October 30, 2017 | Author: Anonymous | Category: N/A
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall .. project site is located within ......
M A R S H A L L S QUA R E S P R O J E C T ADDENDUM TO THE S A N J O S É D O W N T O W N S T R AT E G Y 2 0 0 0 F I N A L E N V I R O N M E N TA L I M PA C T R E P O R T
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 2003042127 FILE NO. H14-010
January 2015
M A R S H A L L S QUA R E S P R O J E C T ADDENDUM TO THE S A N J O S É D O W N T O W N S T R AT E G Y 2 0 0 0 F I N A L E N V I R O N M E N TA L I M PA C T R E P O R T
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2003042127 FILE NO. H14-010 Submitted to: David Keyon, Planner City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street San José, California 95113
Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 2215 Fifth Street Berkeley, California 94710 510.540.7331
January 2015
This page intentionally left blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE............................................................................ 1 SECTION 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ........................................................................................ 3 2.1 PROJECT TITLE ............................................................................................... 3 2.2 PROJECT LOCATION ...................................................................................... 3 2.3 PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS ........................................... 3 2.4 LEAD AGENCY CONTACT ............................................................................ 3 2.5 SUBJECT SITE ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER ....................................... 3 2.6 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ZONING DESIGNATION ................................................................................................. 3 2.7 HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (HCP) DESIGNATION AND INFORMATION ................................................................................................ 3 SECTION 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 7 SECTION 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, CHECKLIST, AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS................................................................................................................... 27 4.1 AESTHETICS .................................................................................................. 28 4.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES .................................... 31 4.3 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................ 33 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................................... 43 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................. 49 4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................. 57 4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................ 63 4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................ 68 4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ..................................................... 76 4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING ....................................................................... 84 4.11 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................ 89 4.12 NOISE .............................................................................................................. 90 4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................. 103 4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES ...................................................................................... 105 4.15 RECREATION ............................................................................................... 107 4.16 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................... 108 4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ....................................................... 116 4.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ........................................ 120 SECTION 5.0 REFERENCES/CHECKLIST SOURCES ............................................................... 121 SECTION 6.0 LEAD AGENCY AND CONSULTANTS .............................................................. 122
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
i
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Table of Contents
FIGURES Figure 1: Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4a: Figure 4b: Figure 4c: Figure 4d: Figure 4e: Figure 4f: Figure 4g: Figure 5a: Figure 5b: Figure 5c: Figure 5d: Figure 6: Figure 7: Figure 8: Figure 9: Figure 10:
Project Location and Regional Vicinity Map ............................................................... 5 Aerial Photograph ........................................................................................................ 6 Site Plan........................................................................................................................ 8 Building Plan – Level B1 ............................................................................................. 9 Building Plan – Level 1 .............................................................................................. 10 Building Plan – Level 2 .............................................................................................. 11 Building Plan – Level 3 .............................................................................................. 12 Building Plan – Level 4 .............................................................................................. 13 Building Plan – Levels 5-6 ......................................................................................... 14 Building Plan – Level 7 .............................................................................................. 15 North Elevations and Perspectives ............................................................................. 16 East Elevations and Perspectives ............................................................................... 17 South Elevations and Perspectives ............................................................................. 18 West Elevations and Perspectives .............................................................................. 19 Representative Site Sections ...................................................................................... 20 Representative Rendering 1........................................................................................ 21 Representative Rendering 2........................................................................................ 22 Representative Rendering 3........................................................................................ 23 Shadow Analysis ........................................................................................................ 87
TABLES Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4:
Letter Codes of Environmental Issues........................................................................ 27 TAC Sources in the Project Site Vicinity ................................................................... 41 City of San José Tree Replacement Ratios................................................................. 44 Project Trip Generation Estimates ........................................................................... 112
APPENDICES Appendix A:
Cultural Resources Technical Analysis for Marshall Squares Project San José, Santa Clara County, California
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
ii
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 1.0: Introduction and Purpose
SECTION 1.0
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
This document, prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the regulations and policies of the City of San José, is an Addendum to the San José Downtown Strategy 2000 Final Environmental Impact Report1 (Strategy 2000 FEIR),which was certified by the City of San José (City) in June 2005. The Strategy 2000 FEIR consists of the Draft EIR, and the First Amendment to the Draft EIR (Response to Comments Documents). This Addendum evaluates the project-specific environmental impacts related to the proposed Marshall Squares Project (project), which is located within the boundaries of the larger Strategy 2000: San José Greater Downtown Strategy for Development2 area (Strategy 2000) area. The City of San José is the Lead Agency under CEQA. Strategy 2000 is a visioning document that resulted in the creation of supplemental plans and programs to implement the vision. Collectively, the effort intends to intensify the amount of development allowed in Greater Downtown San José. Ultimately, Strategy 2000 could allow for the development of 8,000,000 to 10,000,000 square feet of office space, 8,000 to 10,000 residential dwelling units, 900,000 to 1,200,000 square feet of retail space, and 2,000 to 2,500 guest rooms of hotel space in the project area. The Marshall Squares project site is located within the boundaries of the Strategy 2000 area. The project would include the development of an eight-story mixed-use building containing 195 residential units, 9,737 square feet of retail uses, 16,534 square feet of open space and ancillary uses and a maximum of 254 parking spaces. This Addendum is prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 which states: “The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.” Section 15162 specifies that “no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines … one or more of the following”: 1.
Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
2.
Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3.
New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete was adopted, shows any of the following: (A)
The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
1
San José, City of, 2005. Final Environmental Impact Report, San José Downtown Strategy 2000. June.
2
San José, City of, 2001. Strategy 2000: San José Greater Downtown Strategy for Development. February.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
1
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 1.0: Introduction and Purpose
(B)
Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C)
Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D)
Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(e), this Addendum summarizes the Marshall Squares project, the less-than-significant impacts associated with the project, and the reasons for the City’s conclusion that changes to the proposed project and associated environmental effects do not meet the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
2
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 2.0: Project Information
SECTION 2.0 2.1
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE
Marshall Squares
2.2
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project is located on an approximately 1.4-acre site adjacent to St. James Park in Downtown San José. The site is bounded by East St. John Street on the north; Trinity Cathedral (a local landmark constructed in 1863), associated parish building, and North 2nd Street on the east; commercial uses on the south; and North 1st Street on the west. The project site encompasses the following addresses: 50, 52, 60, 66, 80, and 90 North 1st Street; and 65 North 2nd Street. The site contains six buildings that were designed to house commercial uses. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) light rail lines are located on North 1st Street and North 2nd Street, adjacent to the project site, and provide extensive transit access to the surrounding region. A portion of the project site is located within the St. James Historic District, which was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1979. Figure 1 shows the location of the project site, and Figure 2 shows an aerial photograph of the project site, along with key features in the area.
2.3
PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS
Shon Finch Fairfield Residential Company LLC 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121
2.4
LEAD AGENCY CONTACT
City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement David Keyon, Planner 200 East Santa Clara Street San José, CA 95113-1950 (408) 535-7898
[email protected]
2.5
SUBJECT SITE ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER
467-21-018, 467-21-019, 467-21-020, 467-21-030, and 467-21-038, 467-21-039
2.6
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ZONING DESIGNATION
General Plan Land Use Designation: Downtown Zoning Designation: Downtown Commercial (DC)
2.7
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (HCP) DESIGNATION AND INFORMATION
Land Cover Designation: Urban – Suburban Land Cover Fee Zones: Urban Areas (no land cover fee)
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
3
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 2.0: Project Information
This page intentionally left blank.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
4
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
FIGURE 1
0
1000
2000
FEET
SOURCE: ESRI StreetMap North America (2012).
I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_1.ai (4/9/14)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Project Location and Regional Vicinity Map
eeeett SSttrr 44tthh rrtthh NNoo
eeeett SSttrr n n lliiaa tt JJuu EEaass
ss mee JJaam . . t t tt SS EEaass
ST. JAMES PARK
TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH
POST OFFICE
.. tt SStt EEaass
eeeett SSttrr n n JJoohh
eeeett SSttrr 33rrdd rrtthh NNoo
eeeett SSttrr 11sstt rrtthh NNoo
COURT HOUSE
eeeett SSttrr
eeeett SSttrr
eett ttrree dd SS 22nn rrtthh NNoo
tt rrkkee M Maa rrtthh NNoo LINCOLN LAW SCHOOL
ttaa aann S S t t ss W Wee
eett ttrree S S rraa CCllaa
FIGURE 2
Project Site 0
200
400
feet SOURCES: GOOGLE EARTH; LSA ASSOCIATES, INC., 2014. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_2.ai (4/3/14)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Aerial Photograph
Section 3.0: Project Description
SECTION 3.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Marshall Squares (project) would result in the development of a mixed-use project on a prominent, approximately 1.4-acre site adjacent to St. James Park and in the vicinity of the VTA’s light rail hub. The project sponsor is Fairfield Residential. The following discussion describes the physical and operational elements of the project and required project approvals. Figure 3 is the project site plan. Figures 4a through 4g show the project floor plans. Figures 5a through 5d show the exterior elevations of the project. Figure 6 shows representative site sections, and Figures 7 through 9 are representative renderings of the project, as seen from East St. John Street, North 1st Street, and North 2nd Street. 3.1.1
Area and Site History
The project site is located in Downtown San José, near the location of the historic settlement that was founded during the period of Spanish rule that pre-dated the founding of the City. Therefore, the project site has a long history of human use. St. James Park, immediately to the north of the site, was created in 1848 when Charles S. Lyman surveyed the City and reserved the land for the park by combining two adjacent rectangular blocks within the standard grid of streets. The park and its environs became a favored place for many of the City’s churches and public buildings, including the Trinity Cathedral to the east of the site, which was constructed in 1863. The park and its surroundings, including a portion of the project site, were placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1979.3 The project site was occupied by buildings starting in the late 1800s. By 1884, the site contained a mix of uses that characterized the expanding and evolving city, including: a concert hall; storage facilities for concrete, coal, and hay; wagon shop; blacksmith; trimming and painting shop; printer; and boot and shoe factory. The land uses changed on the site over the next approximately 30 years to include a Salvation Army Hall; residential uses; and an Elks Lodge. By the 1950s, the approximately two-story commercial building located at 66 North 1st Street had been constructed, and several of the buildings on the site had been replaced with garages and parking lots. By 1984, the buildings on the site were in their current configuration.4 Currently the site is occupied by six one-to-three story commercial buildings that were constructed between 1954 and 1982. One building, 90 North 1st Street, is within the boundaries of the St. James Historic District, but it does not contribute to the eligibility of the district.
3
Carey & Company, Inc., 2006. Draft Historical Resources Evaluation, Marshall Squares Apartments. March 10.
