconditions
themselves. Digitalbillboardsareequippedwithsensorsthatmodifythebrightness ofthesignin
responsetoambientlightingconditions, thusensuring thatthebrightness ofthedisplayinevening,
nighttime ordawnconditionsdoesnotpresentatraffic hazard.
Asdigitalbillboard technologyhasdeveloped, theissuehasbeenraisedastowhetherdigital
billboardsthemselves, regardlessofcompliancewithsuchoperatingrestrictions, presentadistraction
todriversandtherebycreateconditions thatcouldleadtoaccidents. FHWAhasmonitoredtheissue
closely, andreleaseditsreportupdatingtheagency’sview oftheissuesandresearch. Thereport is
entitled: “TheEffectsofCommercialElectronicVariableMessageSigns (CEVMS) onDriver
21AttentionandDistraction: AnUpdate.”
TheFHWAreportaddressedthebasicresearch questionofwhetheroperationofaCEVMSalongthe
roadwayis associatedwithareductionofdriving safetyforthepublic. Thereportidentifiedthree
fundamental methodsforanswering thisquestion: (1) whetherthereisanincreaseincrashratesinthe
vicinityofCEVMS, (2) whetherthereisanincreaseinnear-crashes, suddenbraking, sharpswerving
andothersuch behaviorsinthevicinityofCEVMS, and (3) whetherthereareexcessiveeyeglances
awayfromtheroadwayinthevicinityofCEVMS.
Thereportdiscussesexisting literatureandreportsofstudies, keyfactorsandmeasuresrelatingto
CEVMS andeffectsontraffic, andrecommendsastudyapproach. Anextensivebibliography is
includedinthereport. Thereportdoes notpurport toprovideguidancetostatesonthecontrolof
CEVMS. Thereportconfirmedthattherehavebeennodefinitiveconclusionsaboutthepresenceor
strengthofadverse safetyimpactsfromCEVMS. Similarly, astudyperformed undertheNational
CooperativeHighway ResearchProgram (NCHRP), Project20-7 (256) entitled “SafetyImpactsofthe
EmergingDigitalDisplayTechnologyforOutdoorAdvertisingSigns” (NCHRPReport) reviewed
existingliterature. Bothreportsagreedthatdigitalbillboardsshouldberegulatedasameansof
protectingthepublicinterest.
Variousrestrictionshavebeenidentifiedinreportsthatrelatetothelocation andoperationofdigital
billboards thatseektoreducesafetyconcerns. Theserelatetobrightness, messagedurationand
messagechangeinterval, billboardlocationwithregardtoofficialtrafficcontroldevices, roadway
geometry, vehiclemaneuverrequirements atinterchanges (i.e., lanedrops, mergesanddiverges), and
withregardtothespecificconstraintsthatshouldbeplacedontheplacementandoperationofsuch
signs. Regulation ofoperations could include, forexample, thetimeanysinglemessage maybe
displayed, thetimeofmessagetransition, brightnessofthesignandcontrolsthatadjustbrightness
21U.S. DepartmentofTransportationFederalHighwayAdministration, TheEffectsofCommercialElectronicVariable
MessageSigns (CEVMS) onDriverAttention andDistraction: AnUpdate, February2009, Publication no. FHWA-HRT-09-018.
Availableathttp://www.fhwa.dot.gov/realestate/cevms.htm.
Page 56 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
basedontheambientlightenvironment, anddesignandplacementthatensuresthatthesigndoesnot
confusedrivers, orcreatedangerous glare.
Restrictionsondigitalbillboardscontainedwithin theOutdoorAdvertisingActandenforcedby
Caltransregulatemanyoftheconditions thathavebeenidentifiedasrelevanttotrafficsafety.
Caltrans regulatesthelocationandsizeofeachproposeddigitalbillboardthrough itsapplication
processaswellasthedistancebetweensuchsigns. Californiastatutoryprovisionsregulate brightness
ofdisplays. ThroughstatelawandtheVehicleCode, suchsignagewouldbeprohibitedfrom
displayingflashinglightsorimages.
Itshouldbenotedthattherearevariousstudiessupportingconflictingconclusionsregardingthe
safetyofdigitalbillboardsandincidenceofdriverdistraction. Thisanalysishasbeenperformed
utilizingstateandfederalpublishedstudiesandadoptedregulationsasthebestinformation available
atthistime.
Significant effectscouldoccuriftheproposeddigitalbillboarddidnotcomplywithrestrictions
regardinglocation, intensityoflight, lighttrespass, orotherrestrictions, especiallythoseenforcedby
theCaliforniaDepartment ofTransportation (Caltrans) pursuant toitsauthorityundertheagreements
betweentheU.S. Department ofTransportation undertheHighwayBeautificationAct, andthe
OutdoorAdvertising Act. MitigationMeasureTraf-1wouldensure thattheCityreceivesaccurate
informationfromtheoperatorregarding complianceonanongoingbasis.
MitigationMeasure
Traf-1: AnnualReport. Theoperatorthedigitalbillboardshallsubmitto theCity, within
thirtydaysfollowingJune30ofeachyear, awrittenreportregardingoperationof
eachdigitalbillboard duringtheprecedingperiodofJuly1toJune30. Theoperator
maysubmitacombinedreport forallsuchdigitalbillboardsoperatedbysuch
operatorwithintheCitylimits. Thereportshall, whenappropriate, identifyincidents
orfactsthatrelatetospecificdigitalbillboards. Thereportshallbesubmittedtothe
DirectoroftheEconomicandCommunityDevelopment Departmentandshall
includeinformationrelatingtothefollowing:
a. Statusoftheoperator’slicenseasrequiredbyCaliforniaBusinessand
ProfessionsCode §§5300etseq.;
b. Statusoftherequiredpermitforindividual digitalbillboards, asrequiredby
CaliforniaBusiness andProfessions Code §§5350etseq.;
c. Compliance withtheCaliforniaOutdoorAdvertisingAct, CaliforniaBusiness
andProfessionsCode §§5200andallregulations adoptedpursuant tosuchAct;
d. Compliance withCaliforniaVehicleCode §§21466.5and21467;
e. Compliance withprovisions ofwrittenagreements betweentheU.S. Department
ofTransportationandtheCalifornia Department ofTransportationpursuantto
thefederalHighwayBeautification Act (23U.S.C. §131);
f. CompliancewithmitigationmeasuresidentifiedintheMitigatedNegative
Declaration adoptedaspartofProjectapproval;
g. Eachwrittenororalcomplaintreceived bytheoperator, orconveyedtothe
operatorbyanygovernment agencyoranyotherperson, regardingoperationof
eachdigitalbillboardincludedinthereport;
h. Eachmalfunctionorfailureofeachdigitalbillboardincludedinthereport,
whichshallincludeonlythosemalfunctions orfailuresthatarevisible tothe
nakedeye, includingreason forthemalfunction, durationandconfirmationof
repair; and
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 57
i. Operating statusofeachdigitalbillboardincludedinthereport, including
estimateddateofrepairandreturntonormaloperationofanydigitalbillboard
identifiedinthereportasnotoperating innormalmode.
Anotherareaofconcernisthepotential developmentofinteractivebillboardsthatwouldbecapable
ofcommunicating withvehiclesorpassengers. Theuseanddevelopmentofthistechnology would
haveconsequences, andshouldbeidentifiedbytheoperatorpriortoanyimplementation. Mitigation
Measure Traf-2, setforthbelow, wouldrequirenoticetotheCityintheeventsuchfeaturesare
proposed. Themitigationmeasurealsoconfirmsprohibitionsonvisualeffects.
MitigationMeasure
Traf-2: OperationalSafety. Theoperationofthedigitalbillboardshallcomplywiththe
followingatalltimes:
a. Nospecialvisualeffectsthatincludemovingorflashinglightsshallaccompany
anymessageorthetransitionbetweentwosuccessivemessages
b. Theoperator shallnot installorimplementanytechnology thatwouldallow
interactionwithdrivers, vehiclesoranydevicelocatedinvehicles, including, but
notlimitedtoaradiofrequencyidentification device, geographic positions
system, orotherdevicewithoutpriorapprovaloftheCityofSouthSan
Francisco, takingintoconsiderationtechnicalstudiesandCalTrans orUSDOT
policiesandguidanceavailableatthetimeoftherequest.
Implementation ofMitigationMeasuresTraf-1andTraf-2wouldensureongoingcompliance with
trafficsafetyregulationsandcontroltheuseofvisualeffectsanddriverinteractionthatcoulddistract
drivers. Withimplementation ofthesemitigationmeasures, impactsontransportation andtraffic
safetywouldbelessthansignificant.
e) InadequateEmergencyAccess. Theproposeddigitalbillboard wouldbelocatedoutsidetravelled
portionsoftheroadwayandwouldpresentnoobstaclestoemergencyaccess.
Thebillboardwouldhavethecapacitytodisplayofficialmessagesregardingemergencies, andcould
performaspartoftheemergency responsesystem, thusresultinginbeneficial impacts. Therefore, the
Projectwouldhavenoimpactwithregardtoinadequateemergencyaccess.
