Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development Addendum to EIR - City of Burlingame - Burlingame.org
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
City of Burlingame Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development Addendum to EIR September 2018 717 Market Street, Suite 650 San Francisco, CA 94103 650-373-1200 www.panoramaenv.com
City of Burlingame Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development Addendum to EIR September 2018 Prepared for: City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Prepared by: Panorama Environmental, Inc. 717 Market Street, Suite 650 San Francisco, CA 94103 650-373-1200 laurie.hietter@panoramaenv.com 717 Market Street, Suite 650 San Francisco, CA 94103 650-373-1200 www.panoramaenv.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 History ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Revisions.................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Evaluation .............................................................................................................................. 4
1.4 Determination ....................................................................................................................... 9
1.5 References........................................................................................................................... 10
List of Tables
Table 1 Comparison of Project Revisions to the Approved Project ..................................... 2
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
iTABLE OF CONTENTS
This page is intentionally left blank.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
iiEIR ADDENDUM
DOUGLAS AVENUE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
EIR ADDENDUM
1.1 HISTORY
Dreiling Terrones Architecture, Inc., representing the property owner (collectively “the
Applicant”), submitted an application to the City of Burlingame (City) Department of
Community Development to demolish two single‐family houses and a 4‐unit apartment
building on two adjacent lots, and construct a 27‐unit, 5‐story apartment building. The
proposed project also includes moving a historic house from the project site and relocating it to
another location in the City. The proposed project would be located on two adjacent lots at 1128
and 1132 Douglas Avenue. The historic house would be moved from 1128 Douglas Avenue to
524 Oak Grove Avenue. The existing house at the Oak Grove Avenue location would be
demolished to accommodate the historic house. The two project sites are in the City of
Burlingame in San Mateo County.
The Applicant revised the proposed project in response to comments on the Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to reduce the number of residential units from 29 to 27,
reduce the required parking, incorporate a guest and delivery parking space, and step back the
front façade of the fifth floor. These changes were evaluated in the Final EIR and determined to
not constitute significant new information (CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(a)) or result in
new significant impacts or a significant increase in the severity of any impacts analyzed in the
Draft EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162) (City of Burlingame, 2017). The Douglas Avenue
Multi‐Family Residential Development Project EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 2015062033)
prepared for the proposed project was certified and the proposed project approved by the
Planning Commission in April 2017. Subsequent to the Planning Commission’s action, the
owner of an adjacent property filed an appeal of the Commission’s action. The Project EIR was
certified and the proposed project approved by the City Council in June 2017. The Notice of
Determination was circulated in June 2017.
On May 18, 2018 the Applicant submitted a request to revise several aspects of the proposed
project. This Addendum will detail the requested project revisions and identify whether the
revisions would result in new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162). The evaluation in
Section 1.3 will identify if the scope of the certified EIR is adequate or if further CEQA
documentation is needed.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
1EIR ADDENDUM
1.2 PROJECT REVISIONS
The Applicant requested project revisions that range from moving the surface parking spaces to
a larger underground garage to reducing the size of bedroom windows. The project revisions
compared to the approved project, as analyzed in the certified EIR, are presented in Table 1.