4
MACTEC, 2005. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Phase II Limited Site Assessment, Marshall Squares Apartment Building Project. September 30.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
7
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
NORTH 2ND STREET
ONE WAY SITE SECTION C A-4.2
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
VTA LIGHT RAIL
Garage Entry
STRAIGHT RUN STAIR
GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGES
STAIR ACCESS
*THESE ARE SCHEMATIC TABULATIONS ONLY & SUBJECT TO CHANGE
PROPERTY LINE
B1 LEVEL: Garage: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities: Storage:
PROPERTY LINE
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
LANDS OF THE RECTOR, WARDENS AND VESTRYMEN OF TRINITY CHURCH EXISTING PARALLEL PARKING
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
EXISTING ANGLED PARKING
Building #9 (2 story with basement)
ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL
LANDS OF ETPH, LP Building #7 (4 story stucco bldg)
55,585 SF 1,065 SF 0 SF 915 SF
LEVEL 1: Garage: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Retail: Amenities & Leasing: Storage:
41,405 SF 1,545 SF 8,990 SF 4,960 SF 0 SF
LEVEL 2: Building #6 (1 story brick & block bldg with basement)
SITE SECTION A-4.1
B
Garage: Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities Storage:
29,830 SF 14,398 SF 6,877 SF 1,385 SF 720 SF
LEVEL 3:
PROPERTY LINE
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities: Storage:
PODIUM EDGE
30,285 SF 9,930 SF 2,180 SF 60 SF
LEVEL 4: Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Storage:
STRAIGHT RUN STAIR
SITE SECTION A-4.1
Garage Entry/Exit STAIR ACCESS
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
PROPERTY LINE
STAIR ACCESS
LEVEL 5: Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Storage:
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
LEVEL 6:
LANDS OF NORTH FORTY, LLC Building #1 (4 story brick & block bldg)
LEVEL 7:
ACCESSIBLE ROUTE
STAIR ACCESS
A
31,745 SF 10,650 SF 60 SF
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Storage:
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities: Storage:
34,260 SF 8,340 SF 170 SF
34,260 SF 8,340 SF 170 SF
24,231 SF 7,039 SF 595 SF 170 SF
PROPERTY LINE
ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL
GROSS BUILDING SF SUBTOTALS:
VTA LIGHT RAIL SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
NORTH 1ST STREET
ONE WAY
Residential Units: Garage: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Retail/Flex: Amenities: Storage: Total:
169,179 SF 126,820 SF 53,786 SF 8,990 SF 9,120 SF 2,265 SF 370,160 SF
FIGURE 3 0
MARSHALL SQUARES 40 80 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_3.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
0’
20’
40’
80’
A-1.1
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Site Plan
NORTH 2ND STREET
GROSS SF. GROSS SF.
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
915 SF
PROPERTY LINE
55,585 SF 55,585 SF 1,065 SF 1,065 SF 0 SF 915 SF 0 SF
PROPERTY LINE
Garage: Garage: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities: Storage: Amenities: Storage:
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
EXIT STAIR #1
B1 LEVEL: B1 LEVEL:
SITE SECTION C A-4.2
ELEV #1
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
+72.9’
AREA WAY 60 SF 15’ x 4’
SITE SECTION B A-4.1 PROPERTY LINE
SITE SECTION A A-4.1
AREA WAY 70 SF
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
AREA WAY 60 SF 15’ x 4’
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
EXIT STAIR #5
PROPERTY LINE
ELEV #2
EXIT STAIR #3
ELEV #3
EXIT STAIR #2
+75.2’
LEGEND Residential Unit LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Residential Unit
Circulation
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
STALL SIZES:
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing
Amenities & Leasing
Back of Back House Program of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET LOADING
FULL & TANDEM
SMALL
HC Van
HC
Circulation Vertical Vertical Circulation
BIKE & MOTORCYCLE
FIGURE 4a
MARSHALL SQUARES 0
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
40
80
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4a.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL B1
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Level B1
A-2.1
NORTH 2ND STREET
PARKING INFORMATION
LEVEL 1:
CITY REQUIRED VEHICULAR PARKING:
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
Garage Entry
Ratio
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
Retail Studio (S): 1-Bedroom (A): 2-Bedroom (B): Guest: Total: Ratio:
+83.9’
EXIT STAIR #3
41,405 SF 1,545 SF 8,990 SF 4,960 SF 0 SF PROPERTY LINE
Garage: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Retail: Amenities & Leasing: Storage:
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
PROPERTY LINE
SITE SECTION C A-4.2
GROSS SF.
Total Units
1.0 1.0 1.0 0.1
41 88 61 190
Total Required N/A 41 stalls 88 stalls 61 stalls 19 stalls 209 stalls 1.1 stalls/unit
PROVIDED VEHICULAR PARKING: Leasing & Retail/Flex (Level 1): Guest (Level 1): Subtotal:
ELEV #3
Property management to coordinate entry and exiting for all loading vehicles off N. 2nd St.
+83.9’
AREA WAY 60 SF 15’ x 4’
40 stalls 19 stalls 59 stalls
Secured Full Size (Level 2): Secured Small Car (Level 2): Unsecured Full Size (Level 1): Secured Full Size (Level B1): Secured Small Car (Level B1): Secured Tandem (Level B1): Subtotal:
27 stalls 39 stalls 12 stalls 57 stalls 40 stalls 15 stalls 190 stalls
Total: Ratio:
249 stalls 1.3 stalls/unit
SHEAR WALL (typical)
ACCESSIBLE VEHICULAR STALL ANALYSIS:
PROPERTY LINE
SITE SECTION B A-4.1
Unassigned & Visitor HC Stalls Required (CBC): Per 2013 CBC Section 1109A.5, HC parking required 5% of unassigned stalls Total unassigned stalls = 59 0.05 x 56 unassigned stalls = 3 HC stalls required Assigned Residential HC Stalls Required (CBC): Per 2013 CBC Section 1109A.4, HC parking required 2% of units Total accessible units = 190 0.02 x 190 accessible units = 4 HC stalls required HC Stalls Provided: Unassigned & Visitor HC: Assigned Residential:
LOUVERED OPENING 15’ x 7’
SITE SECTION A A-4.1
+86.2’ +85.5’
+84.5’
Garage Entry/Exit WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
AREA WAY 60 SF 15’ x 4’
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
EXIT STAIR #4
EXIT STAIR #1
ELEV #1
+85.1’
PROPERTY LINE
+85.5’
MOTORCYCLE PARKING: Retail Required: Residential Required: Total:
Ratio
Units
0.25
190 du
Total Provided:
Total Stalls 3 stalls (min.) 48 stalls 51 stalls 52 stalls
BICYCLE PARKING: Ratio Units Retail Required: 1/3,000 sf 8,865 sf Residential Required: 0.25 190 du Total:
EXIT STAIR #2
PROPERTY LINE
ELEV #2
6 HC stalls 5 HC stalls
Total Provided:
Total Stalls 3 stalls 48 stalls 51 stalls 51 stalls
LEGEND
+86.2’
Residential Unit
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
STALL SIZES:
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing Back of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET LOADING
FULL & TANDEM
SMALL
HC Van
HC
BIKE & MOTORCYCLE
MARSHALL SQUARES SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
0
40
Vertical Circulation Retail / Flex Space
FIGURE 4b FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 1
A-2.2
80
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4b.ai (1/5/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Level 1
NORTH 2ND STREET SITE SECTION C A-4.2
GROSS SF.
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
LEVEL 2:
Leasable Floor Area:
27%
LOUVERED OPENING 380 SF NET EXIT STAIR #1
29,830 SF 14,398 SF 6,877 SF 1,385 SF 720 SF
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
PROPERTY LINE
Garage: Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities Storage:
ELEV #1
TRASH CHUTE
+100.2’
SITE SECTION B A-4.1 PROPERTY LINE
PODIUM EDGE
PASSIVE COURTYARD +101.2’
S1
LOUVERED OPENING 15’ x 7’
EXIT STAIR #4
SITE SECTION A A-4.1
+101.2’
A4 A2 B1
A5
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
ELEV #2
+101.2’
A1b
ELEV #3
A1
B1
A1
B1b
B1b
B1b
B1b
EXIT STAIR #2
PROPERTY LINE
UNIT SUMMARY:
A2
EXIT STAIR #5
EXIT STAIR #3
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
S1
Studio (S): 1-Bedroom (A): 2-Bedroom (B): Total: Density:
41 (21.58%) 88 (46.32%) 61 (32.11%) 190 units (100.00%) 135.14 dwelling units / gross acre
*NOTE: Type I residential units are schematic only - unit interiors to be further developed in subsequent design phases to respond to column grid
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
Residential Unit
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
STALL SIZES:
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing Back of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET LOADING
FULL & TANDEM
SMALL
HC Van
HC
Vertical Circulation
BIKE & MOTORCYCLE
FIGURE 4c
MARSHALL SQUARES 0
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
40
80
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4c.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 2
A-2.3
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Level 2
NORTH 2ND STREET
30,285 SF 9,930 SF 2,180 SF 60 SF
Leasable Floor Area:
71%
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
PROPERTY LINE
B4
S1
B1
S1
ELEV #1
A2 S1
A2
3 HR. FIRE WALL
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities: Storage:
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
PROPERTY LINE
LEVEL 3:
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
EXIT STAIR #1
SITE SECTION C A-4.2
GROSS SF.
A1
A1
POOL COURTYARD +113.2’
PODIUM EDGE
SITE SECTION B A-4.1
PROPERTY LINE
A1
A1
A1c
PASSIVE COURTYARD +101.2’
S1
A1
S1
EXIT STAIR #4
SITE SECTION A A-4.1
B2 A2 B1
B1
S1
A2 3 HR. FIRE WALL
A2
EXIT STAIR #5
S1
A2
UNIT SUMMARY:
A2
S1
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
A2 ELEV #2 3 HR. FIRE WALL
ELEV #3
A1
B1
A1
B1b
B1b
B1b
B1b
Studio (S): 1-Bedroom (A): 2-Bedroom (B): Total: Density:
41 (21.58%) 88 (46.32%) 61 (32.11%) 190 units (100.00%) 135.14 dwelling units / gross acre
EXIT STAIR #2
3 HR. FIRE WALL
A1b
EXIT STAIR #3
PROPERTY LINE
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
Residential Unit
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing Back of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET
Vertical Circulation
FIGURE 4d 0
MARSHALL SQUARES SAN JOSE,40 CALIFORNIA
80
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4d.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 3
A-2.4
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Level 3
NORTH 2ND STREET
Leasable Floor Area:
75%
B4
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
S1
B1
S1
ELEV #1
A2 S1
A2
3 HR. FIRE WALL
31,745 SF 10,650 SF 60 SF
PROPERTY LINE
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Storage:
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
PROPERTY LINE
LEVEL 4:
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
EXIT STAIR #1
SITE SECTION C A-4.2
GROSS SF.
A1
A1
SITE SECTION B A-4.1 PROPERTY LINE
A1
A1
A1c
S1
A1
S1
EXIT STAIR #4
SITE SECTION A A-4.1
B2 A2
A2 B1
B1
S1
A2
EXIT STAIR #5
S1
A2
UNIT SUMMARY:
A2
S1
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
A2 ELEV #2
3 HR. FIRE WALL
3 HR. FIRE WALL
ELEV #3
B3
A1
A1
B1
B1b
B1b
B1b
B1b
Studio (S): 1-Bedroom (A): 2-Bedroom (B): Total: Density:
41 (21.58%) 88 (46.32%) 61 (32.11%) 190 units (100.00%) 135.14 dwelling units / gross acre
EXIT STAIR #2
A1b
EXIT STAIR #3
PROPERTY LINE
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
Residential Unit
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing Back of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET
Vertical Circulation
FIGURE 4e 0
MARSHALL SQUARES 40 80 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4e.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 4
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Level 4
A-2.5
NORTH 2ND STREET
Leasable Floor Area:
80%
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
PROPERTY LINE
B4
S1
PROPERTY LINE
34,260 SF 8,340 SF 170 SF
B1
S1
ELEV #1
A2 S1
B1
B4
A2
3 HR. FIRE WALL
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Storage:
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
EXIT STAIR #1
LEVEL 5 & 6
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
SITE SECTION C A-4.2
GRO S S S F.
