HomeMy WebLinkAbout1818 Trousdale Drive - Staff Report (3)City of Burlingame Item #
Environmental Scoping for a New Four -Story, 79-Unit Assisted Living Facility Environmental Scoping
Address: 1818 Trousdale Drive Meeting Date: 08/22/05
Request: Environmental Scoping for an application for conditional use permit, variances for front setback and
building height, and exceptions to the design guidelines of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road
Specific Plan for a new four-story, 79-unit assisted living facility.
Applicant: Bill Lindstrom, Sunrise Development, Inc. APN: 025-121-270
Property Owner: Trousdale Properties Zoning: C-3 w/R-4 Overlay
Architect: Michael Kutsin, Mithun Architects Lot Area: 43,584 SF (1.0 acre)
General Plan: Commercial Uses — Office Use
Mixed Use — Office/Residential (North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan
Adjacent Development: Multi -family residential, offices and medical offices
Current Use: One-story office building
Proposed Use: Four-story, 79-unit assisted living facility
Allowable Use: Group residential facility with a conditional use permit and with adequate on -site
parking.
Environmental Scoping: Environmental review is required for this project because the proposed new 79-unit
assisted living facility exceeds 10,000 SF (62,184 SF proposed), and therefore does not qualify for an exemption.
As a part of preparing the initial study for the environmental document for this project, staff is requesting that the
Planning Commission comment on any potential environmental effects which you feel should be investigated.
Potential environmental effects identified by staff include:
• traffic, parking and on -site circulation; and
• aesthetics — impact on the existing visual character of the site and on the adjacent office/medical and
multi -family residential buildings, conformance with City policies, i.e., the Design Guidelines for the
North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan.
The issues identified by the Commission will be incorporated into the initial study for the project. The standard
list of items investigated in an initial study is attached for reference. At this time, staff notes that based on
preliminary analysis, it appears that the type of CEQA document required will be a mitigated negative
declaration. However, the type of CEQA document will be finalized during the environmental review process.
The City has entered a contract with MHA Environmental Consulting, Inc., to prepare the environmental
documents for this project. During preliminary review Planning staff identified the following applications
required for this project:
• Conditional use permit for a group residential facility (assisted living facility proposed) (CS 25.40.025, 2);
■ Front setback variance at the first floor along Ogden Drive (10'-0" proposed to the freestanding trellis where
the existing zoning requires 15'-0") (CS 25.40.040);
• Variance for overall building height (56'-9" proposed where 35'-0" is the maximum allowed (CS 25.40.050);
• Exceptions to the design guidelines of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan (refer to Table 2 on
page 4).
Environmental Scoping 1818 Trousdale Drive
Project Summary: The applicant, Bill Lindstrom of Sunrise Development, Inc., is proposing anew, four-story,
79-unit assisted living facility at 1818 Trousdale Drive, zoned C-3 w/R-4 Overlay. This site is located at the
northwest corner of Trousdale and Ogden Drives. Currently, there is an existing one-story, vacant office building
(approximately 15,000 SF) on the site. The site is bordered to the west and south by multi -family residential
buildings and to the east and north by offices and medical uses. The Peninsula Hospital emergency and staff
entrance (currently under construction) is located across the street at the southeast end of the site.
The proposed project includes demolishing the existing one-story office building and building a new, four-story,
79-unit assisted living facility for seniors with below -grade parking. C-3 District Regulations (CS 25.40.025, 2)
states that a group residential facility for the elderly requires a conditional use permit.
The proposed assisted living facility will contain a total of 79 units. The main entrance to the facility is proposed
on Trousdale Drive. The first and second floors will contain assisted living units and related common activity
and support services. The third floor will contain suites for memory -impaired residents. The fourth floor is
similar to the third floor but with lower staffing requirements and increased amenities for residents. Common
areas on the first floor include the dining room, bistro and parlor. Other amenities such as media rooms, activity
rooms, hair -salon, etc., are located throughout the facility. The assisted living units comprise of one -bedroom,
two -bedroom and a "Denver" unit which can accommodate one or two persons. The proposed facility will
contain 41 one -bedroom units, 18 two -bedroom units and 20 "Denver" units. Typical units range in size from
