Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />83 <br />can be mitigated by the developer at such time.” (See below, “Post-Phase I ESA Monitoring/Evaluation Activities- <br />999 El Camino Real,” for updated activities related to 999 El Camino Real.) <br /> Because the Commercial component proposes demolition of the existing buildings to redevelop the site, the Phase I <br />ESA-947/999 El Camino Real concluded a comprehensive ACM survey would be required prior to any renovation or <br />demolition activities at the site (p. 35). Also based on the age of the onsite building, the Phase I ESA-947/999 El <br />Camino Real concluded that “it is possible that lead-based paints were used historically on facility structures” though <br />during the site visit the paint of observed surfaces was in fair condition (p. 36). <br /> Post-Phase I ESA Monitoring/Evaluation Activities-999 El Camino Real. Subsequent to preparation of the 2022 <br />Phase I ESA-947/999 El Camino Real, regulatory oversight of 999 El Camino Real by the San Mateo County <br />Groundwater Protection Program (GPP) continued with monitoring and assessment activities that resulted in San <br />Mateo County GPP issuance of a case closure memorandum in 2024. The case closure memorandum concluded the <br />999 El Camino Site to be eligible for closure, stating, “The subject site appears to satisfy the California State Water <br />Resource Control Board (SWRCB) Low-Threat UST Case Closure Policy (LTCP),” because with respect to <br />petroleum-based soil vapor, “The site meets the criteria for [LTCP] Scenario 4 – Direct Measurement of Soil Gas <br />Concentration at soil vapor probe SV-1A and soil vapor probe SV-2. Benzene, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene <br />compounds were not detected in these samples over the last two opposite season sampling events. The detection limits <br />were below those established in the LTCP for commercial use land use scenario where no bioattenuation zone is <br />present.”16 <br /> San Mateo County GPP issued a case closure memo, concluding “…all appropriate response actions appear complete <br />and further investigation, remedial/removal actions, or monitoring of the release does not appear warranted.”17 GPP <br />notified affected agencies and owners of properties of the intent to close the case to provide an opportunity for <br />comment. As GPP explained to the current Commercial Component property representative in a notification letter <br />dated August 14, 2024,18 “If case closure is granted under these conditions [that residual contamination is proposed <br />to be left in place to naturally attenuate], then GPP staff will request the local municipality to notify GPP of any <br />proposed development on or around the affected parcels for potential interaction with impacted soil and groundwater <br />which may result in a request for a Soils and Groundwater Management Plan and a Site-Specific Risk Assessment to <br />be submitted to GPP by the developer.” A similar letter was sent by County GPP staff to City of Redwood City <br />planning and building staff, explaining these proposed future requirements (possible Soils and Groundwater <br />Management Plan and a Site-Specific Risk Assessment).19 <br /> A “Well Destruction Work Plan” was prepared for Chevron, the former property owner, by Arcadis U.S., Inc., dated <br />October 7, 2024, which outlined the process for groundwater monitoring well and soil vapor probe sampling <br />destruction and removal.20 The well destruction plan was submitted to GPP for review, and GPP informed Chevron <br />that the final report documenting well destruction activities and disposal of waste would need to be submitted to GPP <br />no later than April 15, 2025.21 <br /> <br />16 As explained in the Water Board “Low-Threat Underground Storage Tank Case Closure Policy,” a bioattenuation zone is <br />“an area of soil with conditions that support biodegradation of petroleum hydrocarbon vapors.” -- <br />https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/resolutions/2012/rs2012_0016atta.pdf; accessed 1/25/25. <br />17 Memo from San Mateo County Groundwater Protection Program to File, re SMCo. LUFT [Leaking Underground Fuel <br />Tank] Case #330241/BLA-0000019827, APN: 052-351-030, Former Cissna Chevron Station (Chevron #381493) 999 El <br />Camino Real, Redwood City, California, August 8, 2024; <br />https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/view_document?docurl=/regulators/deliverable_documents/6002866446/20240808%5 <br />FCLOSURE%20MEMO%5FCissna%20Chevron%2Epdf; accessed 1/25/25. <br />18 <br />https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/regulators/deliverable_documents/4705655753/20240814_PreClosure_Noti <br />fication_Prop%20Owner_Cissna%20Chevron.pdf; accessed 1/24/25. <br />19 <br />https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/regulators/deliverable_documents/4705655753/20240814_PreClosure_Noti <br />fication_Agencies_Cissna%20Chevron.pdf; accessed 1/25/25. <br />20 "Well Destruction Work Plan, Former Chevron Facility No. 381493, 999 El Camino Real, Redwood City, California, San <br />Mateo County LOP Case No. 330241; Arcadis U.S., Inc., October 7, 2024, <br />https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/esi/uploads/geo_report/7021661698/T10000011642.PDF; accessed 1/25/25. <br />21 Letter from County of San Mateo Environmental Health Services/Groundwater Protection Program to Chevron <br />USA/Chevron Environmental Management Company, October 22, 2024, <br /> <br />ATTY/RESO.0028/CC RESO CEQA GUIDLINES (920 SHASTA) - EXHIBIT A <br />REV: 04-22-25 VR <br /> <br />Page 83 of 148