AgdaPkt 2017-05-22 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

4/21/17 (P:\RWC1401D 1548 Maple St\ADMIN\Contract\EIR SOW\1548 Maple EIR SOW 04‐21‐17.docx) 9 c. Cultural Resources. This section will summarize the potential for impacts to cultural resources using information obtained from existing documentation of known archeological and historical resources on site. Previous studies of a portion of the project site and adjacent areas (Cartier 1977; Dietz 1978) indicate that the southern portion of the site (i.e., near or under the existing shelter facilities) contained subsurface historic‐period archaeological remains (“leather and hair”) that were likely associated with a previous tannery, whose operations included a portion of the site. However, Dietz (1978) concluded that the subsurface remains of a tannery complex identified south of Highway 101 were too disturbed to qualify as significant under CEQA, and by implication so were the other related materials in the project site. Therefore, the IHSP Draft EIR concluded that the project site has a low sensitivity for historic‐period, as well as pre‐contact period, archaeological deposits. The one known built‐environment resource on the project site (the water tower) was evaluated by ESA under national, State, and local criteria. The water tower is however a locally listed resource. This section will assess the adequacy of previously identified baseline condition information generated by the environmental review for the IHSP to serve as a basis for the analysis in this scope of work; the section will also recommend mitigation measures, as appropriate, to ensure that potential impacts to prehistoric or historic cultural resources would be avoided or minimized. As part of this scope of work, LSA recommends, and has included in this scope of work, an update to the record search previously conducted. Because accidental discovery of cultural resources is a possibility whenever ground‐disturbing activities are conducted, mitigation measures may be recommended for accidental discovery of paleontological and archaeological resources during subsurface construction activities. LSA will review the City’s General Plan and other relevant planning documents to identify the likelihood of accidental discovery of these resources. d. Transportation and Circulation. Fehr & Peers will evaluate potential impacts related to transportation and circulation and incorporate the analysis into the EIR section. Fehr & Peers’ full scope of work for preparation of the TIA is included as an attachment to this proposal. e. Air Quality. Development activity associated with implementation of the proposed project could increase pollutant concentrations in Redwood City through increased vehicle trips and construction. This increase could contribute to existing air pollution in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin and has the potential to exceed regional air emission thresholds established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Construction activities associated with project development, including building demolition, grading, and ground disturbance, could increase concentrations of particulate matter and could expose sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants. The project is also located adjacent to Highway 101 which could expose future residents of the site to toxic air contaminants. LSA will conduct an air quality analysis for the EIR consistent with the May 2011 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. The air quality analysis for the project will include the following components: (1) assessment of baseline air quality in the area based on data from the BAAQMD, California Air Resources Board (ARB), and previously identified information in the Inner Harbor Specific Plan and Harbor View Project EIR; (2) quantitative assessment of project construction and operational ATTY/AGR/2017/AMENDMENTS/AMEND NO.1 LSA ASSOCIATES INC. REV: 05-03-17 VR Page 11 of 27 6.1.A. - Page 14