Table 1 Comparison of Project Revisions to the Approved Project
Component Requirement Approved Project Project Revisions
Parking and Circulation
Parking 33 spaces 34 total parking spaces 33 total underground parking
12 surface spaces (1 spaces
guest/delivery space) 30 of the underground
22 underground spaces spaces will be
accommodated by car
stackers
Driveway 10'-0” Variance from the 10’-0” No need for widening
requirement, for the driveway adjacent to existing
shared driveway width Redwood tree due to
adjacent to the existing relocation of surface parking
Redwood tree in the front spaces
yard, to be 9’-0” 10’-0” wide shared driveway
11’-0” wide shared width beyond the existing
driveway width beyond Redwood tree to allow for
the existing Redwood tree more landscaping
Rear Back-Up - Access from shared Maintain a 24’-0” rear
Aisle driveway to surface driveway back up clearance
parking onto adjacent property
Landscaping and Site Layout
Rear - Surface parking and Communal space (described
Landscaping narrow strip of vegetation below) and wider strip of
and trees along vegetation and trees along
northwestern boundary of northwestern boundary of
project site project site
Community - Enclosed community Enclosed community room,
Room room and outdoor water outdoor communal seating
feature in front of the space, and outdoor water
building feature in rear of the building
Lot Maximum of 49.4% (7,654 sf/15,492 sf) 49.7% (7,699 sf/15,492 sf)
Coverage 50%/7,746 sf
Impervious - 83% (12,801sf/15,492 sf) 49.7% (7,697 sf/15,492 sf)
Surface
Front Minimum 60% 39.7% (774 sf/1,952 sf) a 40.0% (781 sf/1,952 sf) a, b
Setback
Pervious
Surface
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
2EIR ADDENDUM
Component Requirement Approved Project Project Revisions
Flow-Through 4% of 169 sf 456 sf
Bioretention impervious
Planters surface,
reductions per
C3 checklist
Building Design
Number of - 27 27
Units
Average Unit Average 950 sf 948 sf
Size maximum of
1,250 sf
Profile City: 35', Building height: 56'-10" Building height: 56’-10”
maximum, (parapet) e (parapet)
75' with Garage floor depth: ~11’- Garage floor depth: 14’-0”
Conditional 0” below grade below grade
Use Permit c
2013 CBC: 60' d
Setbacks Front setback: Front setback: 19’-11” f Front setback: 20’
15’ Side setback: 11’ Side setback: 11’
requirement, Rear setback: 20’ Rear setback: 20’
19.9' average
setback
Side setback:
7’
Rear setback:
20’
Underground - 10’-0” underground 14’-0” underground garage
Garage garage height height to accommodate car
stackers
Balcony - No community balconies Community balcony at rear
of floors 2 through 5
Massing - Window system at Window system at corridors
corridors on floors 2 on floors 2 through 5 is inset
through 5 are flush with
apartments
- Front wall of the 5th floor is Front wall of the 5th floor is set
set back compared with back further, 7’-6” compared
the bottom floors with the bottom floors
Windows - Medium sized bedroom Small bedroom windows
windows
Construction
Trucks - 874 trucks 991 to 1,024 trucks g
Excavation - 16’ h 17’
Depth
Soil Export - 6,000 cubic yards 6,651 cubic yards
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
3EIR ADDENDUM
Component Requirement Approved Project Project Revisions
Waste - 2,222 cubic yards 2,222 cubic yards
a A variance was granted.
b The plans indicate that 60% impervious surfaces are allowed, but according to the zoning code, 40%
are permitted within the front setback. The 60% impervious surfaces will not require another variance
since there is no increase in the impervious area with the project revisions compared to the approved
project.
c Enclosures for stairways and elevators, and equipment are exempted from the height restriction as long
as these features do not comprise more than 5% of the roof area and do not exceed more than 10
feet above top of parapet.
d Stairway and elevator enclosures are exempt from the height restriction.
e A CUP was granted.
f The Project Data summary indicates a front setback of 19'-10", but the plan drawing indicates a front
setback of 19'-11".
g The increase in trucks is a result of additional soil export, equipment, and construction material import.
h The Final EIR considered excavation to 16’ for concrete supports, which is less excavation than for a
slab floor at grade as now proposed.
Source: (DTA, 2017; DTA, 2018)
1.3 EVALUATION
1.3.1 Aesthetics
Construction techniques and equipment used would be the same as those analyzed in the EIR.