Page 58 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
17. UTILITIESANDSERVICESYSTEMS
Would theproject
a) Exceedwastewater treatmentrequirementsof the applicableRegional
WaterQualityControl Board?
b) Requireorresultintheconstruction ofnewwaterorwastewater treatment
facilitiesorexpansion ofexisting facilities, theconstruction ofwhich could
cause significant environmentaleffects?
c) Requireor resultinthe constructionofnewstormwaterdrainagefacilities
orexpansionof existingfacilities, theconstruction of which couldcause
significant environmental effects?
d) Havesufficient watersuppliesavailableto serve theprojectfromexisting
entitlements andresources, or arenewor expandedentitlements needed?
e) Resultinadeterminationbythe wastewater treatment providerwhich
serves ormayservetheprojectthatithasadequatecapacitytoservethe
project’sprojecteddemand inaddition tothe provider’sexistingcommit-
ments?
f) Be servedbyalandfill withsufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
theproject’s solidwastedisposal needs?
g) Complywithfederal, state, andlocalstatutesand regulations relatedto
solidwaste?
a-g) Utilities. Theproposedbillboardwouldrequireelectricalservice. Providingsuchservicethrough
extension ofexistingelectricalserviceinthevicinitywould notresultinanysignificanteffects.
TheProjectwouldnotgenerateanywastewaterorrequireasupplyofpotablewater. Construction and
operationofthedigitalbillboardwouldnotrequireotherutilityservices, andwouldnotaffect
drainage.
Installationoftheproposedbillboardwouldrequirecoordinationwithvariousotherutilitycompanies
viatheUnderground ServiceAlert (USA) topreventconflictswithsubterraneanutilities. There
wouldbenoimpact onutility services.
Energy: In2010, ClearChannelbillboards’ averageannualusagefordouble-sideddigitalbillboardsof
thesamesizeascurrentlyproposed was86,400kilowatt-hours (kwh). Foracomparison, thisequates
totheannualelectricityusageofapproximately 14.25singlefamilyhomes (calculatedusing
BAAQMD’s GHGEmissionsModelrateof6,047kwhannualelectricityusage). Thelatest
generation ofLEDequipmentisanticipatedtobeapproximately15% moreenergyefficient, butthis
technologywasonlybeginning tobeinstalledinNovember of2011, soannualusagedatawasnot
availableforthenewergenerationforthisanalysis.
Thedigitalbillboardinstalledandoperated aspartoftheProjectwoulduseelectricalenergy, and
wouldbeconstructed pursuanttocurrentelectricalcodes, includingTitle24. Thesestandards would
ensurethatelectricalenergywouldbeusedefficiently. TheGHGemissionsassociatedwiththis
energydemandareaddresedinItem7, Greehouse GasEmissions. Theunderlyingquestion asto
whetherdigitalbillboardsareaneffective ordesirableuseofelectricalenergyisapolicyquestion that
maybeconsideredintheProjectreviewprocess, butanyenvironmentaleffectsarelessthan
significant.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 59
18. MANDATORYFINDINGS OFSIGNIFICANCE
a) Doestheprojecthavethepotential todegradethequalityoftheenviron-
ment, substantiallyreduce thehabitat ofa fishor wildlifespecies, causea
fishorwildlife populationto dropbelow self-sustaining levels, threatento
eliminateaplant oranimalcommunity, reducethenumberor restrictthe
range ofarareorendangered plantoranimaloreliminate important
examplesofthemajorperiods ofCaliforniahistory orprehistory?
b) Doestheprojecthaveimpacts thatareindividually limited, but
cumulativelyconsiderable? (“Cumulatively considerable” meansthatthe
incremental effects ofaproject areconsiderable whenviewed in
connection withthe effectsofpastprojects, theeffects ofother current
projects, andtheeffectsofprobable futureprojects.)
c) Doestheproject haveenvironmental effects whichwillcause substantial
adverseeffects onhuman beings, either directlyorindirectly?
a)Environmental Quality. Withtheimplementationofmitigationmeasures, theProjectwouldnot
degradethequalityoftheenvironment, substantiallyreducethehabitatofafishorwildlifespecies,
causeafishorwildlifepopulationtodropbelowself-sustaininglevels, orthreatentoeliminateaplant
oranimal community. TheProjectwouldnotimpactrareorendangered wildlifespecies, oreliminate
importantexamplesofthemajorperiodsofCaliforniahistoryorprehistory.
b)CumulativeImpactsandAdverseEffectsonHumanBeings. TheProjectincludesrevisionofthe
ZoningCodetoallowuptothreedigitalbillboardsalongU.S. 101inSouthSanFranciscoif
approvedinconjunctionwithRelocation Agreements. Theanalysisincludedinthisdocumenttakes
intoaccountthepotentialfortwodigitalbillboardsinadditiontotheonecurrentlyproposed. No
additionaldigitalbillboardsbeyond thesethreewouldbeallowedundertheproposedZoningCode
amendment.
Caltranslimitsbillboardstooneevery500 feetalongthelengthofthehighway, whichleavesthe
possibilitythatadditionalconventional (asopposedtodigital) billboardscouldbeaddedalongU.S.
101inSouthSanFranciscobeyondthethreedigitalbillboards. Thishasthepotentialtoresultin
additionalcumulativeaestheticsimpacts. Theanalysisinthisreportalreadyconsidersthattwo
additional billboardscouldbelocated ascloseas500feettoeitherdirectionoftheproposed
billboard, whichrepresents aworstcasescenariothatcoverseitherdigitalorconventionalbillboards.
Anyadditionalbillboards, whetherdigitalorconventional, wouldberequiredtoundergodesign
reviewandCityapprovalprocesses, whichgenerally requirerelocation ofoneormore other
billboardsforanetreductioninthetotalnumberofbillboards. Whilethespecificlocationoffuture
billboardproposalscannotbeknownatthispoint, itcanbeconcludedthatspecificsofimpactsto
viewswouldbeconsideredforeachproposedlocationandthatRelocationAgreements wouldkeep
thesameorreducethetotalnumberof billboardsinthearea. Therefore, cumulativeimpactsin
relationtoaestheticswouldbeconsidered lessthansignificant.
TheProjectotherwisedoesnothaveindividuallylimitedbutcumulativelyconsiderableadverse
impactsandwouldnotinvolvesubstantialadverseeffects onhumanbeings, eitherdirectly or
indirectly, includingeffectsforwhichproject-levelmitigationwereidentified toreduceimpactsto
lessthansignificant levels. Theseincludeimpactsrelatedtothediscoveryofunknowncultural
Page 60 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
resources, thepotentialpresenceofcontaminatedsoilontheconstruction site, andtraffichazards
relatedtodriverdistraction. Thesepotentialeffectswouldbelessthansignificantwith
implementation ofmitigation measuresidentifiedinthisdocument andwouldnotcontributein
considerablelevelstocumulativeimpacts.
101 Terminal Court ClearChannel Billboard Project Page 61
DOCUMENTPREPARERS
Lamphier – Gregory
PrimaryReportPreparers)
ScottGregory, President
RebeccaGorton, SeniorPlanner
1944Embarcadero
Oakland, Ca. 94606
510-535-6690
Vistarus
VisualModeling)
NiralPatel
H.T. Harvey & Associates
BiologicalImpactsAssessment)
GingerM. Bolen, Ph.D., SeniorWildlifeEcologist
CityofSouthSanFrancisco
Thisdocumentwaspreparedinconsultation withGerryBeaudin, PrincipalPlanner, CityofSouthSan
Francisco.
SOURCES
1.BayAreaAirQualityManagementDistrict, May2011, CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityActAir
QualityGuidelines.
2.BayAreaAirQualityManagementDistrict, May2010, ScreeningTablesforAirToxicsEvaluation
DuringConstruction, Version1.0.
3.CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation, OutdoorAdvertisingActandRegulations, 2011Edition.
4.CaliforniaDepartmentofTransportation, StateScenicHighwayMappingSystem,
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm
5.CityofSouthSanFrancisco, preparedbyDyettandBhatia, SouthSanFranciscoGeneralPlan, 1999.
6.FederalHighwayAdministration- HighwayBeautification Act (HBA) codifiedasTitle23United
StatesCode131, September25, 2007, GuidanceonOff-PremiseChangeableMessageSigns.
7.IlluminatingEngineeringSocietyofNorthAmerica (IESNA), LightingHandbook9thEditionand
10thEdition.
8.OutdoorAdvertising Association ofAmerica, prepared byLightSciences Inc., November 29, 2006,
ComparisonofDigitalandConventional Billboards.
9.U.S. GeologicalSurvey, 2005, MineralResourcesDataSystem: U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Reston,
Virginia. Available through: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/mrds/
10.U.S. DepartmentofTransportation, FederalHighwayAdministration, 2009: TheEffectsof
CommercialElectronicVariableMessageSigns (CEVMS) onDriverAttentionandDistraction: An
Update. Publication No. FHWA-HRT-09-018.
Page 62 101 TerminalCourt Clear Channel Billboard Project
ATTACHMENTA
BiologicalImpactsAssessment
5September 2012
Ms. Rebecca Gorton
Lamphier-Gregory
1944Embarcadero
Oakland, CA94606
Subject: SouthSan Francisco Clear Channel Billboard ProjectBiological ImpactsAssessment
HTH #3410-01)
DearMs. Gorton:
Peryourrequest, H. T. Harvey & Associateshasperformedabiological impactsassessment for
the construction ofan LEDbillboard at101Terminal Court, South SanFrancisco, California
Figure 1). Theproject site isbounded byHighway 101 totheeast and extensivecommercial
development tothenorth, west, andsouth.
According toinformation youprovided, the new billboard would haveanoverall heightof 70
feet (ft) andawidthof48 ftwitha14ftby48ftLED displayscreenmountedabove apole with
a56 ftclearancefromgrade. The billboard would display multiple advertisements, cycling
betweenads every8seconds, andwould beequipped withambient lightsensors, which would
adjustthebrightnessofthedisplay correlating withambientlighting conditions. Weunderstand
thatthe billboardtechnology willbe thesameasthat utilizedforthe ClearChannel LED
billboard alongHighway 92thatweanalyzed in 2008andthatthesameassumptions canbe
made regarding illuminance.