A1
A1
SITE SECTION B A-4.1 PROPERTY LINE
A1
A1
A1c
S1
A1
S1
EXIT STAIR #4
SITE SECTION A A-4.1
B2 A2
A2 B1
B1
S1
A2
EXIT STAIR #5
S1
A2
UNIT SUMMARY:
A2
S1
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
A2 ELEV #2
ELEV #3
B3
A1
B1
A1
3 HR. FIRE WALL
B1b
B1b
B1b
B1b
Studio (S): 1-Bedroom (A): 2-Bedroom (B): Total: Density:
41 (21.58%) 88 (46.32%) 61 (32.11%) 190 units (100.00%) 135.14 dwelling units / gross acre
EXIT STAIR #2
3 HR. FIRE WALL
A1b
EXIT STAIR #3
PROPERTY LINE
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
Residential Unit
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing Back of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET
Vertical Circulation
FIGURE 4f 0
MARSHALL SQUARES 40 80 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4f.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVELS 5 & 6
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Levels 5-6
A-2.6
NORTH 2ND STREET
Leasable Floor Area:
76%
EAST ST. JOHN STREET
PROPERTY LINE
B4
B1
S1
ELEV #1
A2 S1
B1
B4
A2
A1
A1
SITE SECTION B A-4.1 PROPERTY LINE
A1
A1
A1c
137’ FROM PROPERTY LINE
BUILDING AREA RESTRICTED TO 70’ HEIGHT LIMIT PER ST. JAMES SQUARE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES
S1
A1
S1
EXIT STAIR #4
SITE SECTION A A-4.1 A2
A2
S1
A2
UNIT SUMMARY:
A2
S1
EAST ELEVATION A-3.2
A2 ELEV #2
PROPERTY LINE
3 HR. FIRE WALL
LOWER ROOF
ELEV #3
EXIT STAIR #3
WEST ELEVATION A-3.4
S1
3 HR. FIRE WALL
24,231 SF 7,039 SF 595 SF 170 SF
3 HR. FIRE WALL
B1b
B1b
B1b
B1b
41 (21.58%) 88 (46.32%) 61 (32.11%) 190 units (100.00%) 135.14 dwelling units / gross acre
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE
STAIR RETAIL TO ROOF MECHANICAL SHAFT
Studio (S): 1-Bedroom (A): 2-Bedroom (B): Total: Density:
EXIT STAIR #2
Residential Units: Corridor/Vertical Circulation: Amenities: Storage:
NORTH ELEVATION A-3.1
EXIT STAIR #1
LEVEL 7:
SITE SECTION D A-4.2
PROPERTY LINE
SITE SECTION C A-4.2
GROSS SF.
EQUIPMENT SCREEN
Residential Unit
*Typical Window Locations Shown Refer to Elevations for Variations
Circulation
SOUTH ELEVATION A-3.3
Amenities & Leasing Back of House Program
NORTH 1ST STREET
Vertical Circulation
FIGURE 4g 0
MARSHALL SQUARES 40 80 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_4g.ai (1/5/15)
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 7
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Building Plan - Level 7
A-2.7
6
3
7
2
5
4
8 PL
PL (beyond)
Top of structure Top of sheathing
13’
6’-2”
PL
10’
Level 7
10’
85’ max. height from avg. grade plane
Level 6
10’ Level 4
10’
+/- 81’-6”
Level 5
Level 3
13’
(PODIUM)
Level 2
16’-4”
Level 1
(beyond)
Trinity Church Cathedral in front (N.A A.P.))
Officce in frront (N N.A.P.))
Level 1 Grade
Average grade plane +84.71’
Proposed +83.90’
B1 Unit Transformers at Grade
Flex Space
S1 Unit Gas Meters
Proposed +83.90’
IDF Room
S1 Unit
Cycle Therapy & Lobby
Stair
B4 Unit Garage Entry
Pump Room
Straight Run Stair to Podium
Average grade plane +84.71’
Mech.
Passive Courtyard Beyond
Straight Run Stair to Podium
E. St. John Street
1. NORTH ELEVATION (NORTH 2ND STREET) 3
MATERIAL PALETTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Partial Glass Railing Corrugated Metal Full Height Glass Railing Stone Veneer Exterior Plaster Aluminum Storefront Metal Awning Vinyl Window Horizontal Metal Railing Metal Window Frame
2
1
EXTERIOR LIGHTING (DL-1) (DL-2) (AL-1) (AL-2) (AL-3) (WS)
2. AERIAL VIEW OF NORTH 2ND STREET
MARSHALL SQUARES SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
0
20
TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
10’
20’
KEY MAP (NOT TO SCALE)
See sheet A-5.2 for lighting fixture details
3. VIEW LOOKING WEST OVER TRINITY CATHEDRAL TO PASSIVE COURTYARD BEYOND FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL
Deck Light (ceiling mount) Deck Light (wall mount) Accent Light (awning) Accent Light (ceiling) Accent Light (wall washer) Wall Sconce
40’
NORTH ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVES
FIGURE 5a A-3.1
40
feet
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_5a.ai (1/5/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum North Elevations and Perspectives
1. EAST ELEVATION (INTERIOR PROPERTY LINE) MATERIAL PALETTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Partial Glass Railing Corrugated Metal Full Height Glass Railing Stone Veneer Exterior Plaster Aluminum Storefront Metal Awning Vinyl Window Horizontal Metal Railing Metal Window Frame
2
1
EXTERIOR LIGHTING (DL-1) (DL-2) (AL-1) (AL-2) (AL-3) (WS)
SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
0
20
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
KEY MAP (NOT TO SCALE)
See sheet A-5.2 for lighting fixture details
2. AERIAL VIEW LOOKING WEST TO PATTERNED WINDOW FACADE AS SEEN ABOVE EXISTING BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO PROPERTY
MARSHALL SQUARES
Deck Light (ceiling mount) Deck Light (wall mount) Accent Light (awning) Accent Light (ceiling) Accent Light (wall washer) Wall Sconce
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
10’
20’
40’
EAST ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVES
FIGURE 5b A-3.2
40
feet
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_5b.ai (1/5/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum East Elevations and Perspectives
1. SOUTH ELEVATION (NORTH 1ST STREET) MATERIAL PALETTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Partial Glass Railing Corrugated Metal Full Height Glass Railing Stone Veneer Exterior Plaster Aluminum Storefront Metal Awning Vinyl Window Horizontal Metal Railing Metal Window Frame
EXTERIOR LIGHTING (DL-1) (DL-2) (AL-1) (AL-2) (AL-3) (WS)
2. CAFE ANCHORING CORNER OF EAST SAINT JOHN ST. & NORTH 1ST STREET
MARSHALL SQUARES SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
0
20
TCA # 2013-063
See sheet A-5.2 for lighting fixture details
3. PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF NORTH 1ST STREET ELEVATION
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
10’
20’
Deck Light (ceiling mount) Deck Light (wall mount) Accent Light (awning) Accent Light (ceiling) Accent Light (wall washer) Wall Sconce
40’
2
1 3 KEY MAP ( N O T TO S C A L E )
SOUTH ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVES
FIGURE 5c A-3.3
40
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_5c.ai (1/5/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum South Elevations and Perspectives
1. WEST ELEVATION (EAST SAINT JOHN STREET)
MATERIAL PALETTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Partial Glass Railing Corrugated Metal Full Height Glass Railing Stone Veneer Exterior Plaster Aluminum Storefront Metal Awning Vinyl Window Horizontal Metal Railing Metal Window Frame
2
EXTERIOR LIGHTING (DL-1) (DL-2) (AL-1) (AL-2) (AL-3) (WS)
2. VIEW OF EAST SAINT JOHN ELEVATION AS SEEN FROM SAINT JAMES PARK
MARSHALL SQUARES SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
0
20
TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
10’
1 3
KEY MAP
( N O T TO S C A L E )
See sheet A-5.2 for lighting fixture details
3. VIEW LOOKING SOUTH TOWARD CORNER OF NORTH 1ST STREET
FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL
Deck Light (ceiling mount) Deck Light (wall mount) Accent Light (awning) Accent Light (ceiling) Accent Light (wall washer) Wall Sconce
20’
40’
WEST ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVES
FIGURE 5d A-3.4
40
feet SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_5d.ai (1/5/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum West Elevations and Perspectives
SITE SECTION A
C
D
B A
SITE SECTION B
MARSHALL SQUARES SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
0
30
KE Y M AP
( N OT T O S C A L E )
FIGURE 6 FAIRFIELD RESIDENTIAL TCA # 2013-063
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT JANUARY 5, 2015
0’
20’
40’
80’
SITE SECTIONS
A-4.1
60
feet
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_6.ai (1/5/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Representative Site Sections
GROUND LEVEL VIEW OF CORNER CAFE ANCHORING EAST SAINT JOHN STREET FRONTAGE AS IT OVERLOOKS ST. JAMES PARK
FIGURE 7
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_7.ai (1/6/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Representative Rendering 1
GROUND LEVEL VIEW OF NORTH 1ST STREET PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE WITH VERTICAL RESIDENTIAL MASSING ABOVE
FIGURE 8
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_8.ai (1/6/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Representative Rendering 2
GROUND LEVEL VIEW OF VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ENTRIES ALONG NORTH 2ND STREET WITH RESIDENTIAL BALCONIES FLOATING ABOVE
FIGURE 9
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JANUARY 2015. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_9.ai (1/6/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Representative Rendering 3
Section 3.0: Project Description
This page intentionally left blank.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
24
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 3.0: Project Description
3.1.2
Proposed Building
The project would result in the construction of a mixed-use building containing a total of eight levels, including one sub-grade level (Level B1) and seven above-grade levels (Levels 1-7). The 372,706gross-square-foot building would contain up to 195 residential units, 9,737 square feet of retail uses, 16,534 square feet of common outdoor open space (not including indoor common areas), and ancillary facilities, as described below. Retail space is incorporated into the project along East St. John Street and North 1st Street to increase interest and pedestrian activity at the street level. Residential Uses. The residential units would be located on Levels 2-7, and some of the units on Floors 3-7 would be oriented around two interior courtyards. Of the 195 residential units, 56 units (approximately 29 percent of the total) would be studios, ranging in size from 518 to 697 square feet; 81 units (approximately 42 percent) would be one-bedroom units, ranging in size from 710 to 953 square feet; and 58 units (approximately 30 percent) would be two-bedroom units, ranging in size from 1,094 to 1,358 square feet. The overall residential density of the project would be approximately 139 residential units per acre. Retail Uses. As noted above, the project would include approximately 9,737 square feet of retail space located on Levels 1 and 2. Level 1 would contain a 1,396-square-foot retail space fronting East St. John Street that would be open to the roof of Level 2 and is currently envisioned as a café. There would be an approximately 1,618-square-foot second story on Level 2 that would be attached to the ground-level retail space. In addition, a 6,723-square-foot retail space would be developed on Level 1 adjacent to North 1st Street and North 2nd Street. Ancillary Uses. The project would also include approximately 7,984 square feet of ancillary and amenity uses, including a leasing office on Level 1, a gym and a resident amenity room on Level 3. Other ancillary uses would include residential and visitor lobbies, storage space, and utility and elevator rooms. Open Space. Open space would be integrated into the project primarily in the form of courtyards, rooftop space, and private balconies. The project would include 16,534 square feet of shared open space (not including indoor facilities) and 10,672 square feet of private open space. Shared open space would include a 749-square-foot roof deck above Level 7; and two courtyards comprising 15,785 square feet on Levels 2 and 3 (one of which would contain a pool). All except for three of the one- and two-bedroom units would have private balconies overlooking the interior courtyards or the streets surrounding the project site. These balconies would range in size from 68 to 114 square feet. Design and Architecture. The project was designed by TCA Architects, based in Irvine, California, and the landscape architect is HMHca, based in San José. The project features a modern design that is characterized by extensive glazing on the East St. John Street frontage, exterior plaster and brick, cement panels, glass railings, metal awnings, and inset vinyl windows. The top of the building sheathing would be 84 feet 2 inches above the finished grade (approximately the same height as the tower of the nearby Trinity Cathedral); the top of the parapet would be at 89 feet 2 inches (see Figure 5a). 3.1.3
Parking and Circulation
Numerous pedestrian access points would be provided along the edges of the proposed building that front public right-of-ways. These access points include doorways to all the ground-level retail spaces, along with one residential lobby each along North 2nd Street and North 1st Street. A visitor lobby City of San José Marshall Squares Project
25
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 3.0: Project Description
would also provide access into the building from North 1st Street. Bike and vehicle access would be provided via the public streets surrounding the site. The basement and the first two above ground levels of the proposed building would contain a total of 254 interior parking spaces, including 195 spaces for the residential uses, 20 guest parking spaces, 39 spaces for use by the retail tenants/customers and the on-site leasing office (all parking spaces dedicated for retail and leasing uses would be located on Level 1), and one loading space. A combined entrance/exit driveway would be located along East St. John Street. In addition, one entrance driveway and one exit driveway would be located along North 2nd Street. The interior parking garage would also contain a total of 52 motorcycle parking spaces and 53 bicycle parking spaces. 3.1.4
Utilities
Because the project site is developed with commercial and light industrial uses and is located in an urban area, utilities are available to serve the project site, including water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, energy, and communications infrastructure. 3.1.5
Construction
Development of the project would require the demolition of the existing buildings on the project site, and the removal of all paving from the site. Construction is anticipated to occur over 28 months, starting in July 2015 and ending in October 2017. The project would be constructed in one phase and would utilize the following types of equipment: excavators, cranes, dump trucks, cement trucks, cement pump trucks, pile drivers. Project construction would require excavation of approximately 25,000 to 30,000 cubic yards of earth to a depth of up to 13 feet below grade. The foundation would consist of matt and/or post tension slab dependent upon further geotechnical analysis. Pile driving may be used, also dependent upon further geotechnical analysis. 3.1.6
City Actions/Approvals
The City of San José will consider the information provided in the Strategy 2000 FEIR and in this Addendum when considering actions necessary to implement this project, including the following approvals:
Site Development Permit
CEQA Certification of the Addendum to the Downtown Strategy 2000 EIR
Construction Plan Review and Permitting
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
26
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
SECTION 4.0
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, CHECKLIST, AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
In accordance with CEQA Section 21093(b) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15152(a), this Addendum tiers off the Strategy 2000 FEIR, certified in June 2005, which is hereby incorporated by reference. This section, Section 4.0, Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts, describes the existing environmental conditions on and near the project site, as well as environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The focus of this analysis is on impacts that are different or specific to the project than those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. Impact statements and mitigation measures are adapted from the Strategy 2000 FEIR. An environmental checklist is used to compare the environmental impacts of the proposed project with impacts expected to result from development approved in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, and to identify whether the proposed project would be likely to result in new significant environmental impacts. The right-hand column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each question. The sources cited are identified at the end of this document. Mitigation measures are identified for all significant project impacts. “Mitigation Measures” are measures that would minimize, avoid, or eliminate a significant impact. Measures that are required by law or are City standard conditions of approval are categorized as “Standard Measures.” In addition, each significant impact is numbered using an alpha-numerical system that identifies the environmental issue. For example, Impact HAZ-1 denotes the first impact in the hazards and hazardous materials section. Mitigation measures and conclusions are also numbered to correspond to the impacts they address. The letter codes used to identify environmental issues are shown in Table 1.
