The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About620 Airport Boulevard - Environmental Document. M � �� CITY 0 � � BURLINGAME 0 'y�o� ' 90 �FATED JUNEb The City of Burlingame C[TY HALL 501 PRIMROSG ROAD TEL: (650) 558-7250 PLANNING DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 940103997 FAX: (650) 696-3790 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION 620 AIRPORT BOULEVARD The City of Burlingame Planning Commission will be considering the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration related to the following project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration is a finding that based on its review of the project and on the mitigation measures proposed, it will not have a significant effect on the environment. Proiect Description: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a long-term airport parking facility at 620 Airport Boulevard. The project would include surface-level parking for approximately 350 parking spaces, as well as access, landscaping, lighting, and drainage improvements, and security fencing. The project site consists of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 026-342-330 Lot Nos. 4 through 8; Block 6. The 3.7- acre, roughly rectangular-shaped project site is located on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, adjacent to Anza Lagoon. The site is currently vacant, consisting of a depressed, graded and predominantly bare central area surrounded by shallow slopes on three sides covered with non-native vegetation. The graded central area of the site is approximately at mean sea level. The slopes on the north and west sides of the property are part of an approximate eight-foot high levee which create the manmade Anza Lagoon. Portions of the west and north sides of the project site are located within the jurisdiction of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Vehicular access to the proposed parking facility would be from Airport Boulevard and egress would be from the adjacent Sheraton Hotel. Mile High Service, which currently operates the hotel parking services at the adjacent Sheraton Hotel, would operate parking services for proposed long-term airport parking facility. The parking lot would provide four east-west aisles and two north-south aisles for internal circulation. All parking spaces would be 9-feet by 20-feet in dimension. Hotel Airport Shuttle would operate the shuttle service for the long-term airport parking facility to and from SFO. When not in use, these shuttles would be stored at the shuttle company's yard on Bayshore Boulevard. No on-site shuttle storage, maintenance, or fueling facilities would be provided at the proposed long-term parking facility. The Planning Commission hearing on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and the project is tentatively scheduled for Mondav, June 14, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Copies of the Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for review at the City of Burlingame Planning Department, Second Floor, Burlingame City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California. Comments on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration must be submitted to the Planning Department before the end of the Planning Commission public hearing on this project. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice ar in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Posted: April 12, 2004 �.. PROOF OF POSTING OF NOTICES Ruben Hurin declares: I am over age 18, not a party to this action, and am employed in San Mateo County at 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, California 94010. On April 12, 2004 , following ordinary business practices, I placed copies of a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration regarding an application for a Miti atg ed N�ative Declaration and Conditional Use Permit at 620 Airport Boulevard . The notices were posted in front of this property, in front of properties on either side of this property, and across the street from this property. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and this was executed on the date shown below at Burlingame, California. Date: �Ij2I�`�" � ---_1 , �� M d�:' � • °� ei • � W T T IP � � Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor STATE OF C.ALIFORNIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit May 13, 2004 Ruben Hurin City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Subject: Conditional Use Permit at 620 Airport Boulevard SCH#: 2004042059 Dear Ruben Hurin: RECEIVED MAY 1 7 2004 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING DEPT. o��,OF PLA�,�NQ� e �rC�� T �.'/� ' � �Of CAL1F�� Jan Boel Acting Director The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that reviewed your document. The review period closed on May 12, 2004, and the comments from the responding agency (ies) is (are) enclosed. If this comment p.ackage is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten-digit State Clearinghouse number in tuRire correspondeuce so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the California Public Resources Code states that: "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive connnents regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final environmental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed comn�ents, we reconunend that you contact the commenting agency directly. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for dratt environmental documents, pursuant to the California Enviromnental Quality Act. Please contact the State C;earinghouse at (9:C) 445-0613 ifyou hu��e any c;uestions regarding the environmentll review nrocess. Sincerely, r--- Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812-3044 TEL (916) 445-0613 FAX (916) 323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov , Document Details Report � State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2004042059 ' Project Tifle Conditional Use Permit at 620 Airport Boulevard Lead Agency Burlingame, City of Type Neg Negative Declaration Description The proposed project is the construction and operation of a long-term airport parking facility. The project would include surface-level parking for approximately 350 parking spaces, as well as access, landscaping, lighting, and drainage improvements, and security fencing. Lead Agency Contact Name Ruben Hurin Agency City of Burlingame Phone 650-558-7250 email Address 501 Primrose Road City Burlingame Project Location County San Mateo City Burlingame Region Cross Streets Airport Boulevard / Anza Boulevard Parcel No. 026-342-330 Township Range Proximity to: Highways Airports Railways Waterways Schoo/s Land Use Base 101 San Francisco International Anza Lagoon / San Francisco Bay Fax State CA Zip 94010 Section Vacant Land / Zoned C-4 (Watertront Commercial) Project /ssues Air Quality; Geologic/Seismic; Noise; Water Quality; Other Issues Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Fish and Game, Region 3; Department of Parks and Recreation; Agencies San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission; Department of Water Resources; Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 4; Air Resources Board, Airport Projects; Air Resources Board, Transportation Projects; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 2; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission Date Received 04/13/2004 Start of Review 04/13/2004 End of Review 05/12/2004 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. r �. nL::DLI�C�-.:; :;L�.E!;�.i'.; i:rf�.�:�[^ :k�r�Vl� I.a-i�EriTi �r,��; � I i c � �, C� E �'��F � �x�l �^ �� .: State of California —The Resources Agencv ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME http://www.dfa.ca.gov POST OFFICE BOX 47 Apri 1 2 8, 2 0 04 YOUNTVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94599 (707)944-5500 Mr. Ruben Hurin Planning Department City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 C � e�� E�� `� 5 ' ��-��'� 1 APR 3 0 2�0� `�' STATE CLEARING HB�SE Dear Mr. Hurin: Conditional 620 Airport SCH# 2004042059, Use Permit Boulevard 3an Mateo County The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has reviewed the document for the subject project. We do not have specific comments regarding the proposed project and its effects on biological resources. Please be advised this project may result in changes to fish and wildlife resources as described in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 753 .5 (d) (1) (A) -(G) 1. Therefore, if you are preparing an Initial Study and Negative Declaration for this project, a de minimis determination is not appropriate, and an environmental filing fee as required under Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d) should be paid to the San Mateo County Clerk on or before filing of the Notice of Determination for this project. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Scott Wilson, Habitat Conservation Supervisor, at (707) 944-5584. Sincerely, / i ^ � �. � ��. Robert W. Floerke Regional Manager Central Coast Region cc: State Clearinghouse � http://ccr.oal.ca.�/ . Find California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Natural Resources, Division 1, Section 753 Conservin� CaC'fornia's �Ni�dC'fe Since 18�0 � ,� a TO: � � NOTICE OF DETERNIINATION Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812-3044 County Clerk County of San Mateo 555 C t Center First Floor FROM: City of Burlingame 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 ��.��_.�a ��.4�... 1�� t�i� 1. �u �C�Q4 oun y , VVr^ 11...,''.' ,. . E:, .� r �.._.� �p '��O Redwood City, California 94063 ��r- .�. f��, �s, Uv :�I �,,, 9 ey G��L �'� '�.��- SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance w��T�c�t4�21152 o e Public Resources Code. ND 533P 620 Airport Boulevard Burlin�ame, CA — Long Term Airport Parkin Fg acility Project Title 2004042059 Margaret Monroe (650) 558-7250 State Clearinghouse Number Contact Person Area Code/Telephone (If submitted to Clearinghouse) 620 Airport Boulevard City of Burlin�ame, San Mateo County Project Location (include County) Project Description: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a long-term airport parking facility at 620 Airport Boulevard. The proj ect would include surface-level paxking for approximately 350 parking spaces, as well as access, landscaping, lighting, and drainage improvements, and security fencing. The 3.7-acre, roughly rectangular-shaped project site is located on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, adjacent to Anza Lagoon. The site is currently vacant, consisting of a depressed, graded and predominantly bare central area surrounded by shallow slopes on three sides covered with non-native vegetation. The graded central area of the site is approximately at mean sea level. Vehicular access to the proposed parking facility would be from Airport Boulevard and egress would be from the adjacent Sheraton Hotel. Shuttle service for the long-term airport parking facility would be provided to and from SFO. No on-site shuttle storage, maintenance, or fueling facilities would be provided at the proposed long-term parking facility. This is to advise that the City of Burlingame, the Lead Agency, has approved the above-described project on September 7, 2004 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: (Date) 1. The project [❑will � will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this proj ect pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. � A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. The EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at: Citv of Burlingame Planning Department, 501 Primrose Road, Burlin�ame CA 94010. 3. Mitigation measures [�were ❑ were not] made a condition of approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [❑was �was not] adopted for this project. 5. Findings [�were ❑ were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. ' 1 Notice of Determination Page 2 This is to certify that the final EIR or Negative Declaration with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at: City of Burlin�ame, Planning De�artment, 501 Primrose Road, Burlin�ame, CA 94010. 10, 2004 Date , , ., SAN MATEO COUNTY ASSESSOR-COUNTY CLERK-RECORDER WARREN SLOCUM 555 COUNTY CENTER REDWOOD CITY, CA 94063 Finalization 2004118057 09/15/2004 08:56am 020 010 Item Title 1 EIRA EIR Administrative Fee 1 EIRD Fish & Game: Notice of Determination Document ID Amount DOC# 2004-000347 1275.00 Time Recorded 08:56 am Total 1275.00 Payment Type Amount Check tendered 1275.00 # 97567 Amount Due 0.00 THANK YOU PLEASE RETAIN THIS RECEIPT FOR YOUR RECORDS C CITY OF BURLINGAME MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION File No. ND-533-P 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility The City of Burlingame by Margaret Monroe on April 12, 2004, completed a review of the proposed project and determined that: (XX) It will not have a significant effect on the environment because revisions in the project have been made and/or mitigation measures are identified to ensure all potential impacts are mitigated to a � less-than-significant level. (XX) No Environmental Impact Report is required. Proiect Description: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a long-term airport parking facility at 620 Airport Boulevard. The project would include surface-level parking for approximately 350 parking spaces, as well as access, landscaping, lighting, and drainage improvements, and security fencing. The project site consists of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 026-342-330 Lot Nos. 4 through 8; Block 6. The 3.7-acre, roughly rectangular-shaped project site is located on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, adjacent to Anza Lagoon. The site is currently vacant, consisting of a depressed, graded and predominantly bare central area surrounded by shallow slopes on three sides covered with non-native vegetation. The graded central area of the site is approximately at mean sea level. The slopes on the north and west sides of the property are part of an approximate eight-foot high levee which create the manmade Anza Lagoon. Portions of the west and north sides of the project site are located within the jurisdiction of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Vehicular access to the proposed parking facility would be from Airport Boulevard and egress would be from the adjacent Sheraton Hotel. Mile High Service, which currently operates the hotel parking services at the adjacent Sheraton Hotel, would operate parking services for proposed long-term airport parking facility. The parking lot would provide four east-west aisles and two north-south aisles for internal circulation. All parking spaces would be 9-feet by 20-feet in dimension. Hotel Airport Shuttle would operate the shuttle service for the long-term airport parking facility to and from SFO. When not in use, these shuttles would be stored at the shuttle company's yard on Bayshore Boulevard. No on-site shuttle storage, maintenance, or fueling facilities would be provided at the proposed long-term parking facility. Reasons for Conclusion: The project site contains a Waterfront Commercial land use designation in the City of Burlingame General Plan, and a Commercial Recreation, Restaurant and Hotel land use designation in the Burlingame Bayfront Specific Area Plan. The proposed long-term parking facility is consistent with these land use designation. The project is zoned C-4, Waterfront Commercial. All zoning code requirements have been met through the project design. Referring to the Initial Study for all other facts supporting findings, it is found that with the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. File No. ND-533-P 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Page 2 �►�►-� =t�� l� �� Sign ture o Processin Official Title Date Signed The determination becomes final after action at a public hearing held before the Planning Commission, unless the commission's action is appealed to the City Council. Date posted: April 12, 2004 Declaration of Postin� I declare under penalty of perjury that I am City Clerk of the City of Burlingame and that I posted a true copy of the above Mitigated Negative Declaration at the City Hall of said City near the doors to the Council Chambers. Executed at Burlingame, California on ___�� 2004. Ap}�led: ( ) Yes ( ) No , T. NkUSSd, CITY CLERK, CITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: 4. Project Location: 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility City of Burlingame Planning Department 501 Primrose Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Ruben Hurin (650) 558-7250 Parcel with an address of 620 Airport Boulevard, Burlingame, California 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Stanford Hotels Corporation 433 California Street, 7`� Floor San Francisco, California 94014-2011 6. General Plan Designallon: General Plan - Waterfront Commercial; Burlingame Bayfront Specific Area Plan — Commercial Recreation, Restaurant and Hotel 7. Zoning: APN: 8. Description of Project: C-4 026-342-330 Lot Nos. 4 through 8; Block 6 Summarv: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a long-term airport parking facility at 620 Airport Boulevard, along the bayfront in the City of Burlingame. The 3.70-acre site is currently vacant. The project would include surface-level parking for approximately 350 parking spaces, as well as access, landscaping and drainage improvements. Existing Site: The roughly rectangular-shaped project site is located on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, adjacent to Anza Lagoon (see Figure 1: Project Site Location; and Figure 2: Aerial Photograph of Project Site). The site is currently vacant, consisting of a depressed, graded and predominantly baze central area surrounded by shallow slopes on three sides covered with non-native vegetation. The graded central area of the site is approximately at mean sea level. The slopes on the north and west sides of the property are part of an approximate eight-foot high levee which create the manmade Anza Lagoon. (Anza Lagoon has a narrow, but direct connection to the San Francisco Bay and is subject to tidal influence.) An abandoned storm drainage system (consisting of number of raised inlets partially connected to storm drain pipes) is located in the central area of the site; this system was originally installed to serve 620 Airport Boulevazd Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Study 1 FSA / 203409 ■ .