METHODS
I conducted adaytime sitevisiton27 August 2012 toinspecthabitat conditionsimmediately
surrounding theproposedsignlocation (whichcould potentiallybe disturbed duringthe
installation ofthenewLEDsign) andin adjacent areas thatcouldbeindirectly affectedbythe
project. I returned tothe sitethateveningto observequalitatively the existingambientlighting
in thevicinityoftheproject sitetoprovide abasisfordeterminingthepotentialdirect and
Inaddition, H. T. Harvey & Associates
seniorplant/wetlandecologist Patrick Boursier, Ph.D., conducted asitevisiton 31August 2012
toassessthe siteforthe presenceofpotentiallysensitive habitats (e.g., wetlands). Followingthe
completion ofthesurveys, I determined thepotential fortheinstallationofthebillboard to
impactbiological resources, suchas special-status speciesandsensitive/regulatedhabitats, based
onthe conditions attheproposedbillboard location.
EXISTINGSITECONDITIONS
Theproject siteislocatedon theperimeter ofa . A
chain-linkfenceseparates theproject sitefroman approximately 45-ftwidestrip ofruderal (i.e.,
disturbance-associated) vegetation thatoccupies theareabetween theprojectsiteandHighway
983University Avenue, Building D LosGatos, CA 95032 Ph: 408.458.3200 F: 408.458.3210
SantaRosa
NAPA Detail
YOLONapaCaliforniaSONOMAFairfield
SOLANO
MARIN
Martinez Stockton
SanRafael CONTRA COSTA
SanFrancisco Oakland
SAN FRANCISCO
ALAMEDA
Project
RedwoodCity Vicinity
SanJoseSANMATEO
STANISLAUS
SANTA CLARA
PACIFIC
OCEAN SANTA CRUZ
SantaCruz
Hollister020
SANBENIMilesMONTEREY
ProjectSite
2102
Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, EsriMilesJapan, METI, EsriChina (HongKong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, 2012
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
SSFClearChannelBillboard (3410-01)
September2012
101 totheeast. Theprojectsiteis pavedand completely devoid ofvegetation; however,
dominant species present intheadjacentruderal habitat include cypress (Cupressus sp.), toyon
Heteromeles arbutifolia), andnon-native Frenchbroom (Cytisus monspessulanus). Theruderal
habitatimmediately eastoftheproject site (approximately26fteastoftheproposedbillboard
pole) also supports awetland with adense standofhorsetail (Equisetum sp.). Thiswetland
appearstobesupportedbyrunoff fromthe adjacent parkinglot, andmeets the physicalcriteria
w
Duetothehighlydisturbed natureoftheprojectsiteandtheimmediately surrounding vicinity, it
isextremely unlikely thatanyspecial-status specieswouldoccurin theprojectarea. Thevast
majorityof plant andanimal speciesoccurringhere areverycommon speciesassociated with
urban, developed, andruderalconditions throughoutthe SanFrancisco Bayarea. There was no
evidence thatsensitive species were present on theproject site and nohabitat capable of
supporting sensitive speciesispresentwithinorimmediately adjacenttothesite.
BIOLOGICALIMPACTSASSESSMENT
Potentialproject impactsonbioticresourceswereevaluatedfromthree differentperspectives:
Thedirecteffects oftheinstallation ofan LEDbillboardonbioticresources
Theindirect effectsofilluminance fromtheLEDbillboard (i.e., theamountoflightfrom
thebillboardthatlandsona certain area) onsensitive species inadjacentareas
i.e., theamountoflightleaving
surfaceasseen bytheeye) onthebehaviorof birdsflyinginthesitevicinity
Ineach case, thestandardsagainstwhich wemeasuredthesignificance of potentialimpactswere
theCalifornia Environmental QualityAct (CEQA) significancecriteria. Thesepotential impacts
areassessed indetailbelow.
DESIIRECTFFECTSOFIGNNSTALLATION
Allactivity associated withinstallation oftheLEDbillboard attheprojectsiteispresumed to
takeplace within thepavedparkinglot, withmost such activityconcentrated intheimmediate
vicinityofthebillboard.
Nowetlands, riparian habitats, orothersensitive habitats arepresentwithintheimmediate
project site. Thus, aslong asconstruction does notextendinto thehorsetail-linedwetlandtothe
east, nosensitive habitats would beimpactedby theconstruction ofthebillboard. Further, no
special-status plantorwildlife species areexpected tooccurwithin theprojectarea. Theonly
wildlife speciesthat maybe usinghabitats intheimmediate vicinityofthe projectsite during
construction are commonbirds suchasthehouse finch (Carpodacusmexicanus), American
robin (Turdus migratorius), andnorthern mockingbird (Mimuspolyglottos). Thesespecies are
locallyandregionallyabundant, andproject effectsonthese specieswillnotbe significant under
theCEQA.
Insummary, nobiologicalimpacts thatare significantunder CEQAwilloccuras aresult of the
installation ofa billboard atthislocation.
3
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
IEIAANDIRECTFFECTSOFLLUMINANCEOFDJACENTREAS
Manyanimalsareextremely sensitivetolightcues, whichinfluencetheirphysiologyand shape
theirbehaviors, particularly duringthe breeding season (Ringer1972, deMolenaar etal. 2006).
Artificiallighthas beenusedasameansofmanipulatingbreeding behavior andproductivity in
captivebirdsfordecades (deMolenaar etal. 2006), andhas beenshowntoinfluence the
territorial singingbehavior ofwildbirds (Longcore and Rich 2004, Miller 2006, deMolenaar et
al. 2006). Whileitisdifficult to extrapolate resultsofexperiments oncaptive birdsto wild
populations, itis knownthatphotoperiod (the relative amountoflightanddarkin a24-hour
period) isanessential cuetriggeringphysiological processes asdiverse asgrowth, metabolism,
development, breeding behavior, andmolting (de Molenaar etal. 2006). Thisholds truefor
birds, mammals (Beier2006), and other taxaaswell, suggestingthatincreasesinambient light
mayinterfere with these processes across a wide rangeofspecies, resulting inimpactstowildlife
populations.
Artificiallightingmay indirectlyimpactmammals andbirdsbyincreasing thenocturnalactivity
ofpredators likeowls, hawks, andmammalian predators (Negro etal2000, LongcoreandRich
2004, DeCandido and Allen2006, Beier 2006). Thepresence ofartificiallight mayalso
influence habitat use byrodentssuch asthesaltmarshharvestmouse (Reithrodontomys
raviventris) andsaltmarsh wanderingshrew (Sorex vagranshalicoetes) (Beier 2006), andby
breedingbirds (Rogers et al. 2006, deMolenaar etal. 2006), bycausing avoidance ofwell-lit
areas, resulting inanetlossofhabitat availabilityandquality.
Theprojectsiteiscompletely surrounded byurban habitats thatdo notsupportsensitive species
thatmightbe significantly impactedbyilluminance fromtheproposed LEDbillboard.
Similarly, thesmallwetlandimmediately adjacenttotheproject siteisnot expectedtosupport
sensitivespecies. TheSanFrancisco Bay tothe east provides suitablehabitat foravariety of
wildlife, including thefederally andstate listedCaliforniaclapperrail (Rallus longirostris
obsoletus), and the federallylisted missionbluebutterfly (Ariciaicarioides missionensis) has
beenobservedatSign HillPark tothenorthofthe projectsite (CNDDB2012). However, these
habitatsarelocatedtoofarfromtheprojectsitetobeaffectedby illuminance fromthe proposed
LEDbillboard. Similarly, ColmaCreek to thenorth oftheproject siteandthe unnamed channel
tothesouth are located toofarfromthe projectsiteto beaffectedbyilluminancefrom the
proposed billboard.
According tomaterialprovided by ClearChannel Outdoor, theproposedLEDbillboardis
expected to providea maximumof2.23footcandles (fc) of illuminance (aboveandbeyond
ambient light conditions) at 100ft (L. Musica, pers. comm.) within itsviewingangle.
Illuminance woulddecrease with lateraldistancefromthe centeroftheviewing angle, sothat
areas100ft fromthebillboard oneither sideof thecenterof theviewingangle wouldexperience
even less illuminance. Theviewing angleofthe proposedLED billboardwould be 30
vertically and 60 horizontally oneachside (R. Hatton, pers. comm.). TheLED billboard
wouldbeangledin suchawayas tomaximize theamount of visibility fromaspecificportion of
Highway 101, so theareaofbrightestnight illuminance projected bythe proposedbillboard
would form a narrowconedirectedatoncomingtraffic. Furthertheilluminancewould dissipate
so thatilluminancebeyond100ftwould beminimalandthatbeyond500ftnegligible. Thus, the
proposedLEDbillboard isnotexpected tosubstantially increase theamountofilluminance
4
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
currentlyexperienced bysensitive habitats (and thespeciesinhabiting them) within San
FranciscoBay, whichis locatedover 3600ft totheeast, orSignHillPark, which islocated over
5800fttothe north. Therefore, wedonotexpect illuminance fromtheLEDbillboard toresult in
significantimpacts onthese sensitivehabitatsortheirassociated wildlife species.