450 SF to 680 SF.
The proposed exterior will include stucco walls, vinyl clad double -hung wood windows, stained wood windows
and doors at first floor public places, and a concrete tile "terra cotta" roof. On the first floor, low garden walls
with a wrought iron fence and a freestanding wood trellis/stucco column system are proposed. A front setback
variance is required for the freestanding trellis along Ogden Drive (10'-0" proposed where 15'-0" is the minimum
required) (frontage along Ogden Drive is the short side of the lot and is considered to be the lot front for setback
purposes). The proposed building, as measured to the roof ridge, is 56'-9" above average top of curb (35'-0"
maximum allowed), and therefore requires a variance for height. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
reviewed the project at the proposed height and determined no hazard to air navigation (see attached letter dated
May 7, 2005 from FAA).
Parking: For a group residential facility, the code requires on -site parking at a minimum of one parking space
for each three residential units (CS 25.70.034, 3). For the proposed 79-unit facility, a minimum of 27 parking
spaces are required on -site. The project proposes a total of 36 parking spaces in the below -grade parking garage
(26 standard, 2 disabled -accessible and 8 compact parking spaces). The ingress/egress ramp to the below -grade
parking garage is located on Ogden Drive along the left side property line. On -site parking for a delivery van
and facility shuttle is provided at the rear of the building accessible from Trousdale Drive. Drop off/pick up of
persons would be conducted in the below -grade garage. The applicant projects a maximum of 23 full-time and
13 part-time employees on weekdays and 13 full-time and 11 part-time employees on weekends. The applicant
anticipates a maximum of 15 visitors per day. Planning staff would note that the on -site parking, circulation,
drop off/pick up and traffic impacts for this project will be analyzed in the environmental review.
Zoning and Specific Plan Criteria: At time of submittal, the site is now zoned C-3 with an R-4 overlay,
therefore the project must comply with the C-3 district regulations. In addition, the project is also subject to the
design guidelines in the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. As a follow-up to adoption of the
Specific Plan, staff is in the process of preparing new zoning regulations for this area to reflect the mixed -use
designation and the design guidelines. The site is within the proposed "Trousdale West" (TW) zone district.
2
Environmental Scoping 1818 Trousdale Drive
Table 1 provides a comparison of the proposed project to the C-3 District development standards. Table 2 shows
how the proposed project meets the design guidelines of the recently adopted North Burlingame/Rollins Road
Specific Plan.
Landscaping: There are no specific on -site landscaping requirements in the existing C-3 regulations. However,
the applicant provided a Landscape Plan showing trees, shrubs, groundcover, vines, site furniture, patios and
decorative paving to be installed throughout the site (sheet Landscape Plans — sheets L-1, L-2 and L-3). A variety
of trees are proposed throughout the site. The project also includes installation of streets trees along Trousdale
Drive (Golden Rain trees) and Ogden Drive (Chinese Tallow tree) as required by the North Burlingame/Rollins
Road Specific Plan. A total of 10 existing trees will be removed as part of the project, two of which are
protected -size. The City Arborist reviewed the proposed project and notes in his memo, dated June 28, 2005, that
a tree removal permit will be required to remove any protected -size tree. The applicant is in the process of
obtain the required tree removal permits.
Table 1 - Compliance with C-3 Regulations Lot Area: 43,584 SF
Proposed
Required
Setbacks:
Front (Ogden) (Is`flr):
25'-2" to building/10' to trellis'
; 15'-0"
(2nd flr):
25'-2"
15'-0"
(3rd flr):
25'-2"
15'-0"
(4" flr):
29'-2"
15'-011
.......................... .............................................................................. ._.................................................................................
Interior Side (I st flr):
..............................................
12'-0" to trellis
7'-0"
(2nd flr):
37'-9"
8'-0"
(3rd flr):
37'-9"
91-011
(4`h flr):
...._.............................................................................................................................................................................................................
32'-9"
10'-011
Exterior Side (Trousdale) (Is`flr):
22'-0" to building/10' to trellis
7'-6"
(2nd flr):
22'-011
81-611
(3rd flr):
22'-0"
9'-6"
(4`" flr):
22'-0"
10'-611
---.... _................... ........................................... _.......................................... _...........................................................
