Laserfiche WebLink
7.1.A. - Page 25 <br /> c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of <br /> any criteria pollutant for which the project region is <br /> non-attainment under an applicable federal or state <br /> ambient air quality standard (including releasing x <br /> emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for <br /> ozone precursors)? <br /> d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant x <br /> concentrations? <br /> e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial x <br /> number of people? <br /> ANALYSIS: The existing air quality in Redwood City is generally good. From 1997 through 1999, the <br /> national and state standards for nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and ozone were not violated in <br /> Redwood City. However, the state 24-hour PM10 (particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter) <br /> was exceeded on three days in 1999. From 1990 to 2000, the air quality monitoring station in Redwood <br /> City measured only a single exceedence of the national one-hourl4 ozone standard (in 1995). The <br /> project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air quality attainment plan <br /> established by the California Air Resources Board, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District <br /> (BAAQMD) or the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. <br /> Potential air quality impacts related to project construction and operation include those associated with <br /> construction dust and equipment exhaust emissions, operational emissions, and odor potential. These <br /> are discussed separately below. <br /> Construction Dust and Equipment Exhaust Emissions — Construction activities associated with <br /> the project would generate fugitive dust (which includes the respirable fraction known as <br /> PM10). Excavation activities associated with project construction would entail earth disturbance <br /> and potential dust generation. Dust emissions would result from the storage tank and pump <br /> station construction, as well as the trench-and-cover pipeline construction. These activities <br /> could result in localized dust nuisances near the construction activity. <br /> The largest dust particles would be expected to settle out very close to the construction areas, <br /> but some quantities of dust would be wind-borne beyond the construction site toward adjacent <br /> land uses. There is a slightly increased health risk from breathing such benign dust due to small <br /> amounts of active micro-organisms in soil, but the risk factor is considered low. Dust is, <br /> therefore, more of a nuisance as it settles out on parked cars, outdoor foliage and furniture, <br /> rather than a measurable health risk. The PM10 component of fugitive dust emissions consists <br /> of inhalable particulates that can cause adverse health effects. PM10 can include certain <br /> substances, such as sulfates and nitrates, which can cause lung damage directly, or can contain <br /> absorbed gases (e.g., chlorides or ammonium) that may be injurious to health. Project <br /> construction would also result in increased levels of equipment exhaust emissions (nitrogen <br /> oxides), and to a lesser extent carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and hydrocarbons or reactive <br /> organic gases (ROG). Construction employee vehicles and on-site use of pick-up trucks and small <br /> vehicles would also result in air pollutant emissions, but the levels would be negligible compared <br /> to emissions form on-site heavy equipment and from off-site trucks. Equipment exhaust <br /> 11 <br />