PELEDBLAFBOTENTIALFFECTSOFILLBOARDSUMINANCEONVIANLIGHTEHAVIOR
The primary way inwhich theluminanceof anLEDbillboardmightimpactthemovements of
birds intheproject area isthroughthe disorientationofnocturnally migratingbirds. Such birds
mayalter theirorientation uponsightingthe lightandbecome drawntowardthesign, potentially
strikingobjectssuch as buildings, adjacent powerlines, or eventhesignitself. Migrating birds
whenvisibilityis poor (Longcore andRich 2004, Gauthreaux andBelser 2006).
Hundredsofbirdspecies migrate nocturnally inordertoavoid diurnal predators andtominimize
energyexpenditures. Evidence thatmigratingbirds areattracted toartificiallightsourcesis
abundant intheliterature asearly asthelate 1800s (Gauthreauxand Belser2006). Although the
mechanism causingmigrating birdstobe attracted tobrightlights isunknown, theattraction is
welldocumented (Longcore andRich 2004, Gauthreaux andBelser2006). Migrating birdsare
frequently drawnfromtheir migratoryflight paths intothevicinityofanartificiallightsource,
light (Herbert1970,
Gauthreaux and Belser2006). Whenbirds aredrawnto artificiallights duringtheirmigration,
they become disoriented andpossiblyblinded by theintensityofthelight (Gauthreaux and
Belser2006). Thedisorienting andblindingeffects ofartificiallights directlyimpactmigratory
birdsbycausingcollisions with lightstructures, buildings, communication andpowerstructures,
oreventheground (GauthreauxandBelser 2006). Indirect impactsonmigrating birds might
includeorientation mistakes andincreased lengthofmigration duetolight-drivendetours.
Effects oftheProposed LEDBillboardsonFlight Behavior
Thevisibilityof theproposedLEDbillboardto birdsinflight, andthus theriskit poses toflying
birds, depends primarily onthebeamangleofthesignrelative tothe flightlinesofbirds andon
theluminance (brightness) ofthesignasperceivedby thebirds. Thedirectional natureof LED
lightingand the projectedviewingangle valuesof 30vertically and 60horizontally suggest
that the viewingangleofthesignwill benarrow enoughtopreclude attracting migrating birdson
clearnights, whenthey flyhigh enoughtobeoutsidethe viewingangleofthe sign. Shaders
locatedaboveeachrowoflightswillprevent lightfromprojecting upward intothesky. Asa
result, birdsflying more than30 abovethe center of the
seelight fromthesignatall. However, migrating birdsare forcedtofly lowduringfoggy and
rainyconditions, whichmaybringthem intotheviewing angleofthebillboard.
2Theproposedbillboardcouldproduceapeakvalueofapproximately641cd/ft of luminance
LSI2006). However, in practice, the LEDbillboards will be operated sothat their peak
2luminancewillbeapproximately46cd/ft in the center of thebeamangle (R. Hatton, pers.
2comm.). Forcomparison, afull moon at itsbrightest pointproducesapproximately 232cd/ft
LRC2006). Theproposed billboardwould beequippedwithalightsensorthatadjusts the
brillianceofthebillboard inresponse to availableambient light, dimming theluminance as
ambient lightlessens. Thepeakluminosityfor anLED billboard citedin the2006Light
5
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
Sciences Inc. reporttotheOutdoor Advertising AssociationofAmerica (LSI2006) andindicated
aboveassumes thatthedisplayonthe billboard issolidwhite. Inpractice, thedisplays onthe
plannedLEDbillboardwill containavariety ofcolors, whichwill substantially reduce the
amountof luminance produced.
Additionally, theLEDdisplay onthe billboardcan bechanged every8seconds from astatic
image toastatic image, resultinginachanging lightsource. Colors andpatterns ofcoloronthe
billboard wouldthus bechanging, andbirdsflyingnearthesignwouldnotperceive itasafixed,
unchanging light, thetypeoflightthatappears tobemostattractivetobirds (JonesandFrancis
2003, Gauthreaux andBelser 2006).
It ispossible thatsome birdsthatfindthemselves near thecenter ofthebeam angle maybe
attractedtothesign. However, wedonotexpectthiseffect toresultin long-termconsequences,
suchas increased bird-strikemortalities orsubstantial interference withbird movements because
the signwill befocused onthehighway, noton airspace above thehighway. Thus, a relatively
limited areaatlowaltitude aboveHighway 101 will bewithin the centerof the signsbeam
angle.
Becausethe area surroundingthe signisheavily urbanizedand contains nohabitatsofvalue to
estuarine birds using theSanFranciscoBay habitatstotheeast, wedo notexpectlargenumbers
ofbirds (especiallyspeciesof conservationconcern) tobeflyingina north-southdirection, and
atlowaltitudes thatwouldbe within thebeam, closeenoughtothebillboardfordisorientationto
occuratall. Thus, wedonotexpectbirdsmoving throughoraroundthe project areato be
attracted tothesignforsuch alongduration thatbird-strike mortalityoccurs or substantial
interference withbirdmovements occurs.
Giventheconfiguration of birdhabitatsinthe vicinity ofthe site (whichdoes notlenditselfto
directed birdflightstoward thesigns), thechanging imagesthatwillbedisplayed ontheLED
billboard, the narrowviewingangle, andthe useofshaders toprevent lightfromprojecting
upwardinto thesky, weexpect s impactson avian flightbehaviorto be lessthan
significant.
SUMMARY
Basedontheinformation provided byClearChannelOutdoor concerningthe LEDbillboard, our
review ofliterature concerninglightingeffectsonwildlife, our reconnaissance-levelsurveys of
thesite, andourknowledge oflikelyavianflightlinesin thevicinityofthe project site, wedonot
expecttheconstructionofanewLEDbillboard toresultinsignificant impacts onwildlife. Ifthe
assumptions made inouranalysisconcerning theLED billboard characteristics (e.g.,
illuminance, luminance, orbeam angle) differ fromactual characteristics ofthebillboard,
additional analysis maybe necessarytodetermine whether impactsare significant.
Pleasefeelfree to [email protected] or (408) 458-3246ifyouhave any
questions regardingourreport. Thankyouvery muchfor contacting H.T. Harvey & Associates
regarding thisproject.
6
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
Sincerely,
Ginger M. Bolen, Ph.D.
SeniorWildlifeEcologist
7
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
LITERATURE CITED
Beier, P. 2006. Effectsofartificial nightlighting onmammals inRich, C. andT. Longcore, eds.
EcologicalConsequences ofArtificial NightLighting. Covelo, CA: IslandPress. Pp19-
42.
CNDDB] California Natural DiversityDatabase. 2012. Rarefind Version 3.1.1. California
Department ofFishandGame, Biogeographic DataBranch.
DeCandido R. andD. Allen. 2006. Nocturnalhunting byperegrinefalcons attheEmpire State
Building, NewYorkCity. WilsonJ. Ornithol. 118(1): 53-58.
deMolenaar, J.G., M.E. Sanders andD.A. Jonkers. 2006. Road lightingand grassland birds:
local influenceof roadlightingona black-tailedgodwit populationin Rich, C. andT.
Longcore, eds. Ecological Consequences ofArtificial Night Lighting. Covelo, CA:
Island Press. Pp114-136.
Gauthreaux, S.A. andC.G. Belser. 2006. Effects ofartificial nightlightingonmigratingbirds in
Rich, C. andT. Longcore, eds. EcologicalConsequences ofArtificialNight Lighting.
Covelo, CA: Island Press. Pp 67-93.
Herbert, A.D. 1970. Spatial disorientation inbirds. WilsonBull. 82(4): 400-419.
Jones, J. andC.M. Francis. 2003. Theeffects oflight characteristics onavian mortalityat
lighthouses. J. Avian Biol. 34(4): 328-333.
Longcore, T. andC. Rich. 2004. Ecological lightpollution. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2(4): 191-
198.
LRC] Lighting Research Center. 2006. Illumination fundamentals. Pasadena, CA: Optical
Research Associates. 48pp.
LSI] LightSciences Inc. 2006. Comparison ofDigital and Conventional Billboards. Report
preparedfor theOutdoor Advertising AssociationofAmerica. November 29, 2006.
Miller, M.W. 2006. Apparent effectsof lightpollution onsingingbehaviorofAmericanrobins.
Condor 108(1): 130-139.
Negro, J.J., J. Bustamante, C. Melguizo, J.L. Ruiz, andJ.M. Grande. 2000. Nocturnal activity
of lesserkestrels under artificial lightingconditions inSeville, Spain. J. Raptor Res.
34(4): 327-329.
Ringer, R.K. 1972. Effectoflightand behavior onnutrition. J. Anim. Sci. 35: 642-647.
8
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
Rogers, D.I., T. Piersma, and C.J. Hassell. 2006. Roostavailability mayconstrainshorebird
distribution: Exploring theenergetic costsof roostinganddisturbancearoundatropical
bay. Biol. Conserv. 33(4): 225-235.
PERSONALCOMMUNICATIONS
Hatton, Robert. ClearChannelOutdoor, Inc. Personalcommunication withSteveRottenborn of
H. T. Harvey & Associates, on18 September 2008.
Musica, Lou. Clear ChannelOutdoor, Inc. Personal communication withSteveRottenborn of
H. T. Harvey & Associates, on09 September 2008.
9
H. T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
ATTACHMENTB
NorthwestInformationCenterRecordsSearchResults
August21, 2012 NWICFileNo.: 12-0165
RebeccaGorton
Lamphier-Gregory, Inc.
1944Embarcadero
Oakland, CA94606
Re: Recordsearchresultsfortheproposedprojectat101TerminalCourt, CityofSouth
SanFrancisco.
