Laserfiche WebLink
<br />84 <br />project construction to control contamination of surface flows and the potential discharge of pollutants from <br />commencement of construction through project completion. The SWPPP document itself remains onsite during <br />construction. After completion of the project, the owners are required to submit a Notice of Termination to the <br />RWQCB to indicate that construction is completed. <br /> The DTPP program EIR (pp. 10-23 through 10-24) concluded that possible construction period erosion and <br />contamination effects would be adequately mitigated with the required implementation of the extensive City, County, <br />and RWQCB requirements, which would be implemented during construction and monitored by the City Engineer. <br />The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (pp. 10-41 through 10-42) generally concurred with the DTPP EIR <br />conclusion but includes Mitigation Measure UT-8, which relates specifically to proposed realignment and alteration <br />of Arroyo Ojo. Because Mitigation Measure UT-8 would not apply to this project component, the impact would be <br />less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. <br /> ii) As discussed in item (a), the project component would not result in substantial surface runoff that would result in <br />flooding on- or offsite. The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. <br /> iii) As discussed in item (a), project component stormwater control measures would be designed to meet C.3 <br />stormwater criteria and would thereby minimize potential project component-related pollutant runoff. These control <br />measures would be required to meet City storm drain design criteria to maintain post-development peak runoff rates <br />and average volume of runoff similar to existing pre-development levels. This would be expected to minimize impacts <br />on downstream drainage systems. The proposed project component would result in an increase in total impervious <br />surface area; however, as discussed in item (a), the proposed stormwater management plan would provide for more <br />than the required amount of stormwater treatment via a series of flow-through planters, media filters, and Silva Cells. <br />While there would be adjustments to surface area by type—i.e., building roof, asphalt pavement, concrete pavement, <br />replacement of undeveloped surface area in the Spring Street Parklet—the post-development impervious surface area <br />(97,472 square feet) would be greater than the pre-development impervious surface area (87,403 square feet) (Sandis, <br />“Appendix D: C.3 Development Review Checklist”). As discussed above in item (a), the total surface area requiring <br />stormwater treatment would equal 2,896 SF (1,583 SF onsite and 1,313 SF offsite), and the proposed project <br />component proposes to treat 3,277 SF (1,736 SF onsite and 1,541 SF offsite), an additional 381 SF of treated area. <br />Because the project component would provide treatment of more stormwater than required, the project component <br />would not create a substantial additional source of polluted runoff or substantially increase runoff compared to the <br />existing condition, and the project component impact would be less than significant. <br /> iv) As analyzed in the DTPP program EIR (pp. 10-17 and 10-22) and discussed in item (d) below, the project <br />component site is currently located in a Special Flood Hazard Area as defined by the Federal Emergency Management <br />Agency (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The project component site is located in “Zone AE” <br />with a base flood elevation of 10 feet, which as a designated special flood hazard area is an areas of 1% annual chance <br />flood; also called the “100-year flood,” as indicated on FEMA Map number 06081C0301F Panel 301 of 510, dated <br />April 5, 2019. As discussed in the DTPP program EIR (p. 10-25), standard City requirements for flood protection, as <br />applicable, would ensure that potential impacts from flooding would be less than significant. The DTPP Plan-Wide <br />Amendments program SEIR (p. 10-42) concurred with the DTPP EIR conclusion. For these reasons, the project <br />component impact would be consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR because it would not create new impacts or <br />increase impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. <br />d. The DTPP program EIR (pp. 10-25 through 10-27) concluded that impacts on DTPP-facilitated development related <br />to flood hazards, tsunami, and seiche would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. The DTPP Plan- <br />Wide Amendments program SEIR (p. 10-42) concurred with the DTPP EIR conclusion. As analyzed in the DTPP <br />program EIR (pp. 10-17 and 10-22) and discussed in item (c)(iv) above, the project component site is currently located <br />in a FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Area. However, the project component site would not be affected by a <br />tsunami or seiche due to its inland location (about three miles from the shoreline and ten feet above sea level). In light <br />of this location, the impact of the 1900 Broadway project component would be less than significant. This project <br />component would be consistent with the analysis in the EIR/SEIR because it would not create new impacts or increase <br />impacts, and there is no new information of substantial importance for CEQA purposes. <br />e. The DTPP program EIR (pp. 10-23 through 10-25) concluded that DTPP-facilitated development would not violate <br />water quality standards or conflict with goals and objectives in water quality control plans and sustainable groundwater <br />management plans. The DTPP Plan-Wide Amendments program SEIR (pp. 10-42 through 10-43) concurred with the <br />DTPP EIR conclusion finding that the impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. <br /> The project component would be required to comply with the County's stormwater runoff treatment standards, and <br />would therefore be consistent with the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan, which <br />designates water quality objectives for surface waters and groundwater and includes implementation programs to <br />ATTY/RESO.0074/CC RESO 847 WOODSIDE (CEQA) - EXHIBIT 1 - CEQA CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST <br />REV: 10-23-24 VR <br /> <br />Page 84 of 135