Table 1:
Letter Codes of Environmental Issues
Letter Code AES AG AIR VEG CUL GEO GHG HAZMAT HYD LU MIN NOI POP SVCS REC TRAN UTIL
Environmental Issue Aesthetics Agricultural and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise and Vibration Population and Housing Public Service Recreation Transportation Utilities and Service Systems
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
27
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.1 4.1.1
AESTHETICS Setting
Visually the Strategy 2000 area and project site is generally characterized by large-scale urban development consisting primarily of a variety of commercial and light industrial uses, and including several older structures pre-dating the turn of the century, interspersed with newer buildings of varying ages and styles. There is generally a lack of unifying character or cohesive architectural style in the area when viewed as a whole. Vegetation occurs along tree-lined streets, along the perimeter of buildings, and within rights-of-way. St. James Park is located to the north of the project site across East St. John Street. Multiple-story urban development generally forms a visual boundary between Downtown and the surrounding mountainsides that border the Santa Clara Valley, upon which the City is built. However, views of the Diablo Mountain Range are visible to the east, along East St. John Street. The shoreline of San Francisco Bay is located approximately 7 miles to the northwest of the site, and is not visible from the site. In the vicinity of the project site, existing buildings are located around the perimeter of St. James Park, which provides the visual focus for the area. Scenic resources, such as large mature trees and historic buildings, are present. Views along North 1st Street at the western edge of the park include the Old San José Post Office and Courthouse, and views along North 2nd Street, the eastern edge of the park, include a large grassy open space and Senior Center. Views along West St. James Street, the northern edge of the park, include the First Church of Christ Scientist, and views along East St. Johns Street include the Trinity Cathedral, which is adjacent to the project site. The project site is completely developed with urban uses, and the buildings within the site include six commercial buildings from one- to three-stories tall. The project site contains several trees and landscaping beds, and the western, northern, and eastern boundaries of the site contain numerous street trees. 4.1.2
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Aesthetics
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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 that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
28
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.1.2.1
Scenic Vistas
Scenic vistas in the vicinity of the site are generally constrained by flat topography and existing urban development. Views of the Diablo Range foothills to the east are available from the project site only when viewed from the public right-of-way along East St. John Street. Views west of the Coast Range foothills are not available due to existing buildings. As described in the 2000 Strategy FEIR, development related to Strategy 2000 would allow for the construction of taller and more massive buildings in the area, which could further impact the availability of views outside of the Downtown area. However, the proposed project would not encroach upon the existing views of the Diablo Range foothills as it would be developed to the lot line only. As such, these impacts would not be considered significant because the proposed project would not impede views any more than existing buildings currently impede views. The proposed project would replace existing low-rise buildings on the site with one 7-story mixed-use building extending to a maximum of 84 feet 2 inches in height (not including parapets). The project would not result in new impacts to scenic vistas or substantially increase the severity of the less-than-significant impacts to scenic vistas identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.1.2.2
Scenic Resources
The project site is not located within a scenic viewshed or along a scenic highway, including a State Scenic Highway. The project site is completely developed with urban uses and landscaping, and contains no scenic resources such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. However, the project site is located within the St. James Square Historic District. Adjacent buildings including the Trinity Cathedral and the Old San José Post Office could be impacted by the proposed development. As a result, the proposed project would conform to the St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines,5 which would ensure that the project would conform to the intent of the design district. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new or more substantial impacts to scenic resources beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. Such impacts were identified as less than significant in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.1.2.3
Change in Visual Character
As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, urban design concepts and guidelines including the St. James Historic District Design Guidelines would preserve and enhance the visual character and quality of the area, including the project site. The proposed project would replace the six existing one- to three-story commercial buildings with a new 7-story building within the same footprint. The new building would be consistent with the mass and scale of adjacent buildings within the block and would utilize materials that are compatible to the historic nature of the area. Therefore, the proposed project would not create any new or significant impacts with regard to a change in visual character than were analyzed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.1.2.4
Light and Glare Impacts
Due to the urbanized setting, night lighting and glare is widespread throughout the greater Downtown San José area. Existing ambient sources of nighttime lighting include neon and florescent signs, lighting of building exteriors for safety or architectural accents, lights within buildings that illuminate the exteriors of buildings though windows, landscape lighting, street lighting, parking lot lighting, 5
San José, City of. 1989. St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
29
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
and vehicle headlights. Glare in the greater Downtown San José area is also created by reflection of sunlight and electric lights off of existing windows and building surfaces. As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, urban design concepts and design guidelines would limit new sources of light and glare in the project area. The exterior of the proposed project would consist largely of plaster and brick which would minimize light and glare impacts. Site lighting and streetscape lighting along the perimeter of the project would be designed in conformance with the City’s lighting design standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not create impacts related to light and glare that are new or more significant than those analyzed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.1.3
Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant aesthetics impacts than those addressed in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
30
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.2
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
4.2.1
Setting
The Downtown San José area has been developed for urban uses since 1848 when Mexico ceded California to the United States, and San José served as the first State capital. The project site is currently developed with buildings and surface parking lots, and has been developed with urban uses pre-dating 1884. According to the Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2010 map, the project site is designated Urban and Built-Up Land.6 The project site is not the subject to a Williamson Act contract and does not contain forest lands. 4.2.2
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Agriculture Resources
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
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 nonagricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
5
5,6
5,6
1
1
As discussed above, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land on the Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2010 map and is not used or zoned for agricultural purposes. For these reasons, the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to farmland or agricultural resources beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
6
California, State of, 2010. Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Website: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/fmmp/pdf/2010/scl10.pdf (accessed March 17, 2014).
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
31
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.2.3
Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to farmland and forest land beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
32
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.3
AIR QUALITY
The section evaluates air quality emissions resulting from implementation of the proposed project based on the impacts identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.3.1
Setting
The City of San José is located in the Santa Clara Valley within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The project site’s proximity to both the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay has a moderating influence on the local climate. This portion of the Santa Clara Valley is bounded to the north by the San Francisco Bay, the Santa Cruz Mountains to the southwest, and the Diablo Range to the east. The surrounding terrain greatly influences winds in the valley, resulting in a prevailing wind that follows along the valley’s northwest-southwest axis. Pollutants in the air can cause health problems, especially for children, the elderly, and people with heart or lung problems. Healthy adults may experience symptoms during periods of intense exercise. Pollutants can also cause damage to animals, vegetation, and property. 4.3.1.1
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
Various policies in the Envision San José 2040 General Plan7 (General Plan 2040) have been adopted that would avoid or mitigate air quality impacts from development projects. In Chapter 3, Environmental Leadership, the City’s General Plan has the following goals and policies related to the proposed project that would reduce air quality impacts:
Policy MS-10.1: Assess projected air emissions from new development in conformance with the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines and relative to state and federal standards. Identify and implement air emissions reduction measures.
Policy MS-11.2: Assess projected air emissions from new development in conformance with the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines and relative to state and federal standards. Identify and implement air emissions reduction measures.
Policy MS-13.1: Include dust, particulate matter, and construction equipment exhaust control measures as conditions of approval for subdivision maps, site development and planned development permits, grading permits, and demolition permits. At minimum, conditions shall conform to construction mitigation measures recommended in the current BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines for the relevant project size and type.
Policy MS-13.3: Construction and/or demolition projects that have the potential to disturb asbestos (from soil or building material) shall comply with all the requirements of the California Air Resources Board’s air toxic control measures (ATCMs) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations.
In addition to the goals and policies of the General Plan, the proposed project is also subject to the City’s Grading Ordinance, which requires that all earth moving activities control fugitive dust through steps such as regular watering of the ground surface, cleaning of nearby streets, and planting any areas left vacant for extensive periods of time.
7
San José, City of, 2011. Final Environmental Impact Report, Envision San José 2040 General Plan. September.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
33
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.3.1.2
Background Information
Ambient air quality has basically remained unchanged since the approval of the Strategy 2000 FEIR. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has made two regulatory changes since the Strategy 2000 FEIR was certified. Revised BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines were adopted in May 2011 that provide new and updated CEQA thresholds for analyzing air quality impacts. In general, the new BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines have lowered the emissions thresholds for identifying project impacts. For example, the updated BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines revised the threshold for project operations for ROG and NOx from 80 pounds per day to 54 pounds per day. The updated thresholds also include new thresholds for PM2.5 at 54 pounds per day. The updated BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines were also amended to include a risk and hazards threshold for new receptors and modified procedures for assessing impacts related to risk and hazard impacts. On March 5, 2012, the Alameda County Superior Court issued a judgment finding that the BAAQMD had failed to comply with CEQA when it adopted the thresholds of significance in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. The court did not determine whether the thresholds of significance were valid on their merits, but found that the adoption of the thresholds was a project under CEQA. The court issued a writ of mandate ordering the BAAQMD to set aside the thresholds and cease dissemination of them until the BAAQMD complied with CEQA. In May of 2012, the BAAQMD filed an appeal of the court’s decision. The Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District, reversed the trial court’s decision in August 2013. The Court of Appeal’s decision was appealed to the California Supreme Court, which granted limited review, and the matter is currently pending there. The BAAQMD has not reinstated the 2011 CEQA Guidelines; however, the BAAQMD notes that the Alameda County Superior Court, in ordering BAAQMD to set aside the thresholds, did not address the merits of the science or evidence supporting the thresholds. The BAAQMD finds that, despite the court ruling, the science and reasoning contained in the 2011 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines provide the latest state-of-the art guidance available. For that reason, substantial evidence supports continued use of the 2011 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. The Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan8 (CAP) was adopted in September 2010. The CAP is the latest Clean Air Plan which contains district-wide control measures to reduce ozone precursor emissions (i.e., ROG and NOx) and particulate matter. 4.3.1.3
Sensitive Receptors
The BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as facilities where sensitive population groups (children, the elderly, the acutely ill and the chronically ill) are likely to be located. These land uses include residences, schools, playgrounds, child-care centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals and medicinal clinics. Existing sensitive receptors near the project site include the St. James Park northeast of the project site and the Town Park Towers retirement home at 60 N. 3rd Street one block to the east of the project site. Residential buildings are not located in the immediate project vicinity.