DearMs. Gorton:
Peryourrequestreceivedbyourofficeon15August2012, arecordssearchwas
conducted forthe abovereferenced projectby reviewing pertinentNorthwestInformation
Center (NWIC) basemapsthatreferenceculturalresourcesrecordsandreports, historic-
periodmaps, andliteratureforSanMateoCounty. Pleasenotethatuseoftheterm
culturalresources includesbotharchaeological resources andhistoricalbuildingsand/or
structures.
Review ofthisinformationindicatesthattherehasbeennorecordofanycultural
resourcestudiesthatcovertheproposed projectarea. Whiletherearenoarchaeological
resourceswithintheproposedprojectarea, severalNativeAmericanhabitation sites are
presentinthegeneralvicinity. TheOfficeofHistoricPreservation (OHP) HistoricProperty
Directory (HPD) includesnorecordedbuildingsorstructureswithintheproposedproject
area. Inaddition, theNWICbasemapsshow norecordedbuildingsorstructures.
AtthetimeofEuroamerican contact, theNativeAmericans thatlivedinthisportion
ofthepeninsulawerespeakersoftheCostanoanorOhlonelanguage, partoftheUtian
languagefamily (Levy 1978:485). ThesettlementpatternsofNativeAmericans livingon
theSanFranciscopeninsulaweresignificantly disrupted earlierthatinotherregionsof
thestate. However, asinotherareas, settlementpatterns wouldindicateamixtureof
residentialoccupationofvillagesandseasonalroundstoexploitresources attheirpeak.
Reconstruction oftribalnamesandlocationsundertaken byMilliken (1995), based
principally onmissionregisters, would placetheproposedprojectareaasbeinglocated
withinthenorthernportionofthearea controlled bytheUrebure (1995:258).
Basedonanevaluationoftheenvironmentalsettingandfeaturesassociated with
knownsites, NativeAmericanresourcesinthis partofSanMateoCountyhavebeen
foundincloseproximitytosourcesofwater (includingperennialandintermittentstreams
andsprings), nearthebaymarginanditsassociated wetlands, andnearecotonesand
otherproductiveenvironments. Theproposed projectarea islocatedwithinthelower
threachesoftheColmaCreekbasin. Basedon19 centurymaps, theprojectareawas
dominated byestuariesthathavesincebeencoveredinartificialfill. Whilethislandwas
thadjacenttoestuariesinthe19century, thisproductiveenvironmenthasundergone
significant changesassealevelshaveroseoverlast10,000years. Giventhecorrelation
oftheseenvironmental factors, coupledwiththeregionalarchaeologicalsensitivity, there
isamoderatepotentialofunrecordedNativeAmerican resources (especiallyburied
depositswithnosurfaceindications) withintheproposedprojectarea.
Review ofhistorical literatureandmapsgavenoindicationofthepossibilityof
historic-period archaeological resources withintheproposedprojectarea. Withthisin
mind, thereis alowpotentialofidentifying unrecordedhistoric-periodarchaeological
resourcesintheproposed projectarea.
The1947SanFrancisco SouthUSGS7.5-minutetopographic quadranglefailsto
depictanybuildings orstructures withintheproposedproject area; therefore, thereisa
lowpossibilityofidentifying anybuildingsorstructures 45yearsorolderwithintheproject
area.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) Thereisamoderatepossibility ofidentifyingNativeAmerican archaeological
resourcesandalowpossibilityofidentifyinghistoric-periodarchaeologicalresourcesin
theprojectarea. Giventhedepthofdisturbancefortheproposedproject (approximately
35feetbelowsurface) buriedterrestriallandsurfacesthathavethepotentialfor
containingarchaeological materialmaybepresentbelowtheartificialfillatthesurface.
Werecommendaqualifiedarchaeologistconductfurtherarchivalandfieldstudyto
identifyculturalresources. Fieldstudymayinclude, butisnotlimitedto, pedestrian
survey, handaugersampling, shoveltestunits, orgeoarchaeologicalanalysesaswellas
othercommonmethodsusedtoidentifythepresenceofarchaeological resources
especiallyburied depositswithnosurfaceindications). Pleaserefertothelistof
http://www.chrisinfo.org.
2) Iftheproposedprojectareacontainsbuildingsorstructuresthatmeetthe
minimumagerequirement, priortocommencementofprojectactivities, itis
recommended thatthisresourcebeassessedbyaprofessionalfamiliarwiththe
architecture andhistoryofSanMateo County. Pleaserefertothelistofconsultantswho
http://www.chrisinfo.org.
3) Reviewforpossible historic-periodbuildingsorstructureshasincludedonly
thosesourceslistedintheattachedbibliography andshouldnotbeconsidered
comprehensive.
duringconstruction, 4) Ifarchaeological resourcesareencountered workshould
betemporarilyhalted inthevicinityofthediscovered materialsandworkers shouldavoid
alteringthematerialsandtheircontextuntilaqualifiedprofessionalarchaeologist has
evaluatedthesituationandprovidedappropriate recommendations. Projectpersonnel
shouldnotcollectculturalresources. Native Americanresourcesincludechertor
obsidianflakes, projectile points, mortars, andpestles; anddarkfriablesoilcontaining
shellandbonedietarydebris, heat-affectedrock, orhumanburials. Historic-period
resourcesincludestoneoradobefoundationsorwalls; structuresandremainswith
squarenails; andrefusedepositsorbottledumps, oftenlocatedinoldwellsorprivies.
5) ItisrecommendedthatanyidentifiedculturalresourcesberecordedonDPR
523historicresource recordationforms, available onlinefromtheOfficeofHistoric
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=1069
Thank youforusingourservices. Pleasecontactthisofficeifyouhaveany
questions, (707) 588-8455.
Sincerely,
BryanMuch
AssistantCoordinator
LITERATURE REVIEWED
Inadditionto archaeological mapsandsiterecordsonfileattheNorthwest Information Center of
theHistoricalResources Information System, thefollowingliterature wasreviewed:
Barrows, HenryD., andLutherA. Ingersoll
2005 MemorialandBiographical History of theCoastCountiesof CentralCalifornia.
Three Rocks Research, Santa Cruz (Digital Reproductionof TheLewis Publishing
Company, Chicago: 1893.)
Bowman, J.N.
1951 AdobeHouses intheSanFrancisco BayRegion. InGeologic Guidebook oftheSan
Francisco BayCounties, Bulletin 154. CaliforniaDivisionofMines, FerryBuilding,
SanFrancisco, CA.
Brabb, EarlE., FredA. Taylor, andGeorge P. Miller
1982 Geologic, Scenic, andHistoricPoints ofInterestinSanMateo County, California.
Miscellaneous Investigations Series, MapI-1257-B, 1:62,500. Departmentofthe
Interior, UnitedStatesGeological Survey, Washington, D.C.
GeneralLandOffice
1858 SurveyPlatforRancho RanchoBuriburi
1864 SurveyPlatforRanchoCañada deGuadalupe, laVisitacióny Rodeo Viejo
Gudde, Erwin G.
1969 California PlaceNames: The Originand Etymology ofCurrentGeographical
Names. ThirdEdition. University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley andLosAngeles.
Hamman, Rick
1980 California Central CoastRailways. Pruett Publishing Company, Boulder, CO.
Hart, James D.
1987 ACompaniontoCalifornia. Universityof California Press, Berkeley andLos
Angeles.
Heizer, Robert F., editor
1974 Local History Studies
DeAnza College, Cupertino, CA.
Helley, E.J., K.R. Lajoie, W.E. Spangle, andM.L. Blair
1979 Flatland DepositsoftheSanFrancisco BayRegion - TheirGeologyand
Engineering Properties, and TheirImportance toComprehensive Planning.
GeologicalSurveyProfessional Paper943. UnitedStates GeologicalSurveyand
Department ofHousingandUrbanDevelopment.
Hoover, Mildred Brooke, HeroEugeneRensch, andEthelRensch, revised by WilliamN. Abeloe
1966 Historic SpotsinCalifornia. ThirdEdition. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Hoover, Mildred Brooke, HeroEugeneRensch, andEthelRensch, William N. Abeloe, revised by
DouglasE. Kyle
1990 Historic SpotsinCalifornia. Fourth Edition. Stanford UniversityPress, Stanford,
CA.
Hope, Andrew
2005 Caltrans Statewide HistoricBridgeInventoryUpdate. Caltrans, Division of
Environmental Analysis, Sacramento, CA.
Hynding, Alan
1984 From Frontierto Suburb: TheStory ofSanMateoPenninsula. StarPublishing
Company, SanMateo, CA.
Kroeber, A.L.
1925 Handbook oftheIndians ofCalifornia. Bureau ofAmericanEthnology, Bulletin 78,
SmithsonianInstitution, Washington, D.C. (ReprintbyDoverPublications, Inc., New
York, 1976)
Levy, Richard
1978 Costanoan. InCalifornia, edited byRobertF. Heizer, pp. 485-495. Handbookof
NorthAmerican Indians, vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, generaleditor. Smithsonian
Institution, Washington, D.C.
Milliken, Randall
1983 TheSpatial Organization ofHumanPopulationonCentral California'sSan
FranciscoPeninsula at theSpanish Arrival. S-
Northwest Information Center, RohnertPark.
1995 ATimeof LittleChoice: The Disintegration ofTribal Culture intheSanFrancisco
BayArea1769-1810. Ballena PressAnthropological PapersNo. 43, MenloPark,
CA.
Myers, WilliamA. (editor)
1977 HistoricCivilEngineering Landmarks ofSanFrancisco andNorthernCalifornia.
PreparedbyTheHistory and HeritageCommittee, SanFrancisco Section, American
Societyof CivilEngineers. Pacific Gas andElectricCompany, SanFrancisco, CA.