Rear (Is'flr):
........................._.... ... _...... ... ........................................................................................................................ _.....
63'-1" to building/16'-2" to
........ _.................... _............... _.... __._............... _.................. _.... __.... _...... ---.._.............. _..----- ..
15'-0"
(2nd flr):
enclosure
15'-0"
(3rd frr,):
63'-1"
15'-0"
(4th flr,):
63'-1"
15'-0"
..........._... _.......................... .............................................. _.................................................... ........................... _
63'-1"
............... _....... _............ _..... _.... .................. .............................................
Building Height:
_..__....... _........ _...._...._............... f............................
56'-9112
j 35'-0"
' Front setback variance required at the first floor along Ogden Drive (10'-0" proposed to the freestanding
trellis where 15'-0" is the minimum required) (CS 25.40.040).
2 Variance for overall building height (56-9" proposed where 35'-0" is the maximum allowed (CS 25.40.050).
Environmental Scoping
1818 Trousdale Drive
Table 2 indicates whether the proposed project complies, partially complies or does not comply with the intent of
the recently adopted design guidelines of the North Burlingame/Rollins Road Specific Plan. A copy of the design
guidelines of the El Camino Real Design District — North of Trousdale Drive is included in the staff report. The
goal of the North of Trousdale Drive area is to be developed with a mixture of uses, including multi -family
residences and office including health services, financial institutions and care facilities.
Table 2 - Compliance with Specific Plan Design Guidelines — El Camino Real District
Design Guidelines
Compliance
Development Density
60 beds/acre
Does not comply — 117 beds/acre proposed
(assumes one bed in one -bedroom units and two
beds in two -bedroom and "Denver" units
Build -To Lines:
10'-0" required on Ogden Drive
Does not comply — The freestanding garden wall
with trellis is proposed at the 10'-0" build -to line, but
is not considered the front fagade of the building
(main building is setback 25'-2")
10'-0" required on Trousdale Drive
Complies — measured to entry canopy attached to
the building (main building is setback 22'-0")
Minimum Building Height:
Two stories on Ogden Drive
Complies — four stories proposed
Three stories on Trousdale Drive
Complies — four stories proposed
Maximum Building Height:
35' review line/60' maximum on Ogden Drive
Partially complies — review required because
building exceeds 35' in height (59'-6" proposed)
35' review line/75' maximum on Trousdale Dr
Partially complies — review required because
building exceeds 35' in height (59'-6" proposed)
Minimum Parcel Frontage:
60% of building frontage must be at build -to line
Does not comply — 0% proposed
on Ogden Drive
60% of building frontage must be at build -to line
Does not comply — 9% proposed, only entry
on Trousdale Drive
canopy is proposed at built -to line
Front Setback Areas:
Except for driveways, all areas between the
Complies
sidewalk and the front fagades ofbuildings shall be
adequately designed and maintained, including
installation of an irrigation system for planted
areas.
4
Environmental Scoping
1818 Trousdale Drive
Table Z - Uom liance with Specific Plan Design Guidelines — El (:amino Real District
Design Guidelines Compliance
Building Fagade — Articulation
Buildings shall have architecturally -articulated Complies
storefronts. Window treatments, awnings and
public entries should be designed to promote active
use of ground floor businesses.
Building Fagade — Scale of Detailing
Building fagades should have elements that relate Complies
to the scale of a person. All fagades shall
emphasize three dimensional detailing, such as
cornices, window moldings and reveals, to cast
shadows and create visual interest on the fagade.
Architectural elements used to provide relief can
include awnings and projections, trellises, detailed
parapets and arcades.
Building Fagade — Roof Lines
All buildings shall provide strong roof termination Partially complies — stucco finish and horizontal
features. A variety of distinctive roofline profiles is bands proposed.
encouraged. Cornices and horizontal bands of foam
molds with stucco finish are discouraged.
Building Fagade — Entries to Ground Floor
Residential uses shall employ landscaping to Complies
provide a transition between the sidewalk and the
residences.
Building Fagade — Materials Palette
The ground floor fagade should provide a variety Complies
of architectural elements and should use a diverse
set of materials.