8
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2010. Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan. September 15.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
34
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.3.2
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Air Quality
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially 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 classified as 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?
4.3.2.1
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3,8
1,2,3,7
1,2,3,7
1,2,3,7 1,2,3
Clean Air Plan Consistency
An air quality plan describes air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or region classified as a non-attainment area. The main purpose of an air quality plan is to bring an area into compliance with the requirements of federal and State air quality standards. Determining consistency with the 2010 Clean Air Plan (CAP) involves assessing whether applicable control measures contained in the 2010 CAP are being implemented by the City and furthered by the proposed project. Implementation of control measures would improve air quality and protect public health. These control measures are organized into five categories: Stationary Source Measures, Mobile Source Measures, Transportation Control Measures (TCMs), Land Use and Local Impact Measures, and Energy and Climate Measures. The project includes applicable transportation and energy control measures consistent with the 2010 CAP requirements, as described below. The project includes transportation control measures to promote the reduction of vehicle miles traveled such as providing secure bicycle parking spaces for residents and access to the nearby bike lanes and trails located throughout Downtown San José. The project has also been designed to be pedestrian-oriented and to enhance the pedestrian experience. The proposed project is located in Downtown San José within walking distance of existing bus stops and light rail station. The project will also increase the number of San José residents within walking distance of jobs, restaurants, and services. The project also includes energy and climate measures to increase efficiency and conservation. The proposed project would comply with the City’s Green Building Ordinance and Policies which would increase building efficiency over standard construction. The project would also comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance to promote planting of low-VOC-emitting shade trees to reduce urban heat island effects, save energy, and absorb CO2 and other air pollutants. City of San José Marshall Squares Project
35
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
The project supports the primary goals of the CAP in that it is infill development that provides users of the site with access to existing transit and services which will reduce vehicle trips. The project is also consistent with the City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the Bay Area’s 2010 CAP. 4.3.2.2
Regional and Local Air Quality Impacts
The proposed project would redevelop the project site with new residential and commercial uses. The new land uses would result in mobile air quality impacts from increased vehicle trips to the project site and area source air quality impacts such as emissions generated from the use of landscaping equipment and water heating. Therefore, development of the project would contribute to the significant regional and local air quality impacts identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR, including long-term project-related emissions associated with the ozone precursor reactive organic gases (ROG) and PM10. The proposed project, however, would not result in any new or more significant regional or local air quality impacts than described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. The Strategy 2000 FEIR identified Mitigation and Avoidance Measures that identify feasible measures to reduce vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions from the proposed project. The measures would reduce air quality impacts. However, regional emissions would remain significant and unavoidable as identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. Impact AIR-1:
Long-term project-related regional emissions would exceed the BAAQMD thresholds of significance for the ozone precursor ROG and PM10. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified as part Strategy 2000 FEIR and would also be implemented by the project. MM AIR-1: To the extent permitted by law, at the time a specific development application is submitted, development projects within the City shall be required to implement Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) as recommended by the BAAQMD. Each measure listed below includes an estimate by the BAAQMD of its effectiveness at trip reduction. Rideshare Measures: Implement carpool/vanpool program (e.g., carpool ride matching for employees, assistance with vanpool formation, provision of vanpool vehicles, etc.) (Effectiveness 1 - 4 percent of work trips). Transit Measures:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
(i)
Construct transit facilities such as bus turnouts/bus bulbs, benches, shelters, etc. (Effectiveness 0.5 - 2 percent of all trips);
(ii)
Design and locate buildings to facilitate transit access (e.g., locate building entrances near transit stops, eliminate building setbacks, etc.) (Effectiveness 0.1 - 0.5 percent of all trips).
36
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Services Measures: (i)
Provide on-site shops and services for employees, such as cafeteria, bank/ATM, dry cleaners, convenience market, etc. (Effectiveness 0.5 5 percent of work trips);
(ii)
Provide on-site child care, or contribute to off-site childcare within walking distance. (Effectiveness 0.1 - 1 percent of work trips).
Shuttle Measures: (i)
Establish mid-day shuttle service from work site to food service establishments/commercial areas (Effectiveness 0.5 - 1.5 percent of work trips);
(ii)
Provide shuttle service to transit stations/multimodal centers (Effectiveness 1 - 2 percent of work trips).
Parking Measures: (i)
Provide preferential parking (e.g., near building entrance, sheltered area, etc.) for carpool and vanpool vehicles (Effectiveness 0.5 - 1.5 percent of work trips);
(ii)
Implement parking fees for single occupancy vehicle commuters (Effectiveness 2 - 20 percent of work trips);
(iii) Implement parking cash-out program for employees (i.e., non-driving employees receive transportation allowance equivalent to value of subsidized parking) (Effectiveness 2 - 20 percent of work trips). Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures: (i)
Provide secure, weather-protected bicycle parking for employees (Effectiveness 0.5 - 2 percent of work trips);
(ii)
Provide safe, direct access for bicyclists to adjacent bicycle routes (Effectiveness 0.5 - 2 percent of work trips);
(iii) Provide showers and lockers for employees bicycling or walking to work (Effectiveness 0.5 - 2 percent of work trips); (iv)
Provide secure short-term bicycle parking for retail customers or noncommute trips (Effectiveness 1 - 2 percent of non-work trips);
(v)
Provide direct, safe, attractive pedestrian access from Planning Area to transit stops and adjacent development (Effectiveness 0.5 - 1.5 percent of all trips).
Other Measures:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
(i)
Implement compressed work week schedule (e.g., 4 days/40 hours, 9 days/80 hours) (Effectiveness 2 - 10 percent of work trips);
(ii)
Implement home-based telecommuting program (Effectiveness 0.5 1.5 percent of work trips).
37
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Implementation of the measures detailed above would help minimize this impact, but not reduce it to a less-than-significant level. Additionally, the policies in the City of San José General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects resulting from planned development within the City. The project would be subject to the General Plan policies as outlined in Section 4.1.7.1 above. 4.3.2.3
Construction-Related Impacts
Construction activities would temporarily affect local air quality. Construction activities such as earthmoving, construction vehicle traffic and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that affect local and regional air quality. Construction activities are also a source of organic gas emissions. Solvents in adhesives, non-waterbased paints, thinners, some insulating materials, and caulking materials would evaporate into the atmosphere and would participate in the photochemical reaction that creates urban ozone. Asphalt used in paving is also a source of organic gases for a short time after its application. Construction dust could affect local air quality at various times during construction of the project. The dry, windy climate of the area during the summer months creates a high potential for dust generation when, and if, underlying materials are exposed to the atmosphere. The effects of construction activities would be increased dustfall and locally elevated levels of Particulate Matter (PM) downwind of construction activity. Development of the proposed project would result in similar construction-related, short-term air quality impacts as those impacts identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. With implementation of Mitigation Measures for Construction Impacts identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant construction-related air quality impacts than were described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR and this impact would be less than significant. Impact AIR-2:
Demolition and construction period activities could generate significant dust, exhaust, and organic emissions. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would also be implemented by the proposed project. Modifications to address new mitigation measures identified by BAAQMD are shown in underline below and would further reduce construction related impacts already identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR; these modifications do not address a new impact of the project that was not previously evaluated. MM AIR-2: Consistent with guidance from the BAAQMD, the following actions shall be required of construction contracts and specifications. Demolition. The following controls shall be implemented during demolition:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Water during demolition work, including the break-up of pavement and infrastructure, to control dust generation;
Cover all trucks hauling demolition debris from the site; and
Use dust-proof chutes to load debris into trucks whenever feasible.
38
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Construction. The following controls shall be implemented at all construction sites:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods; active areas adjacent to existing land uses shall be kept damp at all times, or shall be treated with non-toxic stabilizers to control dust;
Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials;
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 (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites; water sweepers shall vacuum up excess water to avoid runoff-related impacts to water quality;
Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets;
Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas;
Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.);
Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph;
Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways;
Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible;
Water sprays shall be utilized to control dust when material is being added or removed from soils stockpiles. If a soils stockpile is undisturbed for more than one week, it shall be treated with a dust suppressant or crusting agent to eliminate wind-blown dust generation;
All neighboring properties located within 500 feet of property lines of a construction site shall be provided with the name and phone number of a designated construction dust control coordinator who will respond to complaints within 24 hours by suspending dust-producing activities or providing additional personnel or equipment for dust control as deemed necessary. The phone number of the BAAQMD pollution complaints contact shall also be provided. The dust control coordinator shall be on-call during construction hours. The coordinator shall keep a log of complaints received and remedial actions taken in response. This log shall be made available to City staff upon its request;
Install baserock at entryways for all exiting trucks, and wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment in designated areas before leaving the site; and
Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. 39
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Consistent with guidance from the BAAQMD, the following additional measures shall be required of construction contracts and specifications for the project and shall be implemented at all times:
4.3.2.4
Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of San José regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.
Local Community Risk and Hazard Impacts to Sensitive Receptors
The Strategy 2000 FEIR did not identify any significant sources of risk or hazard impacts within the project vicinity. Since completion of the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the BAAQMD, through its Air Quality CEQA Guidelines document, has introduced new significance criteria and evaluation tools related to community health risk and hazard impacts. The new criteria went into effect on May 1, 2011, as follows. The threshold of significance for local community risk and hazard impacts applies to the siting of a new receptor. Local community risk and hazard impacts are associated with Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) and PM2.5 because emissions of these pollutants can have significant health impacts at the local level. If emissions of TACs or PM2.5 at a receptor site exceed any of the thresholds listed below, the proposed project would result in a significant impact.
Non-compliance with a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan;
An excess cancer risk level of more than 10 in one million, or a non-cancer (i.e., chronic or acute) hazard index greater than 1.0 would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution.
An incremental increase of greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) annual average PM2.5 from a single source would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution.
A project would have a cumulatively considerable impact if the aggregate total of all past, present, and foreseeable future sources within a 1,000 foot radius from the fence line of a source, or from the location of a receptor, plus the contribution from the project, exceeds the following: a. Non-compliance with a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan; or b. An excess cancer risk levels of more than 100 in one million or a chronic non-cancer hazard index (from all local sources) greater than 10.0; or c. 0.8 µg/m3 annual average PM2.5.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
40
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
The City of San José is currently working with the BAAQMD on the development of a Community Risk Reduction Plan (Plan) to address reducing exposures of residents to toxic air contaminants and PM2.5 emissions from all sources. As of June 2014, The Plan has not been adopted and implemented; therefore, the criterion related to compliance with that Plan does not apply at this time. The City of San José has been identified as an impacted community under the BAAQMD’s Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) program which was initiated in 2004 to evaluate and reduce health risk associated with exposures to outdoor TACs in the Bay Area. The BAAQMD has developed an inventory of TAC emissions and compiled demographic and health indicator data. According to the findings of the CARE Program, diesel PM, mostly from on and off-road mobile sources, accounts for over 80 percent of the inhalation cancer risk from TACs in the Bay Area. Any project with the potential to expose sensitive receptors (including residential areas) or the general public to substantial levels of toxic air contaminants would be deemed to have a significant impact. This standard would apply to locating sensitive receptors near existing sources of toxic air contaminants, as well as locating sources of toxic air contaminants near existing sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. According to the BAAQMD, when siting a new receptor, an evaluation of existing sources of TACs and PM2.5 emissions that could adversely affect individuals within a proposed project should be performed. Implementation of the proposed project would not create any new stationary sources of TACs. However, a database search of the BAAQMD’s Stationary Source Risk and Hazard Analysis Tool revealed that there are three existing permitted sources of TACs or PM2.5 emissions within 1,000 feet of the project site. The risk levels associated with these facilities are shown in Table 2, below.