Nelson, N.C.
1909 Shellmoundsof theSanFrancisco BayRegion. University ofCalifornia
Publications inAmerican ArchaeologyandEthnology7(4):309-356. Berkeley.
ReprintbyKrausReprintCorporation, NewYork, 1964)
Nichols, DonaldR., andNancy A. Wright
1971 Preliminary Map ofHistoricMarginsofMarshland, SanFrancisco Bay, California.
U.S. Geological SurveyOpenFile Map. U.S. Department oftheInterior, Geological
Surveyincooperation withtheU.S. Department ofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,
Washington, D.C.
Roberts, George, and JanRoberts
1988 DiscoverHistoric California. GemGuides BookCo., PicoRivera, CA.
San MateoCountyHistoric Resources Advisory Board
1984 SanMateoCounty: ItsHistory andHeritage. SecondEdition. Division of Planning
andDevelopment Department ofEnvironmental Management.
San MateoCountyPlanningandDevelopment Department
SanMateo
CountyGeneral Plan.
State ofCaliforniaDepartment ofParksandRecreation
1976 California InventoryofHistoricResources. State ofCalifornia Department ofParks
andRecreation, Sacramento.
State ofCaliforniaDepartmentof ParksandRecreation andOffice of HistoricPreservation
1988 FiveViews: AnEthnic Sites SurveyforCalifornia. StateofCalifornia Department
ofParks andRecreation andOffice ofHistoricPreservation, Sacramento.
StateofCalifornia OfficeofHistoric Preservation
2012 Historic Properties Directory. Listing by City (throughApril2012). Stateof
CaliforniaOffice ofHistoric Preservation, Sacramento.
Williams, James C.
1997 EnergyandtheMakingofModern California. TheUniversity ofAkronPress, Akron,
OH.
Woodbridge, SallyB.
1988 California Architecture: HistoricAmerican BuildingsSurvey. ChronicleBooks, San
Francisco, CA.
WorksProgress Administration
1984 TheWPAGuide to California. Reprint byPantheonBooks, New York. (Originally
published asCalifornia: AGuidetotheGolden Statein1939byBooks, Inc.,
distributed byHastings HousePublishers, NewYork.)
Yamada, GayleK. andDianneFukami
2003 Building aCommunity: TheStoryofJapanese Americans inSanMateo County.
AACP, Inc., SanMateo, CA.
Historic Properties Directory includesNational
Register, StateRegistered Landmarks, CaliforniaPointsofHistoricalInterest, andtheCalifornia
RegisterofHistorical Resources aswellas Certified Local Governmentsurveys thathave
undergoneSection106review.
FIRST ADDENDUM TO THE
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE
101 TERMINAL COURT CLEAR CHANNEL BILLBOARD PROJECT
AND RELATED ZONING AMENDMENT
RELATED TO THE
180 SOUTH AIRPORT BOULEVARD BILLBOARD PROPOSAL
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
315 MAPLE AVENUE
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080
PREPARED BY:
LAMPHIER – GREGORY
1944 EMBARCADERO
OAKLAND, CA 94606
ADDENDUM DATE MAY 2018
ORIGINAL INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE JUNE 2013
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
Introduction and Project Information ....................................................................................................... 1
Environmental Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 13
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................ 20
FIGURES
Figure 1: Proposed Billboard Location ............................................................................................. 7
Figure 2: Proposed Billboard Site Plan ............................................................................................. 9
Figure 3: Proposed Billboard Design .............................................................................................. 11
Figure 5: Proposed Billboard from U.S. 101, facing north ............................................................. 15
Figure 6: Proposed Billboard from U.S. 101, facing south ............................................................. 15
ii
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 1
INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT INFORMATION
This document serves as an addendum to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)
for the currently proposed billboard, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Sections 1500 et seq.).
Per CEQA Guidelines (Section 15164), an addendum may be prepared if only minor technical changes or
additions are necessary or none of the conditions calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or
negative declaration have occurred.
This document is organized in three sections as follows:
Introduction and Project Information. This section introduces the document and discusses the project
description including location, setting, and specifics of the lead agency and contacts.
Environmental Analysis. This section analyzes the currently proposed billboard in comparison to the
analysis in the IS/MND and discusses the CEQA environmental topics and checklist questions with
the potential to be changed from that previously assessed.
Conclusions. This section summarizes the conclusions of the analysis and makes CEQA conclusions.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project and Related Zoning Amendment project was
analyzed in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) with State Clearinghouse Number
2013062062 circulated in June 2013 and adopted in August 2015.
As assessed in the IS/MND, the zoning amendment allowed up to two additional digital billboards along
the U.S. 101 corridor in South San Francisco in addition to the 101 Terminal Court billboard, as follows:
“The location of proposed digital billboards would be constrained to the western side of the highway
between Sister Cities Boulevard and the City’s southern boundary and otherwise following billboard
locating restrictions (such as Caltrans rule of 500 feet between billboards, discussed in more detail under
item 11, Regulatory Provisions).”
While in the identified highway corridor, the current proposal is for a billboard on the eastern side of the
highway.
The purpose of this Addendum is to make minor changes to the project description to allow for the
proposed billboard on the eastern side of U.S. 101 and demonstrate that a subsequent environmental
document is not required per Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as follows:
15164. Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration
(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified
EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section
15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
(b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical
changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling
for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.
(c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to
the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted
negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
Page 2 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162
should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or
elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
(a) When an EIR has been certified or a Negative Declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent
EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration
due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or
negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in
the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but
the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed
in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative.
(b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after
adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under
subdivision (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative
declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation.
(c) Once a project has been approved, the lead agency's role in project approval is completed, unless
further discretionary approval on that project is required. Information appearing after an approval
does not require reopening of that approval. If after the project is approved, any of the conditions
described in subdivision (a) occurs, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall only be prepared
by the public agency which grants the next discretionary approval for the project, if any. In this
situation no other responsible agency shall grant an approval for the project until the subsequent EIR
has been certified or subsequent negative declaration adopted.
(d) A subsequent EIR or subsequent negative declaration shall be given the same notice and public
review as required under Section 15087 or Section 15072. A subsequent EIR or negative declaration
shall state where the previous document is available and can be reviewed.
The conclusions related to Sections 15164 and 15162 are discussed in the addendum section of this
document.
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 3
PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Project Title: 180 South Airport Boulevard Digital Billboard
Proposal (“currently proposed billboard”), which is
located within the highway corridor analyzed as part
of the:
101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project
and Related Zoning Amendment
2. Lead Agency Contact: City of South San Francisco
Billy Gross, Senior Planner
Department of Economic and Community
Development
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94083
650.877.8535 or [email protected]
3. Project Location: 180 South Airport Boulevard (APN 015-122-050)
4. Project Applicant's Name and Address: Bryan Scott
Outfront Media, Inc.
1695 Eastshore Highway
Berkeley, CA 94710
510.559.1139
5. General Plan Designation: Community Commercial
6. Zoning: Freeway Commercial (FC)
7. Site and Vicinity:
The project location is shown in Figure 1. The currently proposed billboard is located in a recently
redeveloped retail site including a three-tenant restaurant building (Dunkin Donuts, ToGo’s, and
Popeye’s) and associated parking.
The currently proposed billboard would be located in the northwestern corner of the site adjacent to
U.S. 101 with the footing in a landscaped area and the sign also overhanging the trash enclosure and a
corner of the parking area.
An approximately 30-foot wide landscape strip is located between the retail site and the U.S. 101
highway to the west, consisting largely of shrubs and grasses. Farther west across the highway (at
least 400 feet to the nearest building) is located a commercial complex with some light industrial,
office, retail, and a hotel.
South Airport Boulevard borders the site to the north and east and Colma Creek borders the site to the
south. The site is surrounded by various commercial uses on the same side of the highway including
largely light industrial with some retail, office, and hotel uses.
The closest residential areas are located approximately 1,200 feet to the northwest. Other residential
uses can be found approximately 2,600 feet to the north, 3,900 feet to the west, and 5,900 feet to the
south. There are no residences in the vicinity to the east.
Page 4 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
8. Project Description:
Digital Billboard
The current digital billboard proposal involves construction and operation of one new double-sided
outdoor advertising digital LED billboard located in South San Francisco, California. The billboard is
proposed to reach a maximum height of 65 feet.
An “LED billboard” consists of a display surface that supports an image generated by rows of light
emitting diodes (LED). The image on the billboard is static for a period of time, not less than eight
seconds, before cycling to the next image. Operational details provided by the applicant include the
following:
Each LED display would be 48 feet wide by 14 feet tall mounted on a column so that the overall
height is approximately 65 feet above grade. The two display faces will be oriented back-to-back
such that the displays face the two directions of highway traffic. The design of the billboard is shown
in Figures 2 and 3.
Lighting levels on each face of the digital billboard will not exceed 0.3 foot candles over ambient
levels, as measured using a foot candle meter at a 250’ distance according to the guidelines of the
Outdoor Advertising Association of America (OAAA).
Construction of the Billboard
The currently proposed billboard would be connected to existing power lines in the project area. The
foundation used for the proposed structure would be a drilled shaft with a poured concrete footing.
Construction would proceed as described in the IS/MND with a few days of activity spread out over 1
to 2 weeks including (1) drilling of the foundation hole, (2) erection of the column and pouring of
foundation concrete, and (3) removal of temporary support beams and assembly of sign faces.