� � o � •� � � � � � � � O �W � c � ti � � � � � � U ti � �o O c �. ,� a � . � > � � 0 � � a , Q N b C O .� .0 O Q N � O E 0 5 ¢ e � .� E ¢ � U K a O � w Aerial Photograph of Project Site 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking l 20j409 ■ SOURCE: City of Burlingame; Environmen[al Science Associates Figure 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST a previous anticipated development on the site. Other e�sting features on the site include a test well and water meter box in the southwest area of the site, and a catch basin and wood retaining wall which encroach on the east property line. A chainlink fence extends along the perimeter of the site, and is augmented with wood sheeting along the south border. Portions of the west and north sides of the project site are located within the jurisdiction of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC).� Parking Facilitv Characteristics and Operations: The proposed project is the construction and operation of a long-term airport parking facility to serve people wishing to park at an off-site location and use a shuttle service to/from San Francisco International Airport (SFO). Figure 3 presents the proposed site site plan; Figure 4 shows typical cross-sections of the site. The project would include surface-level parking for approximately 350 parking spaces, as well as landscaping along the perimeter of the site, entry gate, lighting and security fencing, and drainage improvemen[s. E�ting and pay booths would take place through the parking and site of the adjacent hotel site to the south. Mile High Service, which currently operates the hotel parking services at the adjacent Sheraton Hotel, would operate parking services for proposed long-term airport parking facility. Vehiculaz access to the proposed parking facility would be from Airport Boulevard and egress would be from the adjacent Sheraton Hotel. Long-term parking patrons would access the parking lot in their vehicles at Airport Boulevard and pass through an entry gate, consisting of an automated ticket dispenser (issuing a paper parking ticket to the patron) with coordinated lift arm. Patrons would then proceed north along the west boundary of the site down a 20-foot wide ramp and then east into the parking area to park their vehicles. The parking lot would provide four east-west aisles and two north-south aisles for internal circulation. Parking aisles would range between appro�mately 20 and 33 feet in width. All parking spaces would be 9-feet by 20-feet in dimension. Hotel Airport Shuttle would operate the shuttle service for the long-term airport parking facility to and from SFO. Hotel Airport Shuttle cunently provides shuttle services for a number of hotels in the area. There would be designated shuttle pick-up and drop-off areas within the proposed long-term parking lot to serve the long-term parking lot patrons. The shuttles would access the long-term parking facility at the entrance on Airport Boulevard and exit at the driveway connecting to the Sheraton Hotel parking lot. Hotel Airport Shutde's vehicles consist of 30-seat capacity buses, and operate with compressed natural gas-burning engines. No additional shuttle buses are anticipated to be required by Hotel Airport Shuttle to serve the proposed project. Hotel Airport Shuttle buses currently operate 5:00 a.m. to midnight daily, at 20-minute frequencies. Between midnight and 5:00 a.m., the shuttles operate on an on-call basis. As under existing conditions, when not in use, these shuttles would be stored at the shuttle company's yard on Bayshore Boulevard. No on-site shuttle storage, maintenance, or fueling ,facilities would be provided at the proposed long-term parking facility. Departing patron vehicles would e�cit the long-term parking facility at a driveway connecting to the Sheraton Hotel parking lot, and proceed to the attendant booth for payment prior to exiting the hotel pazking lot at Airport Boulevard. No increase in Mile High Service parking attendant employment is anticipated to serve the proposed long-term parking lot. � BCDC jurisdiction is measured at 100-feet from the mean high tide line of tidally influenced waters of the San Francisco Bay including Anza Lagoon. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facifity Initial Study 4 FSA / 203409 V� i er�nu Site Plan 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Tenn Parking l 203409 ■ SOURCE: Blunk Dema[tei Associates Architects, AIA Figure 3 TO PARKING IINE OF (� GAADE (SHONRJ DASHFD� (IVPI SECTION C 19;L]9�:L7ICG EOGEOF DAOPEATY LINE 0 SECTION B EDGEOF PROPERN IINE SECTION A SOURCE: Blunk Demattei Associa[es Architec[s, AIA 620 Airport Bou[evard Long-Term Parking / 203409 ■ Figure 4 Site Cross-Sections ENVIRONMENTAL CIIECKLIST Other than the use of Mile High Service (which provides parking services for the adjacent Sheraton Hotel) and Hotel Airport Shuttle (which provides shuttle services for other hotels in the area), the long-term parking lot is proposed to operate independently of the Sheraton Hotel and other hotels and businesses in the area. The proposed long-term parking lot would not be available for use by Sheraton Hotel guests or employees, or other hotels in the area, for either typical or special event use. A tire mechanism (e.g. tiger-teeth strip) would be installed at the exit of the long-term parking lot to prevent potential vehicular access into the long-term parking lot from the Sheraton Hotel parking lot. The project would include nightlighting within the parking facility and potentially with signage elements. Pole-mounted nightlighting would be installed within the parking lot and access road to for visibility and security purposes. The proposed project would also include a minimum six-foot high chain-link fencing encircling the project site for security. Pronosed GradinQ. Drainage and Landscaping Figure 5 illustrates proposed grading and drainage plan for the project. As under existing conditions, the central azea of the site would be depressed and relatively level; surrounded by shallow slopes on the north, west and south boundaries. With the project, elevations on the project site would range from a minimum of approximately 0.75 feet above sea level (at the lowest point within the parking lot) to a maximum of approximately 8.5 feet above sea level (asl) (along the west and south boundaries). The 260-foot long vehicular ramp that descends from Airport Boulevard to the parking lot would have a grade of between approximately one and three percent. A new on-site storm drainage system would be installed to serve the project site. The parking lot would be divided into six primary storm water collection quadrants (each containing a 2- to 2.6 percent grade), with a storm water inlet at the lowest point of each quadrant. Two additional inlets would be located within the access ramp along west boundary, and the proposed landscaping area along the northern boundary, respectively, to collect storm water from these areas. A series of stormdrains ranging between eight and 15 inches in diameter would direct storm flows collected within these inlets to two on-site electric sump pumps. The two pumps would be installed in a parallel connection on-site [each providing 1,650 gallons per minute (gpm) pumping capacity, for a total pumping capacity of 3,300 gpm total], approximately eight to ten feet below the parking lot surface. During storm events, the pumps would direct flows via an eight-inch force main to an existing 21-inch City reinforced concrete storm drainage pipe in Airport Boulevard. The existing test well located on-site would be retained for potential use for any future long- development of the project, but the well would be capped for the proposed interim use. The majority of the site would be paved, including the areas containing the parking lot and access road. The slopes surrounding the parking lot are proposed to be planted with ice plant. If feasible, there is the potential for trees to be planted within the landscaped area as well. Proposed landscaping setbacks include an approximate 50-foot landscaped setback along the southern boundary (adjacent to Airport Boulevard), a 3- to 25-foot landscaped setback along the west boundary, and landscaping setback along the north boundary ranging between 0- to 35 feet. Project Construction: Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to commence in mid-year 2004, with construction occurring over a three-month period. Construction of the project would include clearing and grading of the site, utility installation, construction of new surface parking lot and vehicular entrance, site landscaping and lighting improvements. A total of approximately 2,275 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Study % ESA / 7A3409 0 %/ ��vfi i! � ,,.,>! . �=\ /�;: wicr � � r CP 101.J0 � wv uv.0 � 4� f �. _ � . i� ■ i ■ ' E4.,E �] f--. � 0 � S� I Feet SOURCE: LuzuriagaTaylor,lnc. S�w CUT (E) ow ANo n�L�C( e IN KIXD i0 Y�TCH ApJACENi �__ SOEWNK, CUPB �NO WTIEP. 620 Airport Boulevard L,ong-Term Parking / 203409 ■ Figure 5 Grading and Drainage Plan ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST cubic yards would be cut and filled on the site. No importation of soil is expected, other than gravel and sub base for the proposed paving; and no soil is anticipated to be exported from the site. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting. The Bay Trail and Anza Lagoon border the project site on separate parcels on the north and west sides of the property. These bordering properties are owned by the State Lands Corrunission and currently are leased to San Francisco International Airport Hometel (see Figure 6: Existing Ownership). The Sheraton Hotel property (owned by Harbor View Hotels, Inc.) borders the project site on the east side. Airport Boulevard, a four-lane arterial, borders the site on the south. Across Airport Boulevard to the south is a 13-acre, private long-term airport surface parking facility. DHL Worldwide Express is located in the nearest of the office buildings across Anza Lagoon to the west. An open space area and Kincaid's Restaurant are located across Anza Lagoon to the north. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: Review from the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission, and the City/County Association of Governments (GCAG), who administers San Mateo County's Congestion Management Plan. Compliance with National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for discharges into the storm drain. Approval from the Bay Conservation Development Commission for encroachment within its jurisdiction. Approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial SNdy 9 FSA / 203409 Existing Ownership 620 Airpnrt Boulevard Long-Tenn Parking / 203409 ■ SOURCE: City of Burlingame; Environmental Science Associates ' F1gUI'C C) ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources � Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources � Cultural Resources � Geology / Soils ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials � Hydrology / Water Quality ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ Mineral Resources � Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation / Tra�c ❑ Utilities / Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COIILD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. � I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MTTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IlVIPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standazds, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because a11 potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIIZ or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. �- Sign ture �4�2� 2� � '+-'\ t3�Q,c�� Printed Name �� 2-. 2�- Date Citv of Burlin�ame For 620 Airport Boukvazd I,ong-'fertn Parking Facility Initial SNdy 1 1 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? I. AEST'HETICS �ss � signi��ani PoteRtially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Signiftcant Impact Incorporation Impact ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ ■ ■ /1 /1 No Imnact ❑ � ❑ ❑ Setting The site is currently vacant, consisting of a depressed, graded and predominantly bare central area surrounded by shallow slopes on three sides covered with non-native vegetation. The graded central area of the site is approximately at mean sea level. The slopes on the north and west sides of the property are part of an approximate eight-foot high levee which create the manmade Anza Lagoon. The project site is located adjacent to Anza Lagoon, the Bay Trail and Airport Boulevard. Airport Boulevard is designated as a Local Scenic Connector in the City of Burlingame General Plan. Some close-range views of the site (particularly the lower-lying central area) and some views through the site, are currently obstructed from some vantage points by the existing fence encircling the site (which contains wood sheeting along the south border, Airport Boulevard), the levee and/or existing vegetation. While the project site is not currently visible from U.S. 101 due to interceding vegetation, proposed on-site structures, such as light poles, may be visible with the project. The project site is also visible from the hills to the west. I.a Construction Less Than Si�cant ImpacL During the construction phase, the placement of construction equipment and daily movement of on-site construction vehicles and off-site materials delivery trucks, stockpiling of materials on the site, and other potential construction associated nuisances (e.g., dust), would create temporary negative aesthetic effects to travelers on Airport Boulevard, users of the adjacent recreational facilities, and occupants of adjacent businesses with views of the site. Since the effect is temporary and limited to the construction period, it is not considered significant. However, implementation of the following measures would ensure potential visual impacts during construction would remain less than significant. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial SNdy 12 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Measure: • Construction staging areas shall be kept clear of all trash, etc. Construction staging areas shall be located away from Airport Boulevard and adjacent businesses so they are not visible from public view. • During construction, a screened security fence approved by the City of Burlingame, shall be maintained around the perimeter of the project parcel and removed immediately following construction work. • During construction, no construction-related equipment or vehicles shall be stored on Airport Boulevard. Operation Less Than Significant Impac� Given that relatively minimal alteration of the existing topography on the site would occur, and because the proposed project would not contain any large or obtrusive structures, the project would not increase potential blockage of views from portions of the Bay Trail to the coastal ridge, nor would it increase potential blockage of views of Anza Lagoon and the Bay from Airport Boulevard compared to e�cisting conditions. Implementation of the following measure would ensure potential long-term visual impacts during operation would remain less than significant. Measure: • Proposed security fencing shall constructed to be visually open (i.e., not opaque) such that views through the site would not be obstructed. I.b No Impact. The project site consists of a vacant lot on landfill, containing a manmade earthen berm and covered with non-native vegetation. The site itself dces not contain any visually significant geologic, hydrologic, vegetative, cultural or structural features. There are no designated state scenic highways in the project vicinity. Ic. Less Than Significant Impac� As discussed above, while the project site is located adjacent to the scenic Anza Lagoon, there are no visually significant natural features on the project site itself. The project site is located adjacent to other existing commercial uses, including another long-term parking facility, as well as ofiice and hotel uses which also contain parking facilities. Since the project site is depressed and the proposed use is compatible, the proposed project would not be considered visually incompatible with adjacent uses. Consequently, with proposed landscaping, setbacks and conformance with other City zoning requirements, the project would not substantially degrade the e�cisting visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Id. Less Than Significant Impac� Development of the proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare onto the project site and increase ambient light at night in the site vicinity, including at the hotel property immediately adjacent. The project would include nightlighting within the pazking facility and potentially with signage elements. The specific layout of the proposed exterior lighting design for the development including fixture types would be subject to the City review and approval. Proposed nightlighting would be pole-mounted and similar in type and intensity to that used in nearby parking lots. The preliminary estimated average illuminance 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility lnitial Stvdy 13 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST values on the project site provided by the proposed nightlighting is 3.66 foot-candles2; this value would not be expected to cause excessive spill light off-site. The Burlingame Municipal Code requires that exterior lighting on all commercial properties shall be designed and located so that the cone of light and/or glare from the lighting element is kept entirely on the property or below the top of any fence, hedge or wall. Potential glare from vehicular headlights from project traffic entering the site from Airport Boulevard and from traffic circulating within the project site, would not cause significant glare at off-site locations, because the traffic would ,be greatly shielded by the slopes, vegetation and security fencing surrounding the project site. Although no mitigation is required, the following lighting measures for the proposed development would further minimize potential light and glare effects: Measure: • Non-glare fixtures which focuses the cone of light on site should be used for all exterior lighting; and Proposed project lighting shall be designed to avoid casting glare on off-site receptors including adjacent hotel, office buildings, public streets and sidewalks, in accordance with Burlingame Municipal Code Section 18.16.210. Z A"foot-candle" is a standard unit, established as reference, that is used when measuring quantity of light. One foot-candle equals the total intensity of light that falls upon a one square foot sudace that is placed one foot away from a point source of light that equals one candle power. 620 Airport Bwlevard Long-Term Pazking Facility Initial SNdy 14 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentinlly Significant Inwacr Less Than Signiftcant With Mitigation Incomoration Less Than Significant Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farniland of Statewide Importance (Farniland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES ❑ o 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ _� ►/ /� II.a-c No Impact. The project site is not located on or near any agricultural land. The project site, as with the majority of developed land in Burlingame, is designated Urban and Built-Up Land by the California Department of Conservation (Department of Conservation, 2000). Thus, the project would not convert any prime farmland, unique farniland or Farn�iland of Statewide Importance; would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural land; or involve any changes to the environment that could result in conversion of farmland. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking FaciGty Initial SNdy 1$ FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potenrially Signif[cant Impact Less Than Sigrtificant With Mitigation Incorvoration Less Thm� Significant No Imoact Imnact III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following deternunations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � � �I � ❑ � ❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ III. AIR QUALITY '■ // III.a-d Construction Less Wan Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. Construction of the project is anticipated to occur over a three-month period. The proposed area of grading is approximately 3.70 acres. Project consttuction could generate substantial amounts of fugitive dust. Dust emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the level and type of activity, silt content of the soil, and the prevailing weather. A large portion of the total construction dust emissions would result from equipment and motor vehicle traffic over the project site. Other sources of fugitive dust during construction would include earth movement, grading, and wind erosion from exposed surfaces. Project construction activities may result in significant quantities of dust in the absence of mitigation measures, and as a result, local visibility and PM10 concentrations may be adversely affected on a temporary and intermittent basis. This would be a significant effect of the project. With respect to the other emissions sources associated with project construction, their related emissions are generally included in the emissions inventory that is the basis for regional air quality plans and are not expected to impede attainment or maintenance of ozone and carbon 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking FaciGty Initial Study 16 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST mono�de standards in the Bay Area (BAAQMD, 1999). Therefore, construction-related emissions, other than dust, would not be significant. Mitigation Measure III-1: Prior to commencement of grading and/or construction acNvities, the project sponsor shall submit a dust abatement program for review and approval of the City's NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) administrator and City Planning Department staff. The project sponsor shall require the construction contractor to implement this dust abatement program. Elements of the program shall include the following: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily; • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., the minimum required space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer); • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; • Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; • If visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets, the streets shall be swept (preferably with water sweepers); • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded azeas inactive for ten days or more); • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved surfaces to 15 miles per hour; • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways; • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; and • Designate a person or persons to oversee the implementation of a comprehensive dust control program and to increase watering, as necessary. The above list of ineasures is recommended by BAAQMD as feasible control measures to reduce construction dust emissions. With implementation of these mitigation measures, the residual effect would be less than significant. Operation Less Than Significant Impac� During operation of the project, the project would generate emissions from mobile sources, primarily from patron vehicles and operation of shuttle vehicles. As discussed in the project description, there would be no increase in employees, and therefore no associated increase in employee vehicle trips, compared to existing conditions. No increase in the existing Hotel Airport Shuttle vehicle fleet (the proposed shuttle service provider for the long-term parking facility) is anticipated to serve the project, although it is reasonable to assume that existing shuttles would make either link or new trips to serve the project site. It should be noted that the Hotel Airport Shuttle fleet that would serve the project would consist of 30-seat capacity buses with, compressed natural gas (CNG) engines. CNG buses have cleaner-burning engines compazed to conventional diesel buses, and correspondingly, generate considerably lower air emissions, particularly with NOx and PM. The total daily vehicle trip generation for the project is conservatively estimated at approximately 250 daily one-way trips. This addition of daily vehicle trips would result in 67A Airport Boulevazd Long-Temt Parking Facility Initial SNdy 1% ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST emissions that would be well below the applicable significant thresholds levels for any criteria air pollutants, including NOx, PM10, ROG, SOx, and CO. Any incremental increases in CO concentrations at local intersections would also remain well below state and federal standards, and therefore would be considered less than significant. Furthermore, the project's contribution to cumulative increases in emissions would not be cumulatively considerable. III.e No Impac� There are no anticipated activities associated with site development that would be expected to be a significant source of new, objectionable odors. 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Term Pazking Facility Initial Smdy 1 g FSA / 7A3409 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Less Than Signifecant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significanr No Impact Incorporation Impact Imoact u ❑ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ 0 �� ►� �� c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, flling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ❑ ❑ ❑ � d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? ❑ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ■ ■ ►1 � � �� fl Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ❑ IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ■ ■ ►� IV.a No Impac� Consultation with the Califomia Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB, 2003) and the California Native Plant Society's (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California were conducted for special status species in the U.S. Geological Survey San Mateo 7.5 minute quadrangle. ESA biologists also conducted field reconnaissance surveys of the immediate project site and local surrounding vicinity on May, 2001 and November, 2003. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 19 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The site consists primarily of large, barren topographic depression composed of imported fill material. This basin bottom is graded and is surrounded on three sides by moderately vegetated slopes. Vegetation within the basin consists of low grasses such as soft chess (Bromus hordeaceous) and ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), with black mustard (Brassica nigra) and coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis) growing on the surrounding upland areas. The native pacific gum plant (Grindelia stricta) occurs as a planted ornamental species in the upper portions of the basin alongside the native shrub coyote bush. Few wildlife species were observed on the site, and based on the overall lack of habitat, those expected to occur on the site would only consist of common, disturbance-adapted species. Such bird species include house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), English spanow (Passer domesticus), and rock dove (Columba Zivia), and perhaps house mouse (Mus musculus) and California vole (Microtus californicus). Due to its constructed origin and history of disturbance, the project site itself has no potential to support special status plant or wildlife species. Anza Lagoon, a manmade lagoon, lies to the north and west of the project site. The San Francisco Bay shoreline adjacent to the project area and at Anza Lagoon is fortified with large boulder riprap, and is largely unvegetated. Plants that interspersed with the riprap along the shoreline include saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) and non-native ice plant (Carpobrotus chilensis). Aquatic birds such as mallard duck (Anas platyrhynchos) and snowy egret (Egrena thula) commonly forage in shallow shoreline habitats in Anza Lagoon, while species such as double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus), common loon (Gavia immer), and California gull (Larus californicus) forage in deeper Bay waters. Of these aquatic birds, mallard ducks may nest in upland habitats immediately adjacent the bay shoreline. Like most native birds, active nests for these species are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The project would not have an effect on foraging or nesting of any of these species. Additionally, the project would not have any impacts on common or special status wildlife species in Anza Lagoon. Special Status Wildlife Based upon database searches, ESA's expert in-house knowledge of local species' distributions, and surveys of the project site and adjacent areas, no special status plant or wildlife species were identified in the local project vicinity. Several wildlife and plant species that are reported within five miles of the miles of the project aze considered below on an individual basis. Califomia Clapper Rail: The California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus), listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish Game (CDFG), nests and forages in salt and brackish water marshes. This species typically occurs in gradually sloped shoreline marshes that support perennial pickleweed (Salicornia virginica) and/or Pacific cordgrass (Spartina foliosa). The adjacent shoreline is fortified with riprap and dces not provide any of the habitat components required by this species. Based on the lack of habitat in the project vicinity, California clapper rail is not expected to nest or feed in shoreline habitats near the project area. Western Snowv Plover: The Westem snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrius nivosus), listed as threatened by the USFWS, utilizes sandy beaches, salt pond levees and shores of lazge alkali flats for nesting and foraging. Due to the absence of suitable habitat and ongoing local disturbances (e.g., grading) this species is not present on or near the project area. Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse: The salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris raviventris) is listed as endangered by the USFWS and CDFG. This species inhabits saline 620 Airport Bwlevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial SNdy 2� FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST emergent wetlands dominated by dense stands of perennial pickleweed in the San Francisco Bay and its tributaries. There is no pickleweed habitat that would support this species on or near the project site. Myrtle's Silverspot: Myrtle's silverspot butterfly (Speyeria zerene myrtleae), listed as endangered by the USFWS, is restricted to costal dunes, scrub, and grasslands that support the larval foodplant, western dog violet (Viola adunca). The project site consists entirely of imported fill and does not support the host plant, thus there is here is no potential for Myrtle's Silverspot on the site. California Red-Legge�� California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), listed as threatened by the USFWS, inhabits marshes, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, and slow-moving streams. This frog breeds in seasonal or permanent water bodies with an average depth roughly greater than two feet. There is no aquatic breeding habitat for California red-legged frog in the local project vicinity, therefore this species is considered absent from the project site. Other Special Status Species: A colony of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) was identified in 1987 roughly 0.5 mile south of the project site at Coyote Point (CNDDB, 2003). The eucalyptus trees at Coyote Point provide a roost site for this species; however, no eucalyptus or other suitable roost sites occur on or adjacent to the project site. As a result, monarch butterfly colonies would not occur on or adjacent to the project site. Special Status Plants Because the project site consists primarily of earthen fill, the project site would not support special status plant species. Thus, no impacts would occur to special status plants. IV.b No Impac� No riparian habitat occurs on or adjacent to the project site, thus impacts would not occur to this habitat type. The project would not otherwise affect any sensitive natural communities. IV.c No Impact. The potential presence of jurisdictional wetlands was assessed during biological reconnaissance surveys of the project site. Based on this assessment, jurisdictional wetlands do not occur on the project site. As a result, no impacts will occur to these resources. IV.d No Impact. The project site dces not support any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, and dces not provide a migratory corridor or nursery sites for any species. Due to its disturbed condition, few native or introduced wildlife species occur on the site. As a result, project activities will not inhibit the local or regional movement of wildlife. Because impacts are localized to the immediate project site, the project would not affect habitat for fish or wildlife species in San Francisco Bay or Anza Lagoon. IV.e Less Than Significant Impac� The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commissions (BCDC) jurisdiction (the first 100 feet of the mean high tide line of San Francisco Bay) covers small areas of the north and west portions of the project site. The proposed construction would involve approximately 2,275 cubic yards of material to be cut and filled, some of which would occur within the BCDC jurisdiction on the site. As proposed, a landscaped setback and a portion of the proposed paved access road and parking lot would occur within BCDC's jurisdiction. Prior to construction, the project would be required to consult with BCDC to satisfy any applicable pernutting conditions. Such efforts would ensure that applicable shoreline development regulations would be adhered to. As a result, the 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 21 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST proposed project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances regarding biological resources. IV.f No Impac� Habitat Conservafion Plans (HCPs) are established under Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act; Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs) are established by the Califomia Resources Agency under the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991. These are plans developed specifically to address the impact of a listed species or natural communities in an area, and establish measures to mitigate a project's impact and the funding that will be available. The project site is not located within the area of adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan. 67A Airport Boulevard Long-Term Pazking Facility Initial SNdy 22 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): V. CUI.TURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Less Tfuut Signifrcant Potentially With Less Than Signifrcant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Imaact ❑ � ❑ ❑ � ❑ � ,■ ►1, ❑ ❑ ❑ No Imoaci ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ V.a-d Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporation. The project site and adjacent land areas were reclaimed from the San Francisco Bay by filling in the early 1960's. It is not lmown whether the areas near the original margins of the Bay shoreline in the project vicinity contain azchaeological resources, including shellmound sites. Minimal subsurface disturbance of site soils would occur during site grading and construction of the proposed project. Nevertheless, there is the possibility that buried archaeological deposits could be present, and accidental discovery could occur. Mitigation Measure V-1: If archaeological remains are uncovered, work at the place of discovery should be halted immediately and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the find. Accidental discovery of archaeological deposits could require additional archaeological investigations to deternune the significance of the fmd. Mitigation Measure V-2: If human remains are encountered during project construction, the San Mateo County Coroner's Office will be notified 'unmediately. The coroner will determine if the remains are those of a Native American, and if they are, will notify the Native American Heritage Comrnission. The NaNve American Heritage Commission will make a determination regarding the individual's "most likely descendant" who will then make recommendations for the disposal of the remains. The Native American Heritage Commission will mediate confL'cts between the project proponent and the most likely descendant. Accidental discovery of 6uman remains could require addiNonal investigations to determine if other graves are presen� With implementation of these mitigation measures, the impact would be reduced to a less than significant. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 23 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMEN'I'AL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less 77ian Signifrcant Potentially With Less Thmt Signifrcant Mitigation Significanr Impact Incornoration lmnact ❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � ❑ � 0 0 �� ❑� No lmnact ❑� � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � �� c) Be located on geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? ❑ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? /1 ■ ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ►1 ■ ■ // VI. GEOLOGY AND SOII.S The basin-shaped project site is located along the shoreline of San Francisco Bay on artificial fill. Ground surface topography at the bottom of the basin on the project site is relatively level, with a raised levee along the perimeter of Anza Lagoon near the north and west property boundary. Site elevations range from mean sea level on the basin floor to approximately nine feet above mean sea level (amsl) along the levee crest in the northwest corner of the site. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 24 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST VI.a(i) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or on or immediately adjacent to an active or potentially active fault.3 The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act requires the delineation of zones by the Califomia Department of Conservation, Geological Survey (CGS, formerly known as the California Division of Mines and Geology [CDMG]) along sufficiently active and well- defined faults. The purpose of the Act is to restrict construction of structures intended for human occupancy along traces of known active faults; Alquist-Priolo Zones therefore designate areas most likely to experience surface fault rupture, although fault rupture is not necessarily restricted to those specifcally zoned areas. The nearest active faults are the San Andreas, located 4 miles west, and the Hayward, located 15 miles east. Other nearby active Bay Area faults include the San Gregorio-Hosgri fault, located 15 miles west, and the Calaveras Fault, located 22 miles east (ALB Associates, 2003a, and Jennings, 1994). As the project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or on or immediately adjacent to an active fault, fault rupture hazards associated with the proposed project are considered less than significant. VI.a(ri,iii) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Burlingame and the larger San Francisco Bay Area are located in a seismically active region. Recent studies by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) indicate there is a 63 percent likelihood of a Richter magnitude 6.7 or higher earthquake occurring in the Bay Area in the next 30 years (USGS, 2003). The project site could experience a range of ground shaking effects during an earthquake on one of the aforementioned Bay Area faults. Ground shaking levels could be intensified by the nonengineered artificial fill that currently overlies the project site. A characterstic earthquake on the San Andreas fault could result in violent (Modified Mercalli Index IX) ground shaking intensities.4 Ground shaking of this intensity could result in breakage of underground pipes and conspicuous ground cracking (ABAG, 2003a). Potential ground shaking hazards on the project site are limited by the nature of the project, as no structures would be built. However, the proposed project is separated from San Francisco Bay and Anza Lagoon along the northern and western site boundary by a levee constructed in the 1970's by Harding Lawson Associates (HLA). The levee has a crest height of approximately nine feet amsl, is approximately 40 to 60 feet wide at its base and narrows at the crest to a width of approximately 10 feet (Treadwell and Rollo, 2003). The proposed project would recontour the existing levee slopes along the western portion of the project site through grading activities in order to construct the proposed parking lot access ramp and the southwest corner of the parking lot. Previous geotechnical investigations at the project site have noted that HLA's levee design incorporated a slope stability analysis (ALB Associates, 1993b). Slope stability is usually An active fault is defined by the State of Califomia as a fault that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (approximately the last 10,000 years). A potentially active fault is defined as a fault that has shown evidence of surface displacement during the Quaternary (last 1.6 million years), unless direct geologic evidence demonstrates inactivity for all of the Holocene or longer. This definition does not, of course, mean that faults lacking evidence of surface displacement are necessarily inactive. Sufficiently active is also used to describe a fault if there is some evidence that Holocene displacement occurred on one or more of its segments or branches (Hart, 1997). Shaking intensity is a measure of ground shaking effects at a particular location, and can vary depending on the overall magnitude of the earthquake, distance to the fault, focus of earthquake energy, and type of underlying geologic material. The Modified Mercalli (MM) intensity scale is commonly used to measure earthquake effects due to ground shaking. The MM values for intensity range from I(earthquake not felt) to XII (damage neazly total). The concept of "characteristic" earthquake means that we can anticipate, with reasonable certainty, the actual earthquake that can occur on a fault. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 2$ FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST expressed in terms of an index, referred to as the "factor of safety," which is typically defined as the forces that resist movement (the shearing strength available along a sliding surface) divided by the shearing stresses that tend to produce failure along a surface (Hunt, 1984). Slopes with a factor of safety of 1 or less are considered unstable. HLA's analysis concluded a static factor of safety of 1.7 and a pseudostatic (seismic) factor of safety of 1.0 for a seismic cceff'icient of 0.3g (ALB, 1993b). Expected ground shaking intensities at a particular location is dependent upon several factors, including underlying geologic materials, as the composition of soils, even those relatively distant from faults, can intensify ground shaking. Site-specific analysis in past geotechnical investigations on the project site calculated expected ground surface accelerations of 0.47g from an earthquake on the North Coast section of the San Andreas Fault. This analysis was based upon distance of the project site to known faults, peak bedrock acceleration, and attenuation of bedrock acceleration based on local site conditions (ALB Associates, 1993a). Based upon upwardly revised peak ground shaking estimates due to improved knowledge of earthquakes and seismic effects since the original levee slope stability analysis was performed in the 1970's, the existing levee slopes could fail in the event of a characteristic earthquake (i.e., maximum moment magnititude) on the San Andreas Fault. This failure would not necessarily result in complete levee collapse, but may result in slumping of slope materials or even localized levee failure. The proposed recontouring of the existing levee slope within the project site that would occur with the project would have the potential to affect levee slope stability, if not properly designed. Therefore the following mitigation measure shall be required: Mitigation Measure VI-1: A site-specific, design-level geotechnical invesNgation shall be prepared that assesses the impacts of proposed project modifications to the levee on levee stability and any iill on site. The geotechnical investigation shall be conducted by a California Certified Geotechnical Engineer or Civil Engineer, and shall include an analysis of expected ground motions along the San Andreas fault in accordance the 1997 Uniforu► Building Code (UBC) and the California Building Code (Title 24) additions. Expected ground motions determined by a registered geotechnical engineer shall be incorporated into the final design as part of the projec� The final seismic considerations for the site shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Burlingame Structural and City Engineers before grading permits are issued. The proper design of proposed levee modifications associated with the proposed project as required by Mitigation Measure VI-1 would insure that the proposed project would not adversely impact slope stability of the existing levee. However, this mitigation measure would not correct slope instability in the event of a characterstic earthquake along any portion of the levee. Therefore, the pre-existing potential for levee failure would remain. Localized levee failure could result in temporary flooding of the parking lot and overwhelm the proposed drainage system, particularly if the earthquake coincided with high tide. As the proposed use of the project site is only proposed for long-term parking, and would not contain any buildings, the presence of individuals on-site would be limited. Any potential flooding on site would also have the potential to result in incidental flooding to the Sheraton Hotel property to the east, including its subsurface parking garage. Although flooding could occur in such an event, the potential for severe injury or death is unlikely. Therefore, with mitigation identified above, potential ground shaking impacts would be less than sign�ficant. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 26 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CIiECKLIST Violent seismic ground shaking of intensity expected on the project site can also trigger ground failures caused by liquefaction, potentially resulting in disruption of utility service 5 and roadway damage. Liquefaction potential is highest in areas underlain bX shallow groundwater and Bay fills, Bay Mud, and unconsolidated alluvium. The CGS has not investigated the project site and surrounding area for potential designation as a Seismic Hazazd Zone for liquefaction. However, geotechnical investigations conducted on the project site have determined that the high clay content of on-site fill minimizes potential liquefaction, resulting in an overall low risk of occurrence (ALB, 2003b). Any potential fill imported to the project site for the proposed project would be required to comply with soil engineering standards that would be detailed in the geotechnical investigation and subsequent report required by Mitigation Measure VI-1, above. The susceptibility of the existing levee to seismic impacts is discussed above. Liquefaction impacts are therefore considered less than significant. VI.a(iv) No Impact. The project site is located in an area of low relief with no significant slopes. Thus, no impacts related to landslide hazards would be associated with project. VI.b Less than Significant Impac� The proposed project would involve clearing and grading prior to the installment of impervious surfaces. As the project site exceeds one acre in size, the project applicant will be required to apply for coverage under the State General Construction Pernut in order to comply with federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. As fully described in Hydrology, Section VIII, Mitigation Measure VIII-1, the project applicant is required to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in order to minimize potential erosion and subsequent sedimentation of storm water runoff. This SWPPP would include Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control erosion associated with grading, trenching, and other ground surface-disturbing activities. In addition, the project applicant will be required to submit a grading plan to the City of Burlingame, San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPP). VI.c Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. Please refer to VI.a(i-iv). VI.d Less than Significant Impact. Soils on the project site consist of at the project site consist of artificial fill. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly known as the Soil Conservation Service) has characterized on-site soils as Urban Land-Orthens, reclaimed context. As these soils are fill, the USDA notes that the composition can vary widely and include broken concrete, asphalt, and solid waste (LJSDA, 1991). Borings conducted during previous geotechnical investigations at the project site indicate appro�cimately 6 to 10 feet of fill consisting of gravels, silty, and clayey materials e�cist on the site, underlain by several feet of Bay Mud (ALB, 1993b). The potential expansivity of fill overlying the project site has not been characterized. If expansive soils are present and not properly managed, potential damage would be limited to cracking or other damage to parking lot pavement, which would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse affects. However, the project applicant would be required to obtain a grading pernut from the City of Burlingame. As required by grading provisions of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (iJBC) and the California Building Code (Title 24) additions, a soils engineering repoit would be attached to the grading permit which addresses 5 Liquefaction is the process by which saturated, loose, fine-grained, granular, soil, like sand, behaves like a dense fluid when subjected to pmIonged shaking during an earthquake. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 2% ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLLST adverse soil conditions that may affect the proposed project, including expansive soils. Compliance with grading provisions of the UBC would minimize potential expansive soil hazards to less than significant levels. VI.e No Impac� No septic tanks or altemative subsurface wastewater disposal systems are proposed as part of the project. Therefore, no project impact is associated with this issue. 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Term Parking Fxitity Ini[ial Smdy 28 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) 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? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazazdous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less Tlwn Significant Potentially With Less T7uvi Significant Mitigation Signi,ficant No Impact Incorporation Imnact Imnact ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �❑ �❑ d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? ❑ e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ❑ fl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? � � ❑ � ❑ ❑� �❑ ►� ►/ ■ // ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands aze adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are internuxed with wildlands? ❑ n �■=// n �. ��I ►_ VII. HAZARDS VII.a-b Less than Significant Impac� A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project site indicates that, based on a historical review and site reconnaissance, the project 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Tertn Parking Faci6ty Initial Study i9 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST site does not pose an apparent environmental concern associated with past or current use. Moreover, the Phase 1 indicates the project site is not located on selected Federal and State regulatory hazardous materials lists, and that off-site properties in the project vicinity that are on regulatory agency lists do not pose an environmental concern to conditions at the project site (Law Engineering and Environmental Services, 1998). Other investigations conducted at surrounding properties have indicated that there is the potential for subsurface artificial fill in the project vicinity to contain debris. This debris could include hazardous materials that have adversely impacted soil or groundwater conditions, potentially posing health risks to construction workers or future users of the site. However, past geotechnical borings at the site have not encountered debris, and the proposed project would only include limited grading and utility improvements (ALB, 1993b). Potential health hazards are therefore minimized by the limited depth and extent of grading, the absence of debris encountered during past on-site geotechnical investigations, and the overall confined nature of the proposed project. Potential hazardous materials issues are considered less than significant. VII.c No Impact. There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the project site. VII.d No Impac� The project site is not located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5. The site, nor any facilities within a quarter mile of the site, are on the California Office of Planning and Research (CORTESE) list (Law Engineering and Environmental Services, 1998). VII.e Less than Significant Impac� The project site is located within the San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan boundary, and therefore is subject to Section 21096(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that the lead agency use the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook as a technical resource in the preparation of environmental documents as they relate to airport safety. The site falls within the horizontal surface on the San Francisco International Airport Imaginary Surfaces Height Restrictions Map, which has a height restriction of 161 feet above sea level. The proposed project dces not include a structure and would fall well below the height limits of the San Francisco International Auport Zone (San Mateo County City/County Association of Govemment, 1996). VII.f No Impac� The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. VII.g No Impact. The project contains no elements that would impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. See also XIII, Public Services, below, for a discussion on potential effects to fire and police protection. VII.h No Impact The project site is not located in an area subject to wildland fires. 62A Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parkiug Facility Initial Smdy 3� ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support e�sting land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? I.ess Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incoroorarion Imnact Impact ❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion of siltation on- or off-site? ❑ � ��'�. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- S�te� o � ❑ o e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? fl Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation of seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 620 Airport Bwlevazd Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 31 o � ❑ � ❑ o ❑ ■ ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑ � � ❑ o ❑ � ❑ ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Setting The project site is located on the shoreline of San Francisco Bay, adjacent to Anza Lagoon. The site consists of a depressed, graded and predominantly bare central area (approximately at mean sea level) and protected by a levee appro�mately eight to nine feet in height along the lagoon frontage portion of the property. Ground water occurs approximately two to four feet below ground surface, although ground water elevations aze tidally influenced. A test well is located on-site. The graded central area of the site currently collects and retains rain flows during the wet seasons, and experiences flooding following rainfall events. The basin floor contains two- to three-inch thick layer of sediment material that hardens once the water evaporates. The site is currently drained by a temporary sump pump installed on the project site, which removes the water and pumps it to an inlet located in the adjacent 600 Airport Boulevard property (Sheraton Hotel). The on-site sump pump is operated and maintained by the Sheraton Hotel building engineer. The project site also contains an abandoned storm drainage system consisting of a series of raised inlets partially connected to pipes. This was originally constructed to serve a previous development anticipated for the site. However, this abandoned storm drain system dces not currendy drain the site nor is connected to the adjacent 600 Airport Boulevard property or any outfall. VIII.a,c-f Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. Construction The proposed project would including clearing and grading and other activities related to the construction of a parking lot. During grading activities, erosion of on-site soils and imported fill could result in sedimentation of storm water runoff from the project site. In addition, hazardous materials related to construction activities and equipment such as oil and grease, petroleum products, and paint would be stored and used on site in small quantities. The storage and use of large quantities of hazardous materials is not expected to occur due to the limited scale and scope of construction activities. Nevertheless, accidental release or poor management of these materials could increase pollutant concentrations in storm water runoff. As the project site exceeds one acre in size, the project applicant is required to apply for coverage under the State General Conswction Pernut to comply with federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations. Impact VIII-1: The project applicant shall apply for coverage under the State General Construction Permit to comply wiW federal NPDES regulations. The NPDES and State General Construction Permit require the project applicant to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that identifies appropriate construction BMPs in order to minimize potential sedimentation or contamination of storm water runoff generated from the project site. The SWPPP woWd also be required to include any additional measures identified in San Mateo County's STOPP. The SWPPP shall be prepared and specified BMPs shall be implemented during construction as part of the project, and potential degradation of water quality associated with project construction is therefore reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with NPDES pernut regulations. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking FaciGty Initial Smdy 32 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Operation — Drainage The proposed project would increase storm water runoff from the project site through the installation of impervious surfaces. Storm water runoff occurring on the project site is proposed to collected through a new on-site storm drain system. The applicant's project engineer completed a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis to determine the peak demand of the system based on a 30-year flood event, using San Mateo County Intensity-Duration- Frequency (IDF) curves, precipitation records for the City of Burlingame, and a review of the City storm drainage master plan; and to determine the resulting capacity required for the proposed on-site storm drainage system. As discussed in Project Description, the storm water would be collected in eight inlets on the project site. Storm drain pipes ranging between eight and 15 inches in diameter would direct these storm flows to a 15-inch diameter storm drain along the west property boundary, which would then carry the storm flows off-site to an existing 21-inch City reinforced concrete storm drainage pipe in Airport Boulevazd (these flows would be ultimately discharged to the San Francisco Bay). Two pumps would be installed in a parallel connection on-site [each providing 1,650 gallons per minute (gpm) pumping capacity, for a total pumping capacity of 3,300 gpm], to pump on-site storm flows off-site. The proposed storm drain system, as designed and sized, would have sufficient capacity to adequately accommodate 30-year peak event flows on the project site (Perez 2004; Luzuriaga Taylor, Inc., 2004). The City's storm drain in the vicinity was designed to accommodate the proposed project loads and other anticipated future development along Airport Boulevazd. Consequently, the projected increased volume and rate of stormwater discharged from the project site would not exceed the capacity of the City's storm drain system (Luzuriaga Taylor, Inc., 2004). Operation — Water Quality However, the proposed project could result in an increase of non-point source pollutants being directly discharged to San Francisco Bay. Pollutants of concern typically found in urban runoff include sediments, nutrients, pathogens, oxygen demanding substances, petroleum hydrocarbons, heavy metals, toxic pollutants, floatables, and synthetic organics (pesticides, herbicides, PCBs, etc.). Pesticide and herbicide application to grass and agriculture also contributes significantly to nutrient loading in surface waters. Due to the type of vegetation proposed for landscaping (ice plant), the expected use of pesticides or herbicides for landscape maintenance is negligible. However, automobile use associated with the proposed project could result in the discharge of contaminated stormwater runoff to the City's storm drain system, and eventually discharged to San Francisco Bay. In order to reduce potential increases in petroleum hydrocarbons and other pollutants in storm water runoff, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: Mitigation Measure