Table 2:
TAC Sources in the Project Site Vicinity
Source Global Netoptex, Inc. Chevron Gas Station Santa Clara County Courthouse BAAQMD Individual Project Significance Threshold Cumulative Total BAAQMD Cumulative Significance Threshold Exceed?
Adjusted Lifetime Cancer Risk 5.36 0.35 0.94
Hazard Index 0.011 0.006 0.003
PM2.5 Concentration Source Address 0.001 75 E. Santa Clara Street NA 147 E. Santa Clara Street 0.002 161 N. 1st Street
Approximate Distance from Source to Project Site 400 feet 700 feet 400 feet
10.0
1.0
0.3
--
--
6.65
0.02
0.003
--
--
100.0
10.0
0.8
--
--
No
No
No
--
--
Source: BAAQMD and LSA Associates, Inc., 2014.
Based on the analysis of the TAC sources in the project site vicinity as shown in Table 2, future residents of the project site would not be exposed to substantial levels of TACs, and local community risk and hazards impacts associated with TACs would be less than significant at the individual and cumulative level. 4.3.2.5
Objectionable Odors
The Strategy 2000 FEIR did not identify any significant odor impacts associated with implementation of the Strategy 2000. Similarly, the proposed project would not contain any major sources of odor, City of San José Marshall Squares Project
41
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
and would not be located in an area with existing objectionable odors. Therefore, impacts associated with exposure to odors would be less than significant. 4.3.3
Conclusion
The proposed project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2, identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, would not result in any new or more significant air quality impacts than previously identified. The proposed project would result in the same criteria air pollutant emissions impacts as previously identified. The proposed project would also result in the same construction period impacts as identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, with mitigation incorporated. No new information of substantial importance has been identified in regard to the proposed project or the project site such that the proposed project would be expected to result in new significant air quality impacts.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
42
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.4
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4.1
Setting
The approximately 1.4-acre site is located in an urban area in Downtown San José, is mostly without vegetation, and consists of commercial buildings, asphalt pavement, and concrete surfaces. Trees and shrubs have been planted along the sidewalks that surround the site, and within landscaping strips along the interior of the site. No creeks or habitat for special-status species are located on the project site. The Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek, the nearest major waterways, converge approximately 0.5 miles west of the site, across State Route 87 (SR 87). Developed lands provide minimal habitat for locally occurring wildlife species. Amphibian and reptiles would not be expected to utilize the project site on a regular basis as part of their home range or for movement, due to the lack of suitable habitat. However, a number of bird and mammalian species commonly associated with urban environments could intermittently occur on-site. 4.4.2
Regulatory Framework
4.4.2.1
Special Status Species
State and federal endangered species legislation has provided the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited distribution and/or low or declining populations. Species listed as “threatened” or “endangered” under provisions of the State and federal Endangered Species Acts, candidate species for such listing, state species of special concern, and some plants listed as endangered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) are collectively referred to as “special status species.” State and federal laws also protect most bird species. The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in migratory birds, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. The project site, which is predominantly covered by commercial buildings and surface parking lots, does not provide habitat for special-status plant or animal species. 4.4.2.2
Jurisdictional Waters
Jurisdictional waters include rivers, creeks, and drainages that have a defined bed and bank that, at the very least, carry ephemeral flows. Jurisdictional waters also include lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and wetlands. Such waters may be subject to the regulatory authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), CDFW, and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board). As noted above, the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek are located approximately 0.5 mile west of the project site and are the jurisdictional waterways in closest proximity to the project site. 4.4.2.3
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan 2040 provides policies which address biological resources. Policies from the General Plan that are relevant to the proposed project include:
Policy CD-1.23: Further the Community Forest Goals and Policies in this Plan by requiring new development to plant and maintain trees at appropriate locations on private property and along public street frontages. Use trees to help soften the appearance of the built environment, help provide transitions between land uses, and shade pedestrian and bicycle areas.
Policy CD-1.24: Within new development projects, include preservation of ordinance-sized and other significant trees, particularly natives. Avoid any adverse effect on the health and longevity of such trees through design measures, construction, and best maintenance practices. When tree preservation is not feasible, include replacements or alternative mitigation measures in the project to maintain and enhance our Community Forest.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
43
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Policy MS-21.3: Ensure that San José’s Community Forest is comprised of species that have low water requirements and are well adapted to its Mediterranean climate. Select and plant diverse species to prevent monocultures that are vulnerable to pest invasions. Furthermore, consider the appropriate placement of tree species and their lifespan to ensure the perpetuation of the Community Forest.
Policy MS-21.4: Encourage the maintenance of mature trees, especially natives, on public and private property as an integral part of the community forest. Prior to allowing the removal of any mature tree, pursue all reasonable measures to preserve it.
Policy MS-21.5: As part of the development review process, preserve protected trees (as defined by the Municipal Code), and other significant trees. Avoid any adverse effect on the health and longevity of protected or other significant trees through appropriate design measures and construction practices. Special priority should be given to the preservation of native oaks and native sycamores. When tree preservation is not feasible, include appropriate tree replacement, both in number and spread of canopy.
Policy MS-21.6: As a condition of new development, require the planting and maintenance of both street trees and trees on private property to achieve a level of tree coverage in compliance with and that implements City laws, policies or guidelines.
Policy ER-5.2: Require that development projects incorporate measures to avoid impacts to nesting migratory birds.
Policy ER-6.5: Prohibit use of invasive species, citywide, in required landscaping as part of the discretionary review of proposed development.
Policy ER-6.6: Encourage the use of native plants in the landscaping of developed areas adjacent to natural lands.
4.4.2.4
City of San José Tree Ordinance
The City of San José Tree Removal Controls Ordinance is intended to protect all trees having a trunk which measures 56 inches or more in circumference (18 inches in diameter) at the height of 24 inches above the natural grade of slope.9 These trees are defined as “ordinance-size” trees and this ordinance protects both native and non-native tree species. A removal permit is required from the City of San José for the removal of “ordinance-size” trees. The City also requires all trees proposed to be removed to be replaced at the following ratios listed in Table 3. The species and exact number of trees to be planted on the site will be determined at the development permit stage, in consultation with the City Arborist and the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement.
Table 3:
City of San José Tree Replacement Ratios
Diameter of Tree to be Removed 18 inches or greater 12 to 18 inches Less than 12 inches
Type of Tree to be Removed a Native Non-Native Orchard 5:1 4:1 3:1 3:1 2:1 None 1:1 1:1 None
Minimum Size of Each Replacement Tree 24-inch box 24-inch box 15-gallon container
Note: Trees greater than 18 inches in diameter may not be removed unless a Tree Removal Permit, or equivalent, has been approved for the removal of such trees. a x:x = tree replacement to tree loss ratio Source: City of San José, 2013.
9
San José, City of. Municipal Code, Sections 13.32, Tree Removal Controls.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
44
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.4.2.5
City of San José Heritage Trees
Under the City of San José Municipal Code, Sections 13.28.330 and 13.32.090, specific trees are found to have a special significance to the community and are designated “Heritage Trees,” because of factors including, but not limited to, their history, girth, height, species, or unique quality. 4.4.2.6
Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Communities Conservation Plan
The City of San José and several partner agencies, including the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (SCVTA), adopted a multi-species Habitat Conservation Plan for the Santa Clara Valley in January 2013.10 The project site is classified as “Urban – Suburban” in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. 4.4.3
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Biological Resources
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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 adverse effect on any aquatic, wetland, or 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? 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 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?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
10
Santa Clara, County of, et al., 2013. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. Website: www.scv-habitatplan.org/www/ site/alias__default/1/home.aspx (accessed March 16, 2014).
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
45
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Biological Resources
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
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?
4.4.3.1
1,6
1,9
Protected Plants and Wildlife
As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the area covered by the Strategy 2000 program consists of land previously altered by development. Biological evaluations and reconnaissance-level surveys conducted as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR indicate that the primary remaining “natural” habitats associated with Downtown San José occur on the approximately 9,000 linear feet of the Guadalupe River and 3,750 linear feet of Los Gatos Creek that lie to the west of the project site. No habitat types known to support special status plant or wildlife species occur on the project site. No special-status plant species were observed within the project site and it is unlikely any special-status plant species have the potential to occur within the project site. 4.4.3.2
Riparian Habitat
As described above, and in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the project site is not located in an area that supports riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. 4.4.3.3
Federally Protected Wetlands
As described above, and in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the project site is not located in an area that supports any wetlands, drainages, or water bodies as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The project site is located in an urban area, on a developed site. 4.4.3.4
Wildlife Movement Corridors
As described above, and in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the project site is primarily covered with buildings and pavement and has been developed with urban uses. Because the project site is located in an urban environment, there are no major wildlife movement corridors that pass through the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with the movement of established, native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species and would not create impacts that would exceed those evaluated in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.4.3.5
Ordinance Size Trees
The Strategy 2000 FEIR does not contain a comprehensive tree survey. As noted in the Strategy 2000 FEIR most of the trees in the Strategy 2000 area, including those at the project site, are landscape trees planted along public rights of way. The FEIR recognizes that the impacts of the high intensity, transit-oriented redevelopment of the area, including redevelopment of the project site, would require removal of many trees. The loss of trees would be a significant impact that would require compensaCity of San José Marshall Squares Project
46
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
tion per City ordinances. One ordinance-sized palm tree was identified within the proposed project site boundary, near the North 1st Street corridor. Due to the size of the tree, the project applicant would be required to obtain a permit for removal under the City’s Tree Protection Ordinance. The proposed project would not create impacts that would exceed those evaluated in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. Impact BIO-1:
Future development envisioned by the proposed project would result in the removal of existing mature trees. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure was identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would also be implemented as part of the proposed project. MM BIO-1: For existing trees meeting the size criterion of the City’s ordinance that cannot be incorporated into new landscaping, a City of San José Tree Removal Permit shall be obtained prior to removal of trees from the site. Loss of ordinance size trees will be mitigated by implementation of landscaping plans approved by the City of San José, in conformance with the City of San José landscaping guidelines and City of San José Planning Department specifications. In addition, ordinance-size trees will be replaced at a ratio of 4:1 (trees planted to trees removed) as required by the City of San José Tree Removal Permit.