The project revisions would involve construction of a 5‐story building similar to the approved
project. General massing and appearance of the building would be similar to the approved
project. The approved mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce impacts on scenic
resources and from lighting and glare. The revisions to the project would not result in new or
substantially more severe significant impacts on aesthetics than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
No change to conditions would occur that could result in an impact on agriculture or forestry
resources. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe
significant impacts on agriculture or forestry resources than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.3 Air Quality
The project revisions would require deeper excavation and increase the quantity of soil
removed during construction. A minor increase in construction materials, particularly concrete,
would be needed to construct the larger underground garage. Truck trips to and from the
project site would increase by up to 17 percent. A small increase in the number of construction
equipment vehicles or duration of use may be needed to complete the project in 14 months.
Construction emissions analyzed in the EIR constituted less than one percent of the BAAQMD
significance thresholds. The increase in truck trips and earth moving activities would result in
greater criteria air pollutant emissions but would not result in a substantially greater impact. No
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
4EIR ADDENDUM
change to the number or type of units constructed as part of the revised project would occur.
Operational criteria air pollutant emissions would not change. The approved mitigation
measures would be implemented to reduce impacts on adjacent sensitive receptors and future
residents. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe
significant impacts on air quality than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.4 Biological Resources
The number of protected trees that would be removed or trimmed would not change as a result
of the project revisions. No changes to the impacts on nesting birds or bats would occur. The
revised project would comply with the appropriate Downtown Specific Plan Conditions of
Approval. The approved mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce impacts on
special‐status bats and protected trees. The revisions to the project would not result in new or
substantially more severe significant impacts on biological resources than those analyzed in the
EIR.
1.3.5 Cultural Resources
The excavation depth would be greater than the approved project but would not significantly
increase the potential for uncovering cultural resources or human remains. The revised project
would comply with the appropriate Downtown Specific Plan Conditions of Approval. The
approved mitigation measure would be implemented to reduce impacts on cultural resources.
The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant
impacts on cultural resources than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.6 Geology and Soils
The acreage of project site disturbance would not increase, although the depth of excavation
would be greater. The 5‐story building would be generally equivalent to the building analyzed
in the EIR, with a 1‐foot deeper foundation. The revised project would be required to comply
with the City’s building code and associated protection measures to minimize erosion. The
approved mitigation measure would be implemented to reduce the risk from unstable soil
units. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe
significant impacts on geology and soils than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
More soil would be exported from the project site and the number of truck trips would increase,
due to the deeper excavation depth required to construct the larger underground garage.
Annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analyzed in the EIR were less than 22 percent of the
BAAQMD significance threshold. The up to 17 percent increase in truck trips would not result
in an exceedance of the significance threshold. No changes to the number or type of units that
would be constructed are proposed as part of the revised project. Operational GHG emissions
would not change. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more
severe significant impacts on GHG emissions than those analyzed in the EIR.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
5EIR ADDENDUM
1.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The project revisions would involve deeper excavation, greater soil export, and potentially more
dewatering. Groundwater in the area is not contaminated (Cornerstone Earth Group, 2015).
Additional dewatering would not increase any hazards impacts. Excavated soil exported from
the project site would be tested and handled in accordance with regulations and the approved
mitigation measure. Temporary road closures and need to implement the emergency access
mitigation measures would not change. The revisions to the project would not result in new or
substantially more severe significant impacts on hazards and hazardous materials than those
analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
The depth of excavation would increase, potentially resulting in more dewatering. As analyzed
in the EIR, construction dewatering would be required to comply with appropriate permits to
minimize impacts on water quality from discharges. The overall area disturbed during
construction of the revised project would not increase compared to the approved project.
Impervious surfaces would decrease from 83 percent to 50 percent of the project site and the
total size of the flow‐through bioretention planters would increase by more than twice (from
169 sf to 456 sf). Stormwater runoff and the potential for siltation of waterways would be
reduced. The approved mitigation measures would be implemented to reduce the impacts on
water quality. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe
significant impacts on hydrology and water quality than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.10 Land Use and Planning
Several project site layout features would change due to project revisions. The front, rear, and
side setbacks, as well as lot coverage, would comply with the zoning requirements for the R‐4
District. Another conditional use permit (CUP) for the building height would not be required
since there is no increase in the building height with the project revisions compared to the
approved project. The variance to permit widening of the shared driveway adjacent to the
existing Redwood tree would no longer be needed with the project revisions. Another variance
for front setback impervious surfaces would not be required since there is no increase in the
impervious area with the project revisions compared to the approved project. No new
environmental impacts would occur. Implementation of the approved mitigation measure to
reduce the shared driveway’s impact from inconsistency with the City of Burlingame’s
Municipal Code would no longer be needed. The revisions resolve community concerns
regarding the shared driveway. The revisions to the project would not result in new or
substantially more severe significant impacts on land use and planning than those analyzed in
the EIR.