VIII-2: The project storm drainage system shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the STOPPP NPDES permit, including all provisions to the C.3 requirements, to reduce long-term water quality impacts from potentially contaminated runoff. The project sponsor shall provide a plan for long-term operations and maintenance of the oil and sediment separator or absorbent iilter systems including but not limited to the operating schedule, maintenance frequency, routine service schedule, specific maintenance activities, and the effectiveness of the water treatment systems. The performance of the filters shall be monitored regularly by the project applicant or a third party to determine the effectiveness of the water treatment and conclusions reported to the City. To further help minimize and prevent the amount of 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Fariliry Initial Smdy 33 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST pollutants entering the storm drain system, the project sponsor shall unplement Best Management Practices and source control measures that shall include, but are not necessarily limited to, regular street sweeping by mechanized equipment, proper clean- up of soil debris following landscape work or small scale constr�cfion, available trash receptacles, regular trash collection and the application of absorbent material on oil and fuel leaks from automobiles. Mitigation Measure VIII-3: During operation of the project, the project sponsor shall implement a program for regularly collecting and properly disposing of litter and debris that may accumulate on the project site. Mitigation Measure VIII-4: In order to maintain the existing on-site well for potential use for any future long-term development on the project site, the well head elevation shall be modified if needed in accordance with proposed project grading and construction plans and a new well vault shall be installed in accordance with San Mateo County water well standards to prohibit int`iltration of storm water contaminants and prevent potential damage to the well casing. VIII.b Less than Significant Impac� The proposed project would involve paving the majority of the project site, thereby preventing the absorption of precipitation and recharge of shallow groundwater. Prior to the 1970's, the project site was part of San Francisco Bay. Due to the site's proximity to the existing shoreline of San Francisco Bay and Anza Lagoon, shallow groundwater underlying the project site is tidally influenced and likely high in salt (sodium) content. Shallow groundwater underlying the project site and the surrounding vicinity is therefore not used. A test well was installed on the project site in February 1993 for potential irrigation uses. The well was installed to a depth of 237 feet below ground surface (bgs), and screened between 90 and 200 feet bgs to allow infiltration of non-shallow groundwater. Groundwater samples collected in 1993 indicated elevated minerals, sodium, hardness, and pH concentrations (ASE Drilling, Inc., 1993). The well has not been used for irrigation or water supply since its installation, and the proposed project would not draw upon this well for irrigation of proposed landscaping. Water supply for the proposed project and the City of Burlingame is largely drawn from sources in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (City of Burlingame, 2000). Therefore, the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies, or interfere with established or planned groundwater uses, resulting in a less than significant impact. VIII.g-h No Impac� The project property is not located within a 100-year flood zone as mapped on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map, and would not include the construction of housing or other structures (Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2003). Refer to the Setting for a discussion of existing flooding instances on the site, and VIII.a,c-f for a discussion of proposed on-site drainage improvements. VIII.i Less Wan Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project is separated from San Francisco Bay and Anza Lagoon along the northern and westem site boundary by a levee. Refer to Geology and Seismicity section VI.a(ii) for an analysis of ground shaking and potential levee instability. VIII j Less than Significant Impac� Tsunamis (seismic sea waves) are long period waves that aze typically caused by underwater disturbances (landslides), volcanic eruptions, or seismic 620 Airport Bwlevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial SNdy 34 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST events. Areas that are highly susceptible to tsunami inundation tend to be located in low- lying coastal areas such as tidal flats, marshlands, and former bay margins that have been artificially filled but are still at or near sea level, such as the project site. Tsunamis have been recorded in San Francisco Bay by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (formerly U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey). The highest wave that has been recorded for the Bay occurred in March 1964 as a result of the Alaskan earthquake. This wave reached a height of 7.5 feet just beyond the Golden Gate Bridge at Fort Point. The San Mateo County General Plan delineates areas susceptible to tsunami inundation based upon a USGS map that depicts a 20-foot runup along coastal azeas and at the Golden Gate Bridge, estimated to occur once every 200 years. Wave heights are estimated to attenuate to approximately 4 feet at Ravenswood Point (Ritter and Dupre, USGS, 1972, as cited in San Mateo County, 1986). As the project site is bounded by a levee with a crest height of at least 8 feet amsl, potential tsunami impacts are considered less than significant. A seiche is a free or standing wave oscillation(s) of the surface of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosed basin, such as San Francisco Bay, that may be initiated by an earthquake.6 Due to the relatively large size of San Francisco Bay and its outlet to the Pacific Ocean, the hazard of seiche waves is interpreted to be low. In addition, there is no historic record of such waves occurring in San Francisco Bay during recent strong earthquakes. Potential seiche hazards are therefore considered less than significant. 6 The `sloshing' produced by seiches within enclosed water bodies commonly occurs during earthquakes on a small-scale in swimming pools. 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Tenn Parking Facility Initial Smdy 3$ FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Less 77wn Significanr Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Signi,ficant Impact Incorporation Impact ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Imnact � � ❑ ❑ � IX.a Less Than Signiticant Impact. The e�cisting site is vacant and fenced along its perimeter, preventing public access through it. The proposed project would also include a security fence encircling the site. However, the proposed project would not create any physical or psychological barrier in the project vicinity, nor divide an established community. IX.b Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is designated for Commercial Recreation, Restaurant and Hotel by the Burlingame Bayfront Specific Area Plan. The land use plan allaws long-term parking uses as an interim use. The C-4, Waterfront Commercial zoning permits long-term parking uses with a conditional use permit, meeting the following criteria: - the sole purpose of the use is the parking for one day or longer of vehicles using SFO; - a minimum site size of three acres; - permit limited to five years; - no more peak-hour vehicle trips are generated that allowed by the traffic analyzer for the land use designated for the site in the General Plan; - the Design Guidelines for Bayfront Development and BCDC public access requirements are met; and - no parking is within a structure above or below grade. As discussed in XV, Transportation and Tra�c, the proposed project would generate substantially less peak-hour trips than that allowed by the traffic analyzer for the General Plan land use designation for the site. Furthermore, the project as proposed would contain adequate landscaping to comply with all of the Zoning Code and Design Guidelines criteria. The proposed project would require approval from BCDC for encroachment within its jurisdiction. As part of this approval, BCDC could require additional conditions from the applicant to offset potential effects from encroachment of the use within the BCDC jurisdiction. IX.c No Impact. The project site is not located within the area of an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Se N.f, under Biological Resources, above. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 36 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Less Than Signi,ficant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Signiftcant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): lmna�r Incorporation Imoact �r X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? ❑ ❑ ❑ � b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? ❑ ❑ ❑ � X. MINERAL RESOURCES X.a-b No Impac� The project site is recent (1960's) bay fill. The site dces not contain mineral resources, nor dces the project site support locally important mineral resources. The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of any locally-important mineral resource. 620 Airport Bwkvard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Study 3% ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XI. NOISE -- Would the project result in: NOISE a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? � b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Potentially With Significanr Mitigation Imnact Incorporation Less 7han Signiftcant No Imoacr Imnact ��-� ■I ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ ►1 � ❑ � ❑ �� e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? � � � � � For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? � o ❑ o � Setting Environmental noise is usually measured in A-weighted decibels (dBA).� Environmental noise typically fluctuates over time, and different types of noise descriptors are used to account for this variability. A typical noise descriptor includes the energy-equivalent noise level (Leq).8 A decibel (dB) is a unit of sound energy intensity. Sound waves, traveling outward from a source, exert a sound pressure level (commonly called "sound level") measured in dB. An A-weighted decibel (dBA) is a decibel corrected for the variation in frequency response to the typical human ear at commonly encountered noise levels. Leq, the energy-equivalent noise level (or "average" noise level), is the equivalent steady-state continuous noise level which, m a stated period of time, contains the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level that actually occurs during the same period. CNEI. is a weighted 24-hour average noise level. With the CNEL descriptor, noise levels between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. are adjusted upward by l0-dBA to take into account the greater annoyance of nighttime noise as compared to daytime noise. The CNEL descriptor also incorporates a 5-dBA upwazd adjustment for evening noise between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. 620 Airport Boukvazd Long-Term Parking Facility Initial SNdy 38 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The noise environment surrounding the project site is dominated by noise from U.S. 101 and Airport Boulevard. Aircraft noise associated with the San Francisco International Airport is also a contributing factor to the local noise environment. The project site is located in an area generally consisting of office, hotel other commercial land uses, which are not normally considered noise-sensitive; and recreational uses (including Bay Trail and Anza Lagoon). The neazest sensitive residential uses land uses are multi-family residences on Rollins Road on the south side of U.S. 101 (approximately 1,000 feet south of the project site). Local noise levels are regulated by general plan policies and by enforcement of Noise Ordinance standards. The Burlingame General Plan contains a Noise Element that establishes noise exposure standards for land use compatibility. For commercial land uses, the maximum acceptable outdoor noise level is 65 dBA, CNEL, and for passively used open space is 45 dBA, CNEL. 24-hour measurements taken on the project site indicate an eJcisting noise level of 70 dBA, CNEL, in the southwest corner of the project site, and a noise level of 64 dBA, CNEL along the north border of the project site. Based on these measurements, it is estimated the majority of the project site currently exceeds the maximum acceptable outdoor noise level for commercial uses. It can also be inferred from these measurements that the recreational uses in the immediate vicinity of the project site (e.g., along Bay Trail) also cuirently exceed the maximum acceptable outdoor noise level for open space. XI.a,d Construction Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. Construction of the project would include clearing and grading of the site, utility installation, paving and site landscaping. These construction activities would result in temporary and intermittent increases in noise levels. Construction noise levels at or near locations on the project site would fluctuate depending on the particular type, number and duration of use of various pieces of equipment on the site. The effect of construction noise would depend on how much noise would be generated by construction, the distance between construction activities and the nearest noise- sensitive uses, and the existing noise levels at those uses. Typical noise levels generated by backhces for ground clearing activities is 85 Leq, and typical noise levels generated by scrapers for excavation is activities is 88 Le� (estimates correspond to a distance of 50 feet from the noisiest piece of equipment with a given phase, and 200 feet from the other equipment in that phase). Noise from construction activities generally attenuates (decreases) at a rate of 6 to 7.5 dBA. Assuming an attenuation of 6 dBA per doubling of distance, construction noise from the noisiest pieces of equipment would generate outdoor noise levels of approximately 63 Leq at the location of nearest residences. Given the substantial buffer between the project site and the residential neighborhood (with interceding noise-generating uses, including Airport Boulevard, U.S. 101 and Rollins Road), and because e�cisting daytime outdoor noise levels near these residences are on the order of 73dBA (primarily due to noise currently generated on U.S. 101), proposed daytime constr�ction work would not significantly alter the existing noise environment at the nearest residences. Project construction noise would be noticeable to users of the nearby recreational areas. The predominant recreational use in the immediate vicinity of the project site is the Bay Trail, which is set back approximately five and 80 feet from the project site. As discussed above, existing ambient noise levels at this location already exceed City noise standards for 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Term Parking Facility Ini6a1 Study 39 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST passively used open space. Construction-generated noise would be perceived as an annoyance by trail users in the project vicinity. However, since the use of this trail is predominantly transient in nature (walkers/joggers), resultant noise effects to users would be brief in duration. While commercial uses are considered less sensitive than residential and recreational uses for noise, they would also be potentially affected by noise during the project construction. The most noise sensitive period for offices and hotel conference room space is typically daytime business hours, when those uses are most likely to be utilized. Hotel guest rooms would be considered most sensitive during evening and nighttime hours, when guests aze more likely to occupy and use the rooms for sleeping. Since construction is only proposed during daytime hours, and the predominant