4.4.3.6
Conservation Plans
As previously described, the project site is not identified as containing protected habitat in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the conservation strategies of the Habitat Plan or any other local, regional, or State plans that protect biological resources. Nitrogen deposition is known to have damaging effects on many of the serpentine plants in the Habitat Plan study area, as well as the host plants that support the Bay checkerspot butterfly. All major remaining populations of the butterfly and many of the sensitive serpentine plant populations occur in areas subject to air pollution from vehicle exhaust and other sources throughout the Bay Area, including the project area. Because serpentine soils tend to be nutrient poor, and nitrogen deposition artificially fertilizes serpentine soils, nitrogen deposition facilitates the spread of invasive plant species. The displacement of these species, and subsequent decline of the several federally listed species, including the butterfly and its larval host plants, has been documented on Coyote Ridge in central Santa Clara County. Nitrogen tends to be efficiently recycled by the plants and microbes in infertile soils such as those derived from serpentine, so that fertilization impacts could persist for years and result in cumulative habitat degradation. Mitigation for the impacts of nitrogen deposition upon serpentine habitat and the Bay checkerspot butterfly can be correlated to the amount of new vehicle trips that a project is expected to generate. Fees collected under the Habitat Plan for new vehicle trips will be used to purchase conservation land for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. The project site is less than two acres in size and is not identified as sensitive habitat. Therefore, the project is not subject to the Habitat Plan and the associated nitrogen deposition fee. Per the Habitat Plan, projects of less than two acres in size are considered to have a less-than-significant impact with regard to nitrogen deposition.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
47
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.4.4
Conclusion
Implementation of General Plan 2040 policies and Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would ensure that implementation of the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to biological resources beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
48
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.5
CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5.1
Setting
The project site is developed with commercial uses and does not contain identified cultural resources (including archaeological resources or buildings). From 1915 through approximately 1968 the site was used for a variety of uses including boot and shoe manufacturing, painting operations, blacksmithing, carriage house, lime cement processing, coal and hay barns, liveries and a concert hall, Salvation Army, and sheds and dwellings. The buildings on the site were constructed between 1925 and 1982. Since 1968 the site has included modern commercial and retail uses including a youth organization headquarters, a software developer, and surface parking lots. As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, in the Bay Area, rivers and creeks are often associated with archaeological resources because they provided good places for settlement and fishing. Greater Downtown San José and the project site, are located in relatively close proximity (approximately 0.50 miles east) of the Los Gatos Creek and Guadalupe River confluence, and have been occupied by humans for at least 5,000 years. Therefore, the area and project site, have a moderate-to-high likelihood of containing prehistoric archaeological deposits, and a high likelihood of containing historical archaeological deposits. 4.5.1.1
St. James Historic District and Trinity Episcopal Cathedral
The properties bordering St. James Park, including a portion of the project site, are located within the St. James Historic District which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the City of San José Landmark Historic District list. Within this District, the St. James Historic District Design Guidelines apply to development in this area and are intended to ensure that new development is designed to enhance the character of the historic resources. The Trinity Episcopal Cathedral, adjacent to the project site, is one of the seven Contributing Structures in the District. The portion of the project site at 90 North 1st Street, adjacent to the west side of the Cathedral, is within the boundaries of the St. James Historic District, but is not considered a Contributing Structure. Four buildings near the project site (50/52 North 1st Street,11 60 North 1st Street, 66 North 1st Street, and 65 North 2nd Street) were constructed between 1925 and 1955 and are over 50 years old. As noted in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, consistent with City policy, buildings over 50 years old are required to be evaluated for their architectural and historical significance. In May 2014, LSA conducted a preliminary screening assessment (included as Appendix A)12 of the structures and determined that they are not eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historic Places, or in the San José Historic Resources Inventory as a City Landmark, and do not meet other criteria that would qualify them as historic resources pursuant to CEQA. The buildings are not historically significant due to the lack of significant historical association with San José’s early development.
11
50/52 North 1st Street, the Knights of Columbus Coop building is listed in the Office of Historic Preservation’s Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File (HPD) as National Register Status 5S2, “Eligible for Local Listing only-likely to become eligible under Local Ordinance.” This building is not listed in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, was not found to be historically significant in the evaluation conducted in support of this Initial Study, and is, therefore, not a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. 12
LSA Associates, Inc. 2015. Cultural Resources Technical Analysis for the Marshall Squares Project, San José, Santa Clara County, California. January 8.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
49
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.5.1.2
Knights of Columbus Building
The southwestern corner of the project site will be constructed adjacent to P-43-002883, the Knights of Columbus building, at 34-40 1st Street. This four-story concrete building is designated as City Historic Landmark #HL01-135. The bulk and scale of the proposed complex is in keeping with that of the Knights of Columbus building and the proposed project features monumental proportions that are more in keeping with the character of the Knights of Columbus building than the one- and two-story buildings currently on the site. In addition, the 1st Street façade of the proposed project is characterized by planar, rectilinear surfaces, a subdued color scheme, and a straightforward pattern of fenestration that is in character with that of the Knights of Columbus building. Construction of the proposed complex adjacent to the Knights of Columbus building, would, in fact, appear to improve the overall architectural setting of the Knights of Columbus building by replacing the current spatial void to the north with a building of comparable scale and monumentality. Construction of the proposed complex would not demolish or materially alter in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of the Knights of Columbus building such as its Renaissance Revival-styled windows, that convey its historical significance and/or that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register. Implementation of the Marshall Squares project would not diminish the California Register eligibility of the Knights of Columbus building and there would be no significant impact to this historic resource. 4.5.2
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan 2040 provides policies which address cultural resources. Policies from the General Plan that are relevant to the proposed project include:
Policy LU-13.1: Preserve the integrity and fabric of candidate or designated Historic Districts.
Policy LU-13.3: For landmark structures located within new development areas, incorporate the landmark structures within the new development as a means to create a sense of place, contribute to a vibrant economy, provide a connection to the past, and make more attractive employment, shopping, and residential areas.
Policy LU-13.4: Require public and private development projects to conform to the adopted City Council Policy on the Preservation of Historic Landmarks.
Policy LU-13.7: Design new development, alterations, and rehabilitation/remodels within a designated or candidate Historic District to be compatible with the character of the Historic District and conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, appropriate State of California requirements regarding historic buildings and/or structures (including the California Historic Building Code) and to applicable historic design guidelines adopted by the City Council.
Policy LU-13.8: Require that new development, alterations, and rehabilitation/remodels adjacent to a designated or candidate landmark or Historic District be designed to be sensitive to its character.
Policy LU-13.15: Implement City, State, and Federal historic preservation laws, regulations, and codes to ensure the adequate protection of historic resources.
Policy LU-13.16: Alert property owners, land developers, and the building industry to historic preservation goals and policies and their implications early in the development process.
Policy LU-14.1: Preserve the integrity and enhance the fabric of areas or neighborhoods with a cohesive historic character as a means to maintain a connection between the various structures in the area.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
50
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Policy EC-2.3: Require new development to minimize vibration impacts to adjacent uses during demolition and construction. For sensitive historic structures, a vibration limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV (peak particle velocity) will be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage to a building. A vibration limit of 0.20 in/sec PPV will be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage at buildings of normal conventional construction.
The policies listed above are intended to minimize significant impacts of new construction on areas of historical sensitivity, such as St. James Square Historic District. Implementation of Policy LU-13.1 enables historic districts to convey their historical significance through the retention of their integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. By preserving these aspects of integrity, projects ensure that the historic district’s fabric—or material characteristics—are maintained in spite of the construction of new elements within the district's boundary. Implementation of Policy LU-13.4, requires conformity with the City Council Policy on the Preservation of Historic Landmarks, which states that “Every effort should be made to incorporate candidate or designated landmark structures into the future plans for their site and the surrounding area and to preserve the integrity of the landmark districts.” Implementation of Policy LU-13.7 ensures that project plans and designs are developed in conformity with federal, State, and City guidelines regarding historic building, structures, and historic districts. Implementation of Policy LU-13.8 ensures that project plans and designs are compatible with the character of historic landmarks or districts. 4.5.3
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Cultural Resources
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site, or unique geologic feature? Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
4.5.3.1
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3,10
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
Archaeological and Historical Resources
4.5.3.1.1 Archaeological Resources No archaeological resources have been identified on the project site. However, as noted in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the project site and its surroundings are considered sensitive for archaeological resources. Construction activities could adversely affect previously-unidentified archaeological resources on the project site. However, implementation of the following measures from the Strategy 2000 FEIR would reduce impacts to previously unidentified archaeological resources to a less-thansignificant level. No new impacts to archaeological resources would occur beyond those already identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
51
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Impact CULT-1:
The project area has the potential to contain prehistoric and/or historic-period archaeological deposits that may qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA, and that may be encountered during project construction. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
MM CULT-1: To identify and avoid or mitigate impacts to such archaeological deposits (should they be present), a qualified archaeologist monitor construction-related ground disturbance in accordance with an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMEP). The AMEP should include a refined sensitivity to identify areas of heightened archaeological potential; construction worker training and archaeological monitoring protocols; archaeological deposits evaluation and significance thresholds; and provisions for mitigation planning (e.g., data recovery protocol), curation, and tribal coordination. If archaeological cultural resources are identified, a report of findings should be prepared that documents the methods outlined in the AMEP.
Impact CULT-2:
Development of new residential, commercial, institutional, and co-location properties could adversely impact cultural resources. (Same Impact as Approved Project- Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
MM CULT-2: Once specific development plans are created and prior to being finalized, the City’s Director of Planning shall consider the need for further analysis of potential adverse impacts to cultural resources. If it is determined by the Director of Planning that the potential presence of cultural resources requires further investigation, then a qualified historian or architectural historian shall review the plans to identify any districts, buildings, structures, or objects that meet the definition of a historical resource, and that may be impacted by project activities. If no such properties that meet the definition of historical resources are identified, then no further review related to historical resources would be necessary prior to the implementation of project plans. If properties meeting this definition are identified, the City shall ensure that the project plans follow the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Secretary’s Standards). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5(b)(3), if the project plans conform to the Secretary’s Standards, then potential impacts to historical resources will be considered mitigated to a less-than significant level.
Impact CULT-3:
Mixed-use development within the St. James Square Historic District Zone of Historic Sensitivity could adversely impact cultural resources. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation of the following multi-part mitigation measure would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
52
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
MM CULT-3: A qualified historian or architectural historian should review all plans for any development within the St. James Square Historic District Zone of Historic Sensitivity to ensure conformity with the St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines, and, if necessary, provide technical assistance to achieve such conformity. If mixed-use development within the St. James Square Historic District Zone of Historic Sensitivity involves ground disturbing activities, the following mitigation measures should be implemented: Mitigation Measure CULT-3a, Mitigation Measure CULT-3b, and Mitigation Measure CULT-3c. MM CULT-3a: Prior to project implementation, a qualified archaeologist shall: (1) assess the potential for subsurface archaeological remains that may meet the definition of a historical or archaeological resource, and may be impacted by project activities; and (2) make project-specific recommendations, as warranted, about the disposition of such resources. The results of this archaeological assessment should be submitted to the (Northwest Information Center) NWIC. MM CULT-3b: If unidentified archaeological deposits are encountered during project activities, all work within 50 feet of the find should be redirected. A qualified archaeologist should: (1) evaluate the finds to determine if they meet the definition of a historical or archaeological resource; and (2) make recommendations regarding the disposition of such finds. If the finds do not meet the definition of a historical or archaeological resource, then no further study or protection is necessary prior to project implementation. If the finds do meet the definition of a historical or archaeological resource, then they should be avoided by project activities. If avoidance is not feasible, adverse effects to such resources should be mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the evaluating archaeologist. Project personnel should not collect or move any cultural material. Fill soils that may be used for construction purposes should not contain archaeological materials. Upon completion of the archaeological evaluation, a report documenting the methods, results, and recommendations of the archaeologist should be prepared and submitted to the NWIC. MM CULT-3c: If human remains are encountered by project activities, construction activities shall be halted and the County Coroner shall be notified immediately. If the remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner shall notify the NAHC within 24 hours of this identification, and a qualified archaeologist shall be contacted to evaluate the situation. The NAHC will identify a Native American Most Likely Descendent (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. The archaeologist should recover scientifically-valuable information, as appropriate and in accordance with the recommendations of the MLD.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
53
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Upon completion of analysis, as appropriate, the archaeologist should prepare a report documenting the methods and results of the investigation. This report should be submitted to the NWIC. Impact CULT-4:
Development of new residential, commercial, institutional, and co-location properties could result in a significant cumulative impact to potentiallysignificant archaeological deposits. (Same Impact as Approved ProjectLess Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
The development of new residential, commercial, institutional, and co-location properties could result in a significant cumulative impact to potentially-significant archaeological deposits. Historical research indicates that: (1) in general, those portions of the project area within historic Downtown San José are likely to contain historical archaeological deposits; and (2) archaeological deposits associated with Spanish, Mexican, and American rule in San José may be present in the project area. The impacts of specific development actions may be less than significant when viewed on a project-by project basis. However, when considered with the impacts of other related actions, these specific actions may be cumulatively considerable. Potentially-significant archaeological deposits representing the Spanish, Mexican, and American periods of San José’s history may be present in the area roughly bounded by East Julian Street, Terraine Street, East William Street, and North-South 3rd Street. It is likely these deposits are present in other areas of Downtown, including south of San Fernando Street and around Almaden Boulevard. Historical maps show numerous buildings and structures associated with El Pueblo de San José de Guadalupe, the first civil settlement in California. Given the limited number of identified archaeological deposits in San José associated with this settlement, project actions that have the potential to damage such deposits may result in a significant, cumulative impact. Mitigation Measure:
MM CULT-4: Prior to project actions within the area that may affect properties containing historical archaeological deposits, especially puebloassociated deposits, the City should identify the likelihood that cumulative development would result in impacts to such deposits. The steps listed in Mitigation Measures CULT-3a, CULT-3b, and CULT-3c should be implemented.