1.3.11 Mineral Resources
No change to conditions would occur that could result in an impact on mineral resources. The
revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts
on mineral resources than those analyzed in the EIR.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
6EIR ADDENDUM
1.3.12 Noise
Equipment used during construction and the types of construction activities would not be
significantly different than those analyzed for the approved project. Greater excavation
activities would occur, but surface paving would be reduced. Construction noise would not
noticeably change compared with what was analyzed for the approved project. Replacing the
surface parking lot with a larger below‐ground parking garage would minimize operational
noise associated with vehicles. The increased noise from car doors, alarms, and driving into and
out of the project site from the proposed northwestern shared driveway would be eliminated by
the project revisions. The project revisions include a communal outdoor space in the rear of the
building. Noise levels from normal speech levels can be as high as 58 dBA at 1 meter (Olsen,
1998). With the ambient noise levels of 59 dBA at the project site, noise levels would attenuate to
below 60 dBA at less than 4 feet away from people conversing. The outdoor communal space
would be set back further (approximately 5.5 feet at the closest point) from the property line
than the approved surface parking lot (approximately 2.5 feet at the closest point). Sounds from
people talking are typical in a suburban environment. The inclusion of an outdoor communal
space would not result in noise levels greater than 5 dBA above the existing ambient noise level
of 59 dBA at the property line (City of Burlingame, 1975). Vegetation and the 6‐foot‐tall fence
would further minimize the noise from future residents. The approved mitigation measures
would reduce construction and operational noise impacts. The revisions to the project would
not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts on noise than those analyzed
in the EIR.
1.3.13 Population and Housing
The number of workers needed to construct the revised project would be similar to the
approved project, as analyzed in the EIR. The project revisions do not change the number or
type of units that would be constructed. The maximum number of future residents would
remain the same. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more
severe significant impacts on population and housing than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.14 Public Services
The project revisions would not change the need for public services analyzed in the EIR, as
there would be no increase in the maximum number of future residents. The revisions to the
project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts on public
services than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.15 Recreation
The project revisions include installation of communal outdoor space for residents that was not
a part of the approved project. The outdoor space is within the project footprint analyzed in the
EIR. The number of new units and residents would not change so there is no change to the need
for recreational facilities analyzed in the EIR. The revisions to the project would not result in
new or substantially more severe significant impacts on recreation than those analyzed in the
EIR.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
7EIR ADDENDUM
1.3.16 Transportation and Traffic
Construction of the larger underground garage would require more soil export, construction
materials, and construction debris than analyzed in the EIR. An increase of up to 17 percent
more truck trips over the course of the construction period would be required to transport these
materials to and from the project site. The additional truck trips would not substantially
increase congestion on Douglas Avenue and nearby intersections beyond the impacts identified
in the EIR. The approved mitigation measures would reduce any impacts on intersection
operations. The number and type of units constructed would not change. As such, vehicle trips
during operation of the project would not increase. The relocation of the surface parking spaces
to the underground parking garage would eliminate any potential traffic hazards associated
with ingress and egress through the 9‐foot‐wide northeastern driveway. This change is the
project eliminates a community concern about the shared driveway. The approved Mitigation
Measure Traffic‐2, parts a. and b. would reduce any traffic hazards impacts associated with the
underground garage driveway. Mitigation Measure Traffic‐2, part c. would no longer be
needed because the driveway would not be shared. The revisions to the project would not result
in new or substantially more severe significant impacts on transportation and traffic than those
analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
The project revisions would require construction of a larger underground garage and deeper
excavation. Additional soil and construction debris would be exported from the project site. Soil
