Reso24 16252 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

75 to contaminated soil and/or groundwater and/or hazardous fumes. The DTPP EIR determined that the impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation was required. The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR concurred that impacts related to exposing people and/or the environment to prior contamination associated with existing hazardous materials sites would be less than significant. The proposed project component is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List) (https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/, viewed 1/25/2024). While the project component would not be located on a Cortese List site, there is one Cortese List site in State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database that is located immediately adjacent to the project component site to the east across Walnut Street. The Former Broadway Produce & Flowers leaking underground storage tank (LUST) site (T0608100085), located at 1870 Broadway, was previously used as a gasoline service station and was later redeveloped into an office building. While this site formerly contained five underground storage tanks (USTs) and contaminated groundwater and soils, remediation work was completed per the oversight of cleanup oversight agencies and the site has a status of “Completed – Case Closed” as of 7/7/2011. Because remediation efforts are complete and the site has been issued a closure letter or other formal closure decision document, the Former Broadway Produce & Flowers site immediate proximity to the project component site is not likely to result in an adverse hazardous materials impact. In the event of the discovery of unknown hazards, compliance with the regulatory framework would adequately address any potential impacts associated with exposure to contaminated soil and/or groundwater and/or hazardous fumes. The impacts would be less than significant. As a result, this project component would be consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. e. The project component site is located within San Carlos Airport Influence Area A, as is the entire DTPP area (DTPP program EIR pp. 14-9, 14-10, and Figure 14.1). The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed the DTPP prior to its adoption and found that its goals, objectives, policies, and development criteria were consistent with the San Carlos Airport Land Use Plan (DTPP EIR pp. 14-16 and 14-17; also see Final EIR comment letter L5 and p. 2- 101). The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (pp. 14-11 through 14-12) concurred with the DTPP EIR conclusion that the impacts related to consistency with the San Mateo County ALUCP were less than significant and no mitigation was required. In addition, because the proposed maximum building height would be less than 200 feet, the project component would not require FAA notification (San Mateo County C/CAG, Comprehensive ALUCP for the Environs of San Carlos Airport, Exhibit 4-4a: FAA Notification Form 7460-1 Filing Requirements; adopted October 2015, amended October 13, 2022). Therefore, implementation of the proposed project component would not result in an airplane-related safety hazard for people residing or working in the project component vicinity. The impacts related to safety and noise hazards associated with airports would be less than significant. As a result, this project component would be consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. f. The DTPP EIR determined that, because future development would create additional traffic congestion and could possibly interfere with emergency response or evacuation, the DTPP would create a potentially significant impact as it relates to impairment or interference with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. The DTPP EIR includes Mitigation Measure 8-1, which would address this impact by providing signal prioritization for emergency vehicles at additional intersections where needed. The DTPP EIR concluded that implementation of Mitigation Measure 8-1 would reduce the potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR concurred and determined that Mitigation Measure 8-1 had been implemented and the Plan-Wide Amendments would not add any new traffic signals, so the impacts would be less than significant. The project component design would be required to comply with all applicable City codes and regulations pertaining to emergency access, as well as fire protection and security. DTPP program EIR Mitigation 8-1 requires the City to implement signal detectors at selected intersections as needed over time to provide priority traffic signal timing for emergency response vehicles. The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (pp. 14-12 through 14-13) concurred with the DTPP EIR conclusion; in addition, the DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR noted that, “the City has implemented signal prioritization at 15 intersections in the Downtown, including around Fire Station No. 9 on Marshall Street, and at more intersections in the vicinity, effectively implementing Mitigation Measure 8-1.” As a City standard condition of approval for all development projects, the project component applicant must prepare a mandatory construction traffic routing and parking plan subject to City review and approval, to ensure that adequate emergency access is maintained during construction; all traffic control for lane closures during construction shall conform to the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook administered by the City. As a result of the above requirements, the proposed project component would not impair or interfere with emergency access, and the impact is considered less than significant. As a result, this project component would be consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR ATTY/RESO.0074/CC RESO 847 WOODSIDE (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST REV: 10-23-24 VR Page 75 of 135