Reso24 16252 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

78 the removal and disposal of hazardous materials, such as asbestos-containing materials or lead-based paint. Development projects in the Planning Area are required to comply with applicable local, State, and federal-mandated site assessment, remediation, removal, and disposal requirements for coil, surface water, and/or groundwater contamination (p. 4.9-21). Redwood City General Plan Public Safety Element Program PS-57 ensures development avoids or minimizes potential impacts associated with accidental release of asbestos from construction activities. Continued implementation of the requirements of the General Plan Public Safety Element and project component compliance with existing local, State, and federal environmental site assessment and remediation procedures would ensure potential project component impacts related to upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials would be less than significant. As noted above, the proposed project component would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, nor would the project component emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials. As a result, this project component would be consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU EIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. c. The Focused GPU EIR concluded that the project component’s potential impact on schools related to hazardous emissions or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste would represent a less than significant impact with implementation of federal, State, and local regulation and oversight of hazardous materials, including State regulations on the siting of hazardous materials facilities that limit their location in proximity to schools (pp. 4.9-21 – 4.9-22). The proposed project component is not anticipated to result in the emission, transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school. The nearest school, Adelante Selby Spanish Immersion School, is approximately 0.44 miles south of the project component site. As discussed in item (b), the proposed project component would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, nor would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials. The project component-related hazardous materials emissions or handling impact on schools would be less than significant. As a result, this project component would be consistent with the analysis in the Focused GPU EIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. d. The Focused GPU EIR concluded that there are no known sites on the Cortese list that would be housing sites under the Focused GPU and any potential contamination would be addressed through the City’s development requirements in accordance with the General Plan Public Safety Element and compliance with applicable state and federal laws, making the impact 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 1/26/24). There are approximately nine Cortese List sites from the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database located within 1,000 feet of the project component site, all of which are former leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites. The location of the former LUST sites in the project component vicinity does not represent a potentially significant hazardous materials impact as the nine sites all have a status of “Completed – Case Closed,” meaning a closure letter or other formal closure decision document has been issued for the site. Further, the nine sites have undergone remediation for contaminated materials. 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 Focused GPU EIR because it would not create new impacts or increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. e. The Focused GPU EIR Planning Area is located within both Area A and Area B of the San Carlos Airport Influence Area The project component site is located within (Focused GPU EIR, Figure 4.9-1). It found that implementation of the Focused GPU would potentially place new residential development in Area B of the AIA, which would trigger a consistency analysis with relevant ALUCP policies. With regulatory compliance, the Focused GPU EIR determined that the impact would be less than significant. The project component site is located in Area A of the San Carlos Airport Influence Area. Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77, Section 77.9 requires notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) by developers proposing structures taller than the indicated elevations (p. 4.9-24). Applicable development must file Form 7460-1 with the FAA at least 30 days before the proposed construction. The project component site is located outside the FAA Notification boundary for maximum building height for the San Carlos Airport (i.e., the project component site is located more than 10,000 feet from the San Carlos Airport runway); the project component does not require FAA ATTY/RESO.0074/CC RESO 847 WOODSIDE (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST REV: 10-23-24 VR Page 78 of 135