Building Materials — Variety
A variety of durable materials and textures is
encouraged. Such materials may include both
traditional materials, such as wood and stucco, and
materials such as concrete, structural steel, corten
steel, and other high -quality durable metals which
have not been traditionally used in "Main Street"
architecture. Stucco is not encouraged and should
not be overly used, particularly at the building
base, because it is more susceptible to damage than
more durable materials.
5
Partially complies - stucco finish is primary
material.
Environmental Scoping 1818 Trousdale Drive
Table 2 - Compliance with Specific Plan Design Guidelines — El Camino Real District
Design Guidelines
Compliance
Building Materials — Differentiation of
Architectural Elements
A wide variety of other materials is encouraged to
Complies
articulate building elements, such as the base, the
first floor and the upper floors. These basic
components of a building should be articulated by
means other than the exterior finish. Such means
can include horizontal break bands above the
ground floor, pier and column bases, roof
terminations, sills and awnings.
Building Materials — Decorative Elements
Tile artwork, plaques, decorative glass and lighting
Complies
fixtures are encouraged to provide visual relief to
fagades. Where extensive stucco exteriors are
proposed, fagades shall maximize the above
features.
Lighting
Adequate lighting shall be provided for building
Complies
signage, storefront display, pedestrian entry access
and travel in parking lots, in compliance with the
City's illumination ordinance.
Parking
Parking lots, whether in parking structures or
Complies
surface lots, shall be located behind or next to
buildings, in accordance with the minimum
frontage requirements specified in Section A.4 of
this chapter.
Streetscape Improvements - Sidewalks
8'-0" sidewalk width on Ogden Drive
Complies
10'-0" sidewalk width on Trousdale Drive
Complies
Streetscape Improvements — Trees
Red Flowering Gum tree on Ogden Drive
Complies — Chinese Tallow trees proposed
Alternate: Chinese Tallow tree
Golden Rain tree on Trousdale Drive
Complies — Golden Rain trees proposed
Alternate: Red Oak
Staff Comments: See attached. Planning staff would note that the applicant has been working with the various
city departments to address their comments. Many of the comments have already been addressed on the proposed
plans.
G
Environmental Scoping
1818 Trousdale Drive
Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission should review the proposed project and the areas of
potentially significant environmental effects identified by staff. The Commission should identify any additional
effects of the project which you anticipate may be potentially significant to the environment. Any issues
identified by the Planning Commission will be added to the draft initial study for the analysis to be prepared by
Planning staff. The areas of investigation for environmental evaluation as defined by CEQA are listed on the
attached sheets immediately following the staff report.
Ruben Hurin
Planner
c. Bill Lindstrom, Sunrise Development, Inc.
7
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS LIST FROM CEQA:
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
❑ Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑ Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
❑ Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
❑ Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
AGRICULTURAL 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:
❑ Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
❑ Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
❑ Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
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 determinations. Would the project:
❑ Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
o Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?
❑ 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)?
❑ Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
❑ Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
❑ 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?
❑ Have a substantial or 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 US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
❑ 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, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
❑ Interfere substantially with the movement of any native or 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?
❑ Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
❑ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
❑ Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
❑ Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
❑ Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
❑ Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Environmental Factor List from CEQA
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
❑ Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
a) 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.
b) Strong seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
d) Landslides?
❑ Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil?
❑ Be located on a 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?
❑ Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-13 of the Uniform Building Code (2001), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
❑ Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
❑ Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
❑ 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?
❑ Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
❑ 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?
❑ 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?
❑ 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?
❑ Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
❑ Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
❑ Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
❑ 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 (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)?
❑ 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 or siltation on- or off -site?
❑ 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 -site?
❑ 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?
❑ Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑ 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?
❑ Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
-2-
Environmental Factor List from CEQA
❑ 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?
❑ Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
❑ Physically divide an established community?
❑ 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?
❑ Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
❑ 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?
❑ 2b) 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?
NOISE. Would the project result in:
❑ 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?
❑ Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
❑ A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
❑ A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
❑ 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?
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
❑ 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)?
❑ Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
❑ Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
PUBLIC SERVICES. 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 government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives
for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
RECREATION.
❑ 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?
❑ Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
-3-
Environmental Factor List from CEQA
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
❑ 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)?
❑ Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
❑ 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?
❑ Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
❑ Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑ Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑ Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
❑ Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
❑ Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
❑ 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?
❑ Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
❑ 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?
❑ Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
❑ Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
❑ Does 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?
❑ Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals?
❑ Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
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)?
❑ Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
10