Other Billboard Removal per the Relocation Agreement
In compliance with the Billboard Relocation Agreement, the currently proposed billboard would also
involve removal of two existing billboards with a total of three faces in the general vicinity including
a single-sided billboard at 1340 El Camino Real and a double-sided billboard at 21 San Mateo
Avenue.
Hand tools and small crane rigs would be used to remove the billboards. The top of the billboards
would first be disassembled and removed, and then the poles would be cut at the ground. Only the
above-grade portion of the billboard structures would be removed. Below surface foundations would
remain in place.
It would take approximately one to two working days to remove each of the existing billboard signs.
Removal of the two billboard structures would take approximately one week. Materials from the
removed billboard would be delivered to a recycling facility and/or appropriate landfill.
Comparison to Project Description in the IS/MND
The proposed billboard sign faces are the same size and the same LED technology including proposed
operation and light levels and construction activities as assumed in the IS/MND. The height of the
currently proposed billboard (65’) is within the range analyzed in the IS/MND (55’ to 70’).
The proposed billboard is in the same general area as assumed in the IS/MND (U.S. 101 corridor
between Sister Cities Boulevard and the City’s southern boundary) but on the eastern side of the
highway instead of the western side.
9. Required Approvals:
Approval of the current billboard proposal will require a General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
Amendment (because these currently prohibit digital billboards to the east of U.S. 101), Relocation
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 5
Agreement, and Design Review from the City of South San Francisco. Additionally, the following
reviews and approvals would be required:
Appropriate clearance through Caltrans is also required for highway-oriented signs. This may require
a relocation agreement if the freeway segment is determined to be classified as a “landscaped
freeway” (as discussed under Regulatory Provisions).
Construction activities will require appropriate administrative permits.
The City and applicant may also enter into a Development Agreement.
10. Regulatory Provisions:
The following regulations are applicable to installation of billboards and compliance has been
assumed in analysis of the currently proposed billboard.
Federal
The federal Highway Beautification Act of 1965 (23 U.S.C. 131) provides for control of outdoor
advertising, including removal of certain types of signs, along the interstate highway system. The Act
is enforced by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
As part of its enforcement effort, FHWA has entered into agreements regarding the Act with state
departments of transportation. The agreements with California are described under the State
provisions, below.
State
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is involved in the control of “off-premise”
displays along state highways. Such displays advertise products or services of businesses located on
property other than the display. Caltrans does not regulate on-premise displays. (Caltrans Landscape
Architecture Program, 2008)
California has entered into two agreements with FHWA as part of the implementation of the Highway
Beautification Act: one dated May 29, 1965, and a subsequent agreement dated February 15, 1968.
The agreements generally provide that the State will control the construction of all outdoor
advertising signs, displays, and devices within 660 feet of the interstate highway right-of-way. The
agreements provide that such signs shall be erected only in commercial or industrial zones and are
subject to the following restrictions:
No signs shall imitate or resemble any official traffic sign, signal, or device, nor shall signs
obstruct or interfere with official signs;
No signs shall be erected on rocks or other natural features;
Signs shall be no larger than 25 feet in height and 60 feet in width, excluding border, trim, and
supports;
Signs on the same side of the freeway must be separated by at least 500 feet; and
Signs shall not include flashing, intermittent, or moving lights, and shall not emit light that could
obstruct or impair the vision of any driver.
California regulates outdoor advertising in the Outdoor Advertising Act (Business and Professions
Code, Sections 5200 et seq.) and the California Code of Regulations, Title 4, Division 6 (Sections
2240 et seq.), which incorporate the Federal Highway Beautification Act by reference. Caltrans
enforces the law and regulations. Caltrans requires applicants for new outdoor lighting to demonstrate
that the owner of the parcel consents to the placement of the sign, that the parcel on which the sign
would be located is zoned commercial or industrial, and that local building permits are obtained and
complied with. A digital billboard is identified as a “message center” in the statute, which is an
Page 6 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
advertising display where the message is changed more than once every two minutes, but no more
than once every four seconds. (Business and Professions Code, Section 5216.4)
In brief, off-premises changeable electronic variable message signs (CEVMS) adjacent to controlled
routes shall incorporate standards pertaining to:
1. Duration of Message
2. Transition Time
3. Brightness
4. Spacing
5. Locations
Most importantly as a result of FHWA recommendations, to ensure driver safety, no billboard
manufacturers presently use moving displays or less than a 4-second duration between messages.
Some freeways are classified as “landscaped freeways.” A landscaped freeway is defined as one that
is now, or may in the future be, improved by the planting of lawns, trees, shrubs, flowers or other
ornamental vegetation requiring reasonable maintenance on one or both sides of the freeway
(Government Code §5216). Off-premise displays are not allowed along landscaped freeways except
when approved as part of Relocation Agreements pursuant to §5412 of the Outdoor Advertising Act.
It appears the currently proposed billboard is within a segment of U.S. 101 that is considered a
classified landscaped freeway, though such a determination would be made during the approval
process with Caltrans.1
The Outdoor Advertising Act contains a number of provisions relating to the construction and
operation of billboards:
The sign must be constructed to withstand a wind pressure of 20 pounds per square feet of
exposed surface (§5401);
No sign shall display any statements or words of an obscene, indecent or immoral character
(§5402);
No sign shall display flashing, intermittent or moving light or lights (§5403(h));
Signs are restricted from areas within 300 feet of an intersection of highways or of highway and
railroad right-of-ways, but a sign may be located at the point of interception, as long as a clear
view is allowed for 300 feet, and no sign shall be installed that would prevent a traveler from
obtaining a clear view of approaching vehicles for a distance of 500 feet along the highway
(§5404); and
Message center signs may not include any illumination or message change that is in motion or
appears to be in motion or that change or expose a message for less than four seconds. No
message center sign may be located within 500 feet of an existing billboard, or 1,000 feet of
another message center display, on the same side of the highway (§5405).
Additional restrictions on outdoor signage are found in the California Vehicle Code. Section 21466.5
prohibits the placing of any light source “…of any color of such brilliance as to impair the vision of
drivers upon the highway.” Specific standards for measuring light sources are provided. The
restrictions may be enforced by Caltrans, the California Highway Patrol or local authorities.
1 California Department of Transportation, Classified “Landscape Freeways”, available at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/design/lap/livability/classified-landscaped-fwys.html.
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 7
Figure 1: Proposed Billboard Location
Source: Google Inc., Google Earth imagery date 11/2/2016, with project location noted by Lamphier-Gregory.
Proposed Billboard
Page 8 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 9
Figure 2: Proposed Billboard Site Plan
Source: Chappell Surveying Services for the applicant, dated April 13, 2017
Page 10 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 11
Figure 3: Proposed Billboard Design
Source: RMG Outdoor, Inc. for the applicant, dated March 29, 2017
Page 12 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 13
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
SUMMARY OF PROJECT CHANGES
The proposed billboard is of the same type and has the same size sign-face size as those previously
assessed in the IS/MND.
The difference from the IS/MND is in the location only. The following discussion is broken down by
CEQA topic and focuses on assessment of the changed location.
AESTHETICS
Scenic Vistas
Impact remains Less than Significant
As under the IS/MND, the site and surrounding area is predominately developed with
industrial/commercial uses and is not a scenic resource or vista. The site of the current billboard proposal
is located on a flat area near the highway with no substantial views of the Bay from or across the site.
Figures 4 and 5 are visual models showing the proposed billboard from views along U.S. 101.
Sign Hill, which contains the prominent concrete “South San Francisco The Industrial City” sign on the
hillside, was identified in the IS/MND as the only scenic vista with the potential to be impacted by
billboards along U.S. 101, because they would have the potential to interrupt view of Sign Hill from
motorists traveling along U.S. 101. As noted in the IS/MND, views toward Sign Hill, San Bruno
Mountain and the Skyline Boulevard ridge from U.S. 101 are already partially and intermittently obscured
by existing development, signage, and landscaping. Billboards along U.S. 101 would contribute to
temporary obstruction of these views as a driver progresses toward and past the billboard, however, the
IS/MND determined that the temporary and intermittent nature of the obstruction from the point of view
of a moving vehicle, would be considered a less than significant impact. Because the current billboard
proposal is on the eastern side of U.S. 101, and therefore not between highway motorists and Sign Hill,
there is no potential to block these views from U.S. 101, but the same conclusion would hold true for
roadways farther to the east.
Scenic Highways and Visual Character
Impact remains Less than Significant/No Impact
There would be no substantial change to the assessment or conclusions related to scenic highways or
visual character. The character of the currently proposed billboard site is commercial, just as were the
potential locations assessed in the IS/MND and U.S. 101 is not a state scenic highway in the vicinity.
Light and Glare
Impact remains Less than Significant with Mitigation
The IS/MND identified a potential impact related to the light levels of the proposed digital billboard and
the potential to create substantial light and glare. The currently proposed billboard has sign faces of the
same size as those previously analyzed, and the closest residential uses are over 1,000 feet away (the
increase in illuminance is barely perceptible at 250 feet and negligible at 500 feet), and would comply
with applicable regulation and guidelines. There would be no substantial change in the impact related to
light and glare under the currently proposed billboard.
The IS/MND included Mitigation Measure Visual-1, requiring demonstration of compliance with light
levels consistent with OAAA Guidelines. This mitigation measure would remain applicable to the
proposed billboard and would reduce the impact to less than significant.
Page 14 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
Overall Aesthetics
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Aesthetics analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (no impact/less than significant or reduced to that level through mitigation).