use of the adjacent commercial uses is indoors, the potential effect of construction on indoor day noise levels at these commercial uses would be considered the critical factor. The nearest commercial uses to the project site are the DHL office building (nearest point of building is approximately 250 feet west of the project site), and the Sheraton Hotel building (located approximately 200 feet east of the project site). When considering the distance between the site and these uses, and the noise attenuation features incorporated into the designs of these building (e.g. double-paned, non-opening windows), although the temporary construction-generated noise may be audible within these commercial uses, it would not be of a level that would interfere with normal speech and business operations. Given the relatively small total amount of earthwork and construction required for the proposed project, these temporary noise effects would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measure XI-1: To reduce construction noise effects, the applicant shall require the construction contractor to limit noisy construction activities to the least noise-sensitive times of the day and week (i.e., Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; and Saturday,10:00 a.m, to 5:00 p.m.; none on Sunday and holidays). Mitigation Measure XI-2: The applicant shall require contractors to muftle all equipment used on the site and to maintain it in good operating condition. All internal combustion engine-driven equipment shall be fitted with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition. This measure should result in all non-impact tools generating a maximum noise level of no more than 85dBA when measured at a distance of 50 fee� Mitigation Measure XI-3: Applicant shall require contractors to turn off powered construction equipment when not in use. Operation Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed drainage system would include two electric sump pumps on-site. During storm events, these electric pumps would operate to pump storm water collected on-site to the City storm water collection line in Airport Boulevard. These pumps would be located eight to ten feet below grade and would only operate when submerged in water. Given their design, location and projected infrequent use, these pumps would not generate significant periodic increases in ambient noise levels noise levels in the project vicinity. XI.b Construction Less than Significan� The project would generate groundborne vibration and potentially groundborne noise during construction. However, grading operations, as is proposed with the 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 4� FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST project, do not typically result in significant groundborne vibration or groundborne noise effects. The project would not require pile driving or other special construction techniques that would potentially cause these types of impacts. XI.c Operation Less Than Significant Impact. The additio.nal traffic generated by the project would result in an incremental increase in tra�c-generated noise in the project vicinity; however, given the level of increase in traffic, the projected daily dispersion of traffic throughout the day, and the fact that these new trips would primarily be added to Airport Boulevard and Anza Boulevard (both arterials), and U.S. 101, the increase in traffic-generated noise would not exceed any noise standards established by the City, and correspondingly, be considered less than significant. XI.e Operation Less Than Significant Impac� The project site is located within the San Mateo County Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) boundary, and therefore is subject to Section 21096(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that the lead agency use the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook as a technical resource in the preparation of environmental documents as they relate to noise. The site falls outside of (below) the 65 Community Equivalent Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contour of the Year 2000 San Francisco International Airport Noise Exposure Map (San Francisco International Airport, 1995). The ALUP indicates that commercial land uses aze compatible where the CNEL is less than 70dB (City/County Association of Government, 1996). As a result, the project is not in a location where people would be exposed to excessive aircraft noise levels. XI.f No Impac� The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Pazking FaciGty Initial Smdy 41 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? � b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Less Than Significant Potentially With Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation Less Than Significant No Imnact Impacr ��11 ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ ►�I �� XII.a Less Than Significant Impac� The project would provide short-term employment for a number of construction workers during the construction phase. This minor short-term increase in employment would not substantially induce population growth in Burlingame. As discussed in the project description, there would be no increase in employment associated with the project. Furthermore, the proposed project would not require the new extension of any new public infrastructure, and, therefore, would not indirectly induce population growth in the area. XII.b-c No Impact. The project site is currendy vacant. Therefore, the project would not displace any existing housing or people on the site, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The project site is not identified in the City of Burlingame Housing Element as a potential housing site. The Burlingame Bayfront Specific Area Plan designates the site Commercial Recreation, Restaurant and Hotel. As a result, the project, would not reduce the supply of land in the City available for residential development. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Study 42 ESA ! 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CIiECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially Significant �mpa�r Less Tiwn Significani With Mitigation Incorporation I.ess Than Significant Irrmact No Imoact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES -- a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause signifcant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ /1 /1 ■ ►/ ■ � � � �/ � // XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES XIII.a Less than Significant — Fire ProtecNon Services. Operation of the proposed project would introduce new development and population on a currently vacant site, and therefore would increase the need for fire protection and emergency medical services to serve the site. Responses from the Burlingame Fire Department would likely be limited to incidences such as potential medical emergencies, on- or off-site vehicular accidents, and car fires. However, these potential calls would not be expected to be of a nature or magnitude that would significantly affect existing fire protection services, or require the addition of additional Fire Department personnel and equipment. The project design would be required to comply with the requirements of the California Fire Code, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The project would be required to be consistent with all California Building Code requirements regarding fire safety issues, including emergency vehicular access. The Burlingame Fire Department would review project site and building plans as part of the project design process, prior to project approval, to ensure inclusion of adequate fire prevention equipment, and that site access is available for emergency response services. Less Than Si�cant Impact — Police Protection. Operation of the proposed project would introduce new commercial development and population onto the site and therefore would result in an increase in need for police protection services to serve the site. Responses to the project site from the Burlingame Police Department could potentially include medical emergencies, on- or off-site vehicular accidents, car fires, vandalism, theft or other crimes. However, these potential calls would not be expected to be of a nature or magnitude that would significantly affect police protection services, or require the addition of additional City police personnel and equipment. 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Study 43 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The proposed project proposes a gated access off Airport Boulevard, security fencing encircling the project site, and nightlighting which would serve to minimize the potential for security problems. The Burlingame Police Department shall review the proposed site plan submitted by the project applicant as part of the project design process, prior to project approval, to ensure suffcient on-site security measures are incorporated and adequate access is available for the Burlingame Police Depariment. As a result, the proposed project would not significandy increase the demand for police protection services. No Impact - Schools. The proposed project would not increase demand for local educational services, or adversely affect public schools. Less Than Significant Impact — Parks. As described in the Project Description, the Bay Trail and Anza Lagoon border the project site on separate properties on the north and west sides of the property. Potential temporary impacts to these facilities during construction are discussed under Aesthetics, Air Quality and Noise above. Operation of the proposed project would not result in any long-term adverse impacts to these facilities. No Impact — Other Public Facilities. No other public facilities would be significantly affected with development of the proposed project. 620 AQport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initia] SNdy 44 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XIV. RECREATION -- Less Than Significant Potentially With Significant Mirigarion Im�act Incorporation a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? ❑ b) Dces the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? ❑ XIV. RECREATION Less Than Signifecant Impact ❑ ❑ o ❑ No mpact //' /1 XIV.a-b No Impac� There is an abundance of off-site open space and recreational facilities in the project vicinity (including the Bay Trail, Coyote Point County Recreation Area, Fishmen's Park and Bayside Park) and surrounding communities. The proposed project would not be anticipated to result in an increase in the use of local existing and planned neighborhood and regional parks. Since the Bay Trail would not cross the proposed construction access to and from Airport Boulevard, but rather, extend north of and around the project site, there are no apparent safety impacts to users of the Bay Trail during construction. With respect to potential other temporary impacts during construction associated with adjacent recreational facilities, see Aesthetics, Air Quality and Noise above. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Smdy 45 FSA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC -- Would the project: Less Than Significant Porentially With Signi,ficant Mitigation Imnact Incorporation Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? ❑ ❑ � ❑ b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ❑ c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? fl Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC ■ // ■i ❑ ❑ ❑ o ❑ � � o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I��■� 1� ■ � /� �■ ►1 XV.a-b Less Than Significant Impac� The proposed project would alter e�cisting traffic volumes and patterns in the site vicinity, particularly at the proposed site entrance, and along Airport Boulevazd and Anza Boulevard. Trip generation rates for the proposed project were derived from vehicle counts conducted at the Anza Pazk and Sky, located across Airport Boulevard from the project site. The Anza Pazk and Sky is a long-term parking facility; the proposed project is anticipating a operate similar operation. A.m. and p.m. weekday peak-period counts were conducted in October 2003. The highest peak-hour volume was used to derive a.m. and p.m. peak-hour trip generation rates. The resulting projected peak-hour vehicle trip generation rate is estimated to be 0.2 trips per parking space. Applying this rate to the proposed project results in approximately seven new peak-hour trips generated during the either the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. This projected increase in vehicle trips would not result in an adverse effect on peak-hour level of service on any local roadways and at intersections serving the project site. Moreover, this increase in 620 Airport Boukvard Long-Tenn Parking Facility Initial Smdy 46 FSA /?A3409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST trips would not adversely affect operations on any regional-serving roadways, including those that aze part of the CMP network. XV.c No Impact. The project is below grade level and would not result in a change in air traffic patterns. See also VII.e, under Hazards, above. XV.d-e Less Than Significant Impact. Vehicular access to the proposed parking facility would be from Airport Boulevard with the egress through the adjacent Sheraton Hotel. Long-term parking patrons and shuttles would access the long-term parking facility at Airport Boulevard and pass through an entry gate. Patron and shuttle vehicles would then proceed north along the west boundary of the site down a 20-foot wide ramp and then east to the parking area. Departing patron and shuttle vehicles would exit the long-term parking facility at the driveway connecting to the Sheraton Hotel parking lot, proceed through the Sheraton Hotel parking lot, and exit at the hotel driveway at Airport Boulevard. A tire mechanism (e.g. tiger- teeth strip) would be installed at the e�t of the proposed long-term parking lot to prevent potential vehicular access into the long-term parking lot from the Sheraton Hotel parking lot. The project design would be required to comply with the requirements of the Califomia Fire Code as amended by the City of Burlingame, including provisions for emergency vehicle access. The Burlingame Fire Department would review project site and building plans as part of the project design process, prior to project approval, to ensure that adequate emergency vehicle access is available at the project site. While there are no apparent significant access and or safety design deficiencies identified, the following measures are recommended to improve vehicular access to/from the . site, and vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site: Measure: • Provide larger curb radii at the Airport Boulevard driveway. As currently proposed, vehicles traveling westbound on Airport Boulevard would have to make a sharp right-turn movement (>90degrees) to access the parking lot. This identified improvement would eliminate a small amount of landscaping near the access. • Provide a larger curb radius on the curve between the access road and the parking lot. This larger curb radius would better accommodate vehicles tuming into the parking lot from the access road. This identified improvement would eliminate a small amount of landscaping and one parking space. • Shift the east-west circulation aisles south so that the northernmost aisle would be 33 feet wide, and the southernmost aisle is 24 feet wide. As currently proposed, the three northernmost east-west circulation aisles are 24 feet wide, and the southernmost east-west aisle (closest to Airport Boulevard) is 33 feet wide. It is recommended that the east-west circulation aisles be shifted to the south so that the southernmost aisle is 24 feet wide and the northernmost aisle would be 33 feet wide. This modification would provide a wider circulation aisle for vehicles and shutdes entering from the access road. • Add pedestrian shelter and striped pedestrian walkway. Although the drop-off and pick- up circulation areas are not marked on the site plan, it is recommended that a pedestrian shelter be placed in the middle of the southern row of parking on the northernmost aisle. A striped pedestrian walkway should extend from this shelter southwazds through the lot. 620 Airport Boukvazd Long-Tertn Pazking Facility Initial SNdy 4% ESp / 2p3409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST These improvements would allow shuttle buses proceed straight from the Airport Boulevard driveway to the Sheraton Hotel exit driveway without circulating through the parking lot. This improvement would eliminate eight parking spaces. An alternative could be to provide a turnout for the shuttle bus on the north side of Airport Boulevard. This alternative would eliminate the need for the shuttle bus to travel through the parking lot. However, this would require the proposed project to provide a dedicated pedestrian walkway/stairs between Airport Boulevard and the parking area. � Widen north-south circulation aisle adjacent to the exit driveway to 28 feet in width. As currently proposed, the north-south circulation aisle adjacent to the exit driveway is approximately 20 feet wide. It is recommended that this aisle be widened to 28 feet to accommodate emergency vehicles. Six parking spaces would be eliminated. • Remove the short median island on Airport Boulevard. It is recommended that the short median island on Airport Boulevard, located immediately west of the project driveway, be removed to provide additional storage in the two-way left-turn lane for eastbound vehicles to turn left into the site. XV.f No Impact. The project would not create a demand for parking beyond the long-term parking generated at the project site. As discussed in the Project Description, there would be no increase in employees to serve the proposed project, and therefore, no increase in demand for parking service employees. When not in use, shuttles would be stored at the shutde company's existing yard along Bayshore Boulevard. Consequendy, the project would not result in inadequate parking capacity. XV.g No Impac� The project would have no adverse effect on adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. 