disposal could increase by up to 11 percent. It is assumed that ReThink Waste, which provides
waste disposal services to the City of Burlingame, still transports waste to Ox Mountain Landfill
(also referred to as Corinda Los Trancos Landfill). Ox Mountain Landfill has remaining capacity
of nearly 40 percent (approximately 22 million cubic yards) (CalRecycle, 2018). Sufficient
capacity remains to accommodate the increased waste disposal. The number and type of units
that would be constructed would not change. Demand for wastewater treatment facilities,
water, and disposal facilities would not increase during operation of the revised project. The
revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts
on utilities and services systems than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.18 Energy
Construction of the revised project would require deeper excavation and installation of a larger
underground garage. Truck trips could be expected to increase by up to 17 percent. A nominal
increase in energy consumption, compared to the analysis in the EIR, could occur from
additional truck trips and construction equipment needed to complete these construction
activities in 14 months. As with the approved project, the minimal increase in fuel use during
construction would not result in a significant energy impact. The maximum number of future
residents would remain the same. Energy consumption associated with operation of the revised
project would not change. The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially
more severe significant impacts on energy than those analyzed in the EIR.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
8EIR ADDENDUM
1.3.19 Cumulative Analysis
The revised project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts on
any resource that could result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative impacts. The
revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant
cumulative impacts on any resource than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.3.20 Other CEQA Topics
The project revisions would not result in a change to the zoning or land use designations of the
project site. The revisions to the project would not commit future generations to significant
changes in land use.
Construction and operation of the revised project would involve use of small quantities of
hazardous materials, similar to the approved project. The revisions to the project would not
result in a new potential for irreversible change as a result of an environmental accident. The
potential would remain low.
As discussed above, the underground garage would be larger and a 17 percent more truck trips
would occur throughout construction compared to the approved project. A small increase in
fuel use and materials used during construction would occur as a result of the project revisions.
The revised project would still be relatively small and would not consume significant quantities
of non‐renewable resources.
The revisions to the project would require a similar number of construction workers and the
maximum number of future residents would remain the same as the approved project. The
revisions to the project would not result in growth‐inducing impacts.
The revisions to the project would not result in new or substantially more severe significant
impacts on the environment than those analyzed in the EIR.
1.4 DETERMINATION
No new or substantially more severe significant impacts would occur as a result of the project
revisions. No new substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under
which the project would be undertaken. The mitigation measures and determination of
significance for impacts included in the adopted EIR would continue to be valid. None of the
conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring the preparation of a
subsequent EIR or CEQA Guidelines Section 15163 requiring preparation of a supplemental EIR
have occurred. This addendum to the adopted EIR is an appropriate level of environmental
review for the project revisions, as identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
9EIR ADDENDUM
1.5 REFERENCES
CalRecycle. (2018). Facility/Site Summary Details: Corinda Los Trancos Landfill ( Ox Mtn) (41‐AA‐
0002). Retrieved from Solid Waste Information System (SWIS):
http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/41‐AA‐0002/Detail/
City of Burlingame. (1975, September 15). Noise Element. General Plan.
City of Burlingame. (2017, February). Douglas Avenue Multi‐Family Residential Development
Project . Final EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2015062033.
Cornerstone Earth Group. (2015, August 31). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 1128 and
1132 Douglas Avenue Burlingame, California.
DTA. (2017, April 24). Site Plan.
DTA. (2018, August 6). Site Plan.
Olsen, W. O. (1998). Average Speech Levels and Spectra in Various Speaking/Listening
Conditions: A Summary of the Pearson, Bennett & Fidell (1977) Report. American Journal
of Audiology, 1059‐0889.
Douglas Avenue Multi-Family Residential Development
Addendum to EIR ● September 2018
10You can also read