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Impacts remain No Impact
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area adjacent to a
highway and no part of the site is zoned for or currently being used for agricultural or forestry purposes or
is subject to the Williamson Act. Therefore, the current billboard proposal would result in no substantial
changes to the IS/MND Agricultural and Forestry Resources analysis or conclusions and impacts would
remain unchanged (no impact)
AIR QUALITY
Impacts remain Less than Significant/Less than Significant with Mitigation
The currently proposed billboard has the same size sign faces and would have generally the same
construction activities and emissions (mostly from energy use) as the billboard analyzed under the
IS/MND. With changes only to the location, and not changes that would affect the emissions, the current
billboard proposal would result in no changes to the IS/MND Air Quality analysis or conclusions and all
impacts except the one below would remain less than significant.
The IS/MND identified a potentially-significant impact related to construction-period emissions and
fugitive dust and included Mitigation Measure Air-1, requiring standard construction management
practices to reduce the impact to less than significant. This impact and conclusion would remain
applicable to the currently proposed billboard.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Aesthetics analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (less than significant or reduced to that level through mitigation).
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impacts remain Less than Significant/No Impact
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area, and the site
and surroundings do not support sensitive species that might be significantly affected by construction of
or illuminance from operation of the proposed LED billboard. That being said, avian flight behavior is
known to be potentially affected by artificial illuminance. However, per the IS/MND, the area is heavily
urbanized and large numbers of birds are not expected to be flying within the beam of light from the
billboard. Additionally, because of the limited upwards beam angle constrained by shaders above each
LED row, and the changing graphics, which are not the type of unchanging light most attractive to birds,
birds moving through or around the site would not likely be attracted to the billboard to the extent that
bird-strike mortality or substantial interference with bird movements occurs. The impact on special-status
species, sensitive habitats, and wildlife corridors would therefore remain less than significant.
No local policies, ordinances, or Habitat Conservation Plans are directly applicable to this site and the no
impact conclusion would remain unchanged.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Biological Resources analysis or conclusions and impacts would
remain unchanged (no impact/less than significant).
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 15
Figure 4: Proposed Billboard from U.S. 101, facing north
Source: Applicant (proposed billboard in solid purple and black)
Figure 5: Proposed Billboard from U.S. 101, facing south
Source: Applicant (proposed billboard in solid purple and black)
Page 16 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 17
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impacts remain Less than Significant/Less than Significant with Mitigation
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area adjacent to a
highway. The currently proposed billboard would have generally the same construction activities as the
billboard analyzed under the IS/MND. The current billboard proposal is located on a site that was recently
redeveloped, and would result in no changes to the IS/MND Cultural Resources analysis or conclusions.
The IS/MND identified discovery/disturbance of currently unknown cultural resources as a potentially-
significant impact related to cultural resources and included Mitigation Measure Cultural-1, requiring a
cultural monitoring and mitigation plan to be implemented during drilling that would reduce the impact to
less than significant. This mitigation measure would remain applicable to the currently proposed
billboard.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Cultural Resources analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (less than significant or reduced to that level through mitigation).
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impacts remain Less than Significant/No Impact
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard requires building permits and would be
constructed to the current building code standards, including consideration of geologic and seismic
conditions. There are no active earthquake faults known to pass through the vicinity, and given the
relatively flat topography of the site, the possibility of landslides is considered unlikely. The applicant
must obtain coverage under the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit (General Construction
Permit) issued by the State Water Resources Control Board, which will address any erosion potential
from ground disturbance. There would be no substantial risks related to expansive or unstable soils. The
impact related to seismic and soil hazards would remain less than significant. The conclusion of no
impact related to the use of septic tanks would remain unchanged as no septic takes are proposed.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Geology and Soils analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (no impact/less than significant).
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Impacts remain Less than Significant/No Impact
The currently proposed billboard has the same size sign faces and would have generally the same
construction activities and emissions (mostly from energy use) as analyzed under the IS/MND. With
changes only to the location, there would be no changes that would affect the Greenhouse Gas Emissions
or associated no impact/less than significant impacts identified in the IS/MND.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Greenhouse Gas Emissions analysis or conclusions and impacts would
remain unchanged (no impact/less than significant).
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impacts remain No Impact/Less than Significant/Less than Significant with Mitigation
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area adjacent to a
highway. The currently proposed billboard would have generally the same construction and operational
activities as the billboard analyzed under the IS/MND. The current billboard proposal would not create
hazardous emissions/materials near a school, would not result in airport hazards, would not impact
Page 18 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
emergency response, and is not located in a wildland fire hazard area and impacts related to these topics
would remain unchanged (less than significant/no impact).
The IS/MND identified a potentially-significant impact related to unexplored potential for hazardous
materials and included Mitigation Measure Haz-1 (requiring a Phase I environmental site assessment
report, and a Phase II report if warranted by the Phase I report) and Mitigation Measure Haz-2
(requiring the operator to follow applicable regulations regarding proper disposal and/or recycling of
billboard components) to reduce the impact to less than significant. This mitigation measure would
remain applicable to the currently proposed billboard.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Hazards and Hazardous Materials analysis or conclusions and impacts
would remain unchanged (no impact/less than significant or reduced to that level through mitigation).
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impacts remain Less than Significant/No Impact
The currently proposed billboard would have generally the same construction and operational activities as
the billboard analyzed under the IS/MND. As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard would
not use water during operation or pose a substantial risk to water quality during construction, would not
substantially change site drainage, and is not located in an area subject to flooding or inundation.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Hydrology and Water Quality analysis or conclusions and impacts
would remain unchanged (less than significant/no impact).
LAND USE AND PLANNING
Impacts remain Less than Significant/No Impact
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area adjacent to a
highway. Because the billboard would not involve any physical changes that would divide the established
community and because the site is not subject to a conservation plan, the conclusion of no impact related
to these items would remain unchanged.
Digital billboards on the east side of U.S. 101 are not currently allowed under the South San Francisco
General Plan and Zoning Code. Amendments of the General Plan and Zoning Code as proposed with the
currently proposed billboard would allow location of digital billboards on the east side of U.S. 101 if
otherwise allowed. Assuming approval of the General Plan and Zoning Code amendments, impacts
related to land use plan conflicts would remain less than significant.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Land Use and Planning analysis or conclusions and impacts would
remain unchanged (no impact/less than significant).
MINERAL RESOURCES
Impacts remain No Impact
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area and the site
contains no known mineral resources and has not been delineated as a locally important mineral recovery
site on any land use plan. There would be no impact to mineral resources as a result of the currently
proposed billboard.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Mineral Resources analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (no impact).
May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND Page 19
NOISE
Impacts remain Less than Significant/No Impact
As under the IS/MND, the currently proposed billboard is located in a developed urban area adjacent to a
highway and would have generally the same construction and operational activities as the billboard
analyzed under the IS/MND. The proposed billboard would not be a source of operational noise or
vibration and construction activities will comply with noise regulations.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Noise analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain unchanged
from the IS/MND (no impact/less than significant).
POPULATION AND HOUSING
Impacts remain No Impact
As under the IS/MND, a billboard would not induce population growth or displace housing or people and
would have no impact related to population and housing.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Population and Housing analysis or conclusions and impacts would
remain unchanged (no impact).
PUBLIC SERVICES
Impacts remain No Impact
As under the IS/MND, a billboard would not increase the demand for public services and would have no
impact related to public services.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Public Services analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (no impact).
RECREATION
Impacts remain No Impact
As under the IS/MND, a billboard would not construct or increase the use of recreational facilities and
would have no impact related to recreation.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Recreation analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (no impact).
TRANSPORTATION
Impacts remain No Impact/Less than Significant with Mitigation
As under the IS/MND, operation of a billboard would not generate vehicle trips or otherwise change
traffic patterns or access. With changes only to the location, the current billboard proposal would result in
no changes to the IS/MND Transportation analysis or conclusions and, except as discussed below, would
have no impact related to transportation.
The IS/MND identified a potentially-significant impact related to increase of traffic hazards and included
Mitigation Measure Traf-1 (requiring submission of an annual report identifying incidents or facts that
relate to specific digital billboards and confirming compliance with traffic and safety regulations) and
Mitigation Measure Traf-2 (requiring compliance with operational safety measures) to reduce the
Page 20 May 2018 Addendum to the 101 Terminal Court Clear Channel Billboard Project IS/MND
impact to less than significant. This mitigation measure would remain applicable to the currently
proposed billboard.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Transportation analysis or conclusions and impacts would remain
unchanged (no impact/less than significant with mitigation).
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Impacts remain No Impact
The currently proposed billboard would have generally the same construction and operational activities,
including energy use, as the billboard analyzed under the IS/MND. With changes only to the location, and
no changes that would affect utilities, service systems, or energy, the current billboard proposal would
have no impact related to utilities and service systems.
Therefore, given the substantial evidence above, the current billboard proposal would result in no
substantial changes to the IS/MND Utilities and Service Systems analysis or conclusions (no impact).
CONCLUSIONS
Given the substantial evidence presented in this document, the currently proposed billboard would not
require subsequent analysis per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, as confirmed by the following
statements:
(1) The current billboard proposal would not result in new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) There are no changes in circumstances that would result in the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects; or
(3) There is no new information resulting in a new significant effect not discussed in new significant
environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects,
or a change in the feasibility (or acceptance) of mitigation measures.
While the currently proposed billboard is in a different location than assumed under the adopted IS/MND,
the change in location would be considered a minor technical change per CEQA Guidelines Section
15164. Therefore, this addendum, in combination with the adopted IS/MND, is the appropriate CEQA
document for the currently proposed billboard. No additional CEQA analysis or documentation is
required to make a decision on the currently proposed billboard.
All mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND would remain applicable to the currently proposed
billboard.