620 Auport Boukvard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial Study 48 ESA / 1A3409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Less Than Significant Potenaally With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact lncorporation Imnact No Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ❑ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of e�sting facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? ��-■ //] ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � u e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? ❑ fl Be served by a landfill with sufficient pernutted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVI. UTII�ITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEM ❑ ■ ■ ❑ � � ❑ � ❑ ❑ � � ❑ ■ ■ /1 ■ XVI.a,b,e No Impac� The proposed project dces not propose any on-site sanitary sewer facilities. Consequently, the project would have no adverse effect on City of Burlingame sanitary sewer collection and wastewater treatment facilities. XVI.c Less than Significant. Please refer to discussion of proposed on-site drainage improvements in Section VIII. Conswction of these storm water drainage facilities would not, in itself, result in significant environmental effects. XVI.d Less than Significant Impac� The proposed project would generate a new demand for public water for the on-site landscaping. Given the total area dedicated to landscaping, and the type of landscaping proposed, the amount of water required for landscaping would not be 620 Airport Boukvazd I,ong-Term Parking Facility Initial Study 49 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST considered significant. The project applicant proposes to install drought-tolerant landscaping within the project site, further minimizing the amount of water requued to serve the site. XVI.f-g Less than Significant Impac� Clearing and construction activities could generate a small amount of construction debris. The general contractor would be required to recycle and transport its construction waste separately. The City of Burlingame currently has a Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling Ordinance. This ordinance requires 60% diversion (without use of ADC for demolition and construction phases); limited reliance on inerts (with no more than 20% of the diversion rate achieved through recycling of inerts); preparation of a waste management plan and compliance reports and deposit guaranteeing ordinance compliance; and walkthrough during the demolition and construction phase by the City's recycling specialist. Compliance with these requirements of the waste recycling ordinance would ensure that the project's waste generation impacts would be less than significant. Operation of the proposed project could not generate small amounts of solid waste (e.g. during routine site cleaning or landscaping operations). Any incidental generation of solid waste on the site would not measurably affect the ability capacity of the landfill serving the City of Burlingame or conflict with any federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. 620 Airport Boulevard Long-Term Pazking Facility Initial Smdy 5� ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CIiECKLIST Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially 5ignifrcant Impact Less Than Significant Wrth Mitigation Incoraoration Less Than Significant Impact No Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGIVIFICANCE a) Dces the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Dces the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulative considerable? ("Cumulative considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Dces the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? REFERENCES �❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ � /� � � ❑ ❑ ❑ Association of Bay Area Governments, Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale and Earthquake Hazard Map for Burlingame/Millbrae/Hillsborough, Scenario: Entire San Andreas Fault System, httn://www.abag•ca• og v/bayarea/eqmaps/mapsba.html, November, 2003. ALB Associates, Inc., Supplementation Information on Soils and Seismicity, Planned Suishaya Restaurants, 620 Airport Boulevard, Burlingame, California, May 25, 1993. ALB Associates, Inc., Geotechnical Investigation, Planned Suishaya Restaurants, 620 Airport Boulevard, Burlingame, California, July 2, 1993. ASE Drilling, Inc., BCI Burlingame Well, February 18, 1993. Blunk DeMattei Associates AIA, Site Plan, July 2, 2003; Site Sections, September 2, 2003; California Native Plant Society (CNPS), 2003. CNPS Electronic Inventory for 7.5 minute San Mateo topographic quadrangle. California Natural Diversity Database, 2003. Califomia Department of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Division. Sacramento, California, Information dated November 2003. Caltrans, Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. January, 2002. 620 Airport Boukvazd Long-Term Parking Facility Utitial Study $1 ESA / 7A3409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLLST City of Burlingame, Burlingame General Plan, amended through 2000. City of Burlingame, Specific Area Plan — The Burlingame Bayfront, 1981. City of Burlingame, Burlingame Municipal Code Title 25-Zoning, January 1999. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., On-line Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Hazard Maps, http://www.esri.com/hazards/makemap.html, November, 2003. Hart, E.W., 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California: Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones, California Geological Survey (formerly known as California Division of Mines and Geology), Special Publication 42, 1990, revised and updated. Hunt, Roy E., Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Manual, McGraw Hill, Inc., 1984. Jennings, C.W., Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Geology Survey (formerly known as California Division of Mines and Geology), Geologic Data Map No. 6, 1:750,000, 1994. Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Crowne Plaza Hotel and Adjacent Vacant Parcel, 600 Airport Boulevard, Burlingame, California, April 1998. Luzuriaga Taylor, Inc., Civil Engineers / Land Surveyors, Preliminary Site Grading and Drainage Plan, August 30, 2003. Luzuriaga Taylor, Inc., Civil Engineers / Land Surveyors, letter to Blunk DeMattei Associates, January 15, 2004. Perez, Julian, Luzuriaga Taylor, Inc., Civil Engineers / Land Surveyors, telephone conversation, January 20, 2004. Peterson, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H., California Geological Survey (formerly California Division of Mines and Geology), Seismic Shaking Hazard Maps of California, 1999. San Francisco International Airport, Noise Exposure Map Update —1995, 1995. San Mateo County City/County Association of Governments, San Mateo County Comprehensive Airpon Land Use Plan, December, 1996. San Mateo County, San Mateo County General Plan, 1986. San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPP), http://www.flowstobay.or�/, November 2003. Treadwell & Rollo, Geotechnical Consultation, 620 Airport Boulevard, Burlingame, California, March 14, 2003. U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA NRCS), formerly the Soil Conservation Service (SCS), Soil Survey of San Mateo County, Eastern Part, and San Francisco County, California, 1991. 67A Airport Boulevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initial SNdy 52 ESA / 203409 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST United States Geological Survey (iJSGS) Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WG02) Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region: 2003-2032 — A Summary of Findings, http://quake.us�gov/research/seismology/wg02/summar�, 2003. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Species list for the U.S.G.S. 7.5 minute San Mateo topographic quadrangle. 620 Airport Bwlevard Long-Term Parking Facility Initlal SNdy 53 ESA / 203409 Summary of Miti�ation Measures — 620 Airport Boulevard Air Quality Mitigation Measure III-1: Prior to commencement of grading and/or construction activities, the project sponsor shall submit a dust abatement program for review and approval of the City's NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) administrator and City Planning Department staff. The project sponsor shall require the construction contractor to implement this dust abatement program. Elements of the program shall include the following: • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily; • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., the minimum required space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer); • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; • Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites; • If visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets, the streets shall be swept (preferably with water sweepers); • Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more); • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved surfaces to 15 miles per hour; • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways; • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; and • Designate a person or persons to oversee the implementation of a comprehensive dust control program and to increase watering, as necessary. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure V-1: If archaeological remains are uncovered, work at the place of discovery should be halted immediately and a qualified archaeologist retained to evaluate the f nd. Accidental discovery of archaeological deposits could require additional archaeological investigations to determine the significance of the fmd. Mitigation Measure V-2: If human remains are encountered during project construction, the San Mateo County Coroner's Office will be notified immediately. The coroner will determine if the remains aze those of a Native American, and if they are, will notify the Native American Heritage Commission. The Native American Heritage Commission will make a determination regarding the individual's "most lil�ely descendanY' who will then make recommendations for the disposal of the remains. The Native American Heritage Commission will mediate conflicts between the project proponent and the most likely descendant. Accidental discovery of human remains could require additional investigations to determine if other graves are present. Geolo�v and Soils Mitigation Measure VI-1: A site-specific, design-level geotechnical investigation shall be prepared that assesses the impacts of proposed project modifications to the levee on levee stability and any fill on site. The geotechnical investigation shall be conducted by a California Certified Geotechnical Engineer or Civil Engineer, and shall include an analysis of expected ground motions along the San Andreas fault in accordance the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) and the California Building Code (Title 24) additions. Expected ground motions determined by a registered geotechnical engineer shall be incorporated into the final design as part of the project. The final seismic considerations for the site shall be submitted to and approved by the City of Burlingame Structural and City Engineers before grading permits are issued. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation Measure VIII-2: The project storm drainage system shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the STOPPP NPDES permit, including all provisions to the C.3 requirements, to reduce long-term water quality impacts from potentially contaminated runoff. The project sponsor shall provide a plan for long-term operations and maintenance of the oil and sediment separator or absorbent filter systems including but not limited to the operating schedule, maintenance frequency, routine service schedule, specific maintenance activities, and the effectiveness of the water treatment systems. The performance of the filters shall be monitored regularly by the project applicant or a third party to determine the effectiveness of the water treatment and conclusions reported to the City. To further help minimize and prevent the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system, the project sponsor shall implement Best Management Practices and source control measures that shall include, but are not necessarily limited to, regular street sweeping by mechanized equipment, proper clean-up of soil debris following landscape work or small scale construction, available trash receptacles, regular trash collection and the application of absorbent material on oil and fuel leaks from automobiles. Mitigation Measure VIII-3: During operation of the project, the project sponsor shall implement a program for regularly collecting and properly disposing of litter and debris that may accumulate on the project site. Mitigation Measure VIII-4: In order to maintain the existing on-site well for potential use for any future long-term development on the project site, the well head elevation shall be modified if needed in accordance with proposed project grading and construction plans and a new well vault shall be installed in accordance with San Mateo County water well standards to prohibit infiltration of storm water contaminants and prevent potential damage to the well casing. Noise Mitigation Measure XI-1: To reduce construction noise effects, the applicant shall require the construction contractor to limit noisy construction activities to the least noise-sensitive times of the day and week (i.e., Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; and Saturday, 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; none on Sunday and holidays). Mitigation Measure XI-2: The applicant shall require contractors to muffle all equipment used on the site and to maintain it in good operating condition. All internal combustion engine-driven equipment shall be fitted with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition. This measure should result in all non-impact tools generating a maximum noise level of no more than 85dBA when measured at a distance of 50 feet. Mitigation Measure XI-3: Applicant shall require contractors to turn off powered construction equipment when not in use.