Even with the archaeological data recovery detailed in those mitigations, however, a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact could result from the implementation of project plans, as identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.5.3.1.2
Historical Resources
Based on the revised Cultural Resources Technical Analysis prepared for the project (Appendix A), none of the buildings located on the project site are considered historic resources due to the lack of direct association with San José’s historical development, lack of association with notable persons, and lack of distinctive architectural qualities. The oldest building on the project site, the Knights of Columbus Coop building at 50-52 North 1st Street, was constructed in 1925. However, subsequent alterations, including an extensive remodel in 1985, altered the structure significantly so that the building does not retain any historic characteristics.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
54
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
The Knights of Columbus Coop building’s original appearance has been completely obscured by exterior renovations and lacks integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling. The building no longer conveys its association with the early 20th century development of Downtown San José or the Knights of Columbus. Because of this, the building is not eligible for listing in the City of San José Historic Resources Inventory or the California Register of Historical Resources and is not considered to be a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. One building, 90 North 1st Street (built in 1981), is within the boundaries of the St. James Historic District, but is not a contributing structure. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts to buildings that are historic resources. St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines The project has been designed to substantially conform to the City’s St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines. These design guidelines are intended to facilitate the “compatible integration” of new buildings with the existing built environment and to “maintain a sense of awareness of the District’s contribution to the City’s historic heritage.” The proposed L-shaped residential complex will be constructed on a 1.4-acre project site, extending from the East St. John Street/North 1st Street intersection south along North 1st Street for 400 feet, and from there extending eastward to North 2nd Street. The Trinity Episcopal Church, a contributor to the St. James Square Historic District, is adjacent to the project site at the southwest corner of the East St. John Street/North 2nd Street intersection. The project complex will form a backdrop to the church, which will continue to be the dominant architectural form at the southwest corner of the East St. John Street/North 2nd Street intersection. The church building will be separated from the complex by buildings that are associated with the church on its parcel but lack architectural distinction. When viewed from the East St. John Street/North 1st Street intersection, the church is seen to the east of the complex, on East St. John’s Street, separated from the complex by a small building that lacks architectural distinction. The view of the church from this intersection is currently dominated by a large development on the east side of North 2nd Street and construction of the complex will not substantially alter the church’s current setting (see Figures 5a and 7). The residential complex embodies a contemporary design that contrasts with the Gothic Revival Trinity Episcopal Church but does not conflict with it. The residential complex will provide an unobtrusive backdrop to the church. The project has been designed to ensure that the new building will not result in an incongruous or architecturally unsympathetic addition to the St. James Historic District, as demonstrated in the Cultural Resources Technical Analysis in Appendix A. The project substantially conforms to the St. James Historic District Design Guidelines in terms of design, height, and massing. Specifically, the project will be large in bulk and scale, match the setbacks of nearby historic structures, be lower than the height of the adjacent Trinity Episcopal Church, and have a greater proportion of wall than window. Due to minimal setbacks, no landscaping is proposed beyond potted plants or trees. However, placement of the proposed garage entrance on St. John Street facing St. James Park conflicts with the Guidelines, which state that access driveways and parking should not face St. James Park. Due to the VTA light-rail transit mall along the North 1st Street and 2nd Street project frontages, project access from these frontages is discouraged due to safety concerns arising from potential conflicts between project traffic, pedestrians, and VTA light-rail vehicles. One garage access point on North 2nd Street is intended only for traffic exiting the project site to reduce these conflicts, and traffic City of San José Marshall Squares Project
55
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
entering the project site will be required to use the St. John Street entrance, as this is the safest access to the project site. The project’s substantial conformance with the St. James Historic District Design Guidelines ensures that implementation of the project will not result in a “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” (CCR Title 14(3) §15064.5(b)). The final lighting, signage, and building design may adversely impact the historic structures adjacent to the project site. Impact CULT-5:
Implementing lighting plans, signage plans, and distinctive building design requirements, could adversely impact cultural resources. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
MM CULT-5: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2 would reduce the impacts associated with lighting, signage, and building design to a less-than-significant level.
Construction Groundborne Vibration Impacts to Historic Structures Construction and excavation for the proposed project could result in groundborne vibration that may damage historic buildings near the project site, including the Trinity Church and the Knights of Columbus building. An analysis described fully in the Noise section (Section 4.11.3.2) indicates that the historic Trinity Episcopal Church building is approximately 52 feet from the project’s northeastern boundary, and construction vibration is anticipated to be below the City’s threshold described above for historic structures in General Plan Policy EC 2.3. However, construction groundborne vibration may cause damage to the Knights of Columbus building located adjacent to the project site. Mitigation Measures NOI-4.1 through NOI-4.4, as detailed in the Noise section, would result in a less-than-significant impact from construction groundborne vibration. 4.5.3.2
Paleontological Resources
The project site is flat, completely developed, and does not contain any rock formations or other unique geologic features. Paleontological resources may be encountered during construction activities associated with the project. However, impacts to such resources would be reduced to a less-thansignificant level with implementation of measures above (under which “cultural materials” would be defined to include fossils). 4.5.3.3
Disturbance of Human Remains
No human remains have been identified on the project site. However, previously unidentified resources that may occur in the Strategy 2000 area, including the project site, may contain human remains. Construction activities on the site could adversely affect such remains. Implementation of the measures above, would reduce impacts to potential human remains to a less-than-significant level. These potential impacts would not exceed those already identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.5.4
Conclusion
Implementation of measures described above and included in the Strategy 2000 FEIR would ensure that implementation of the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to cultural resources beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. City of San José Marshall Squares Project
56
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.6
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.6.1
Setting
4.6.1.1
Geological Features
As identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the Strategy 2000 area is located at the western coastal margin of the Coast Range Geomorphic Province of Northern California, a relatively geologically young and seismically active region on the western margin of the North American plate. The approximately 1.4-acre project site is located within a flat urbanized area. The Guadalupe River flows through the western portion of the Strategy 2000 area and Coyote Creek is located approximately 0.5 miles east of the easternmost boundary of the area. Both are perennial streams which drain from the Santa Cruz Mountains in a northwesterly direction to San Francisco Bay. No open creek or stream channels cross the project site; the nearest open water is the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek confluence, located approximately 0.5 miles west of the project site. 4.6.1.2
Soil Conditions
As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the geologic setting of the Santa Clara Valley is a crustal depression filled with alluvial sediments transported and deposited by streams draining the adjacent upland areas. The alluvial deposits consist of unconsolidated to semi-consolidated sand, silt, clay, and gravel. In the Strategy 2000 Area, the alluvial sediments are up to 1,500 feet thick and consist primarily of Yolo association soils, which are moderately well- to somewhat excessively-drained and medium-to-fine textured. A site specific Geotechnical Report13 was prepared for the proposed project. The report indicated that the site is underlain by alluvial deposits consisting of silty to sandy, clays, and a course-grained sand to gravel mix. Concrete remnants were discovered at approximately 7 feet below grade, and additional undocumented fill is anticipated across the site due to previous development patterns. Groundwater at the project site was discovered at depths of 22-23 feet below the existing ground surface. 4.6.1.3
Seismicity and Seismic Hazards
The entire San Francisco Bay Area is located within the San Andreas Fault Zone (SAFZ), a complex of active faults forming the boundary between the North American and Pacific lithospheric plates. Numerous moderate to strong historic earthquakes have been generated in northern California by the SAFZ. The level of active seismicity results in classification of the area as seismic risk Zone 4 (the highest risk category) in the California Building Code. The SAFZ includes numerous active faults found by the California Geological Survey under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (A-PEFZA) to be “active” (i.e., to have evidence of fault rupture in the past 11,000 years). As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, there are no known active faults crossing the Strategy 2000 area, including the project site. The nearest fault is the Hayward fault which is situated approximately 5.3 miles to the east-northeast. Other potentially damaging active faults are located within 10 miles of the Strategy 2000 area and include the San Andreas, Monte Vista-Shannon, and Calaveras faults. 13
Geocon Consultants, 2013. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation- Marshall Squares Multi-Use Development, San José, CA. October.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
57
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.6.1.3.1
Surface Rupture
Surface rupture occurs when the ground surface is broken due to fault movement during an earthquake. The location of surface rupture generally can be assumed to be along an active or potentially active major fault trace. No active faults have been mapped at the project site. Therefore, potential for fault rupture at the site is low. 4.6.1.3.2
Ground Shaking
Ground shaking is a general term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth’s surface resulting from an earthquake, and is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. The extent of ground shaking is controlled by the magnitude and intensity of the earthquake, distance from the epicenter, and local geologic conditions. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale (MMI) is the most commonly used scale for measurement of the subjective effects of earthquake intensity. A related concept, acceleration, is measured as a fraction or percentage of the acceleration under gravity (g). A seismic event on the San Andreas Fault is considered capable of generating a moment magnitude scale (Mw) 7.9 maximum earthquake. A southeast Hayward Fault event is estimated to be capable of producing a Mw 6.4 earthquake. Either of these events would generate very strong seismic shaking (MMI VIII) at the project site.14 4.6.1.3.3
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of loose, saturated granular sediments from a solid state to a liquefied state as a result of seismic ground shaking. In the process, the soil undergoes transient loss of strength, which commonly causes ground displacement or ground failure to occur. Since saturated soils are a necessary condition for liquefaction, soil layers in areas where the groundwater table is near the surface have higher liquefaction potential than those in which the water table is located at greater depths. The project site is located within a State of California-defined Liquefaction Hazard Zone. Liquefaction analysis identified a potentially liquefiable sand layer approximately 6 feet thick located 25 feet or more below the existing grade. Total building settlement estimates project on the order of 1.5 inches or less, unless foundations are designed to extend through the liquefiable layer. A site specific geotechnical investigation report addressing the potential hazard of liquefaction would be submitted to, reviewed by, and approved by the City Geologist prior to issuance of a grading permit or Public Works Clearance. 4.6.1.3.4
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is a form of horizontal displacement of soil toward an open channel or other “free” face, such as a ditch. The lateral spreading hazard will tend to mirror the liquefaction hazard for the project, and by definition needs an open channel or “free” face to expand into; this can include temporary excavations resulting from the construction process. 4.6.1.3.5
Expansive Soils
Expansion and contraction of volume can occur when expansive soils undergo alternating cycles of wetting (swelling) and drying (shrinking). During these cycles, the volume of the soil changes markedly. As a consequence of such volume changes, structural damage to buildings and infrastruc14
Geocon Consultants, 2013, op. cit.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
58
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
ture may occur if the potentially expansive soils were not considered in project design and during construction. Alluvium can develop into compressible or expansive soils. Soil analysis indicated that some of the soils at the site can be considered “moderately” expansive within approximately 5 feet of the anticipated excavation bottom. 4.6.1.3.6
Slope Stability
Slope failure can occur as either rapid movement of large masses of soil (“landslide”) or slow, continuous movement (“creep”). The primary factors influencing the stability of a slope are:
The nature of the underlying soil or bedrock;
The geometry of the slope (height and steepness);
Rainfall; and
The presence of previous landslide deposits.
The site is nearly flat and located in the middle of a large alluvial plain with no adjacent or nearby sloping land features, and would not be expected to be susceptible to slope instability hazards. 4.6.1.4
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan 2040 provides policies which address soils, geology, and hazards. Policies from the General Plan that are relevant to the proposed project include:
Policy EC-3.1: Design all new or remodeled habitable structures in accordance with the most recent California Building Code and California Fire Code as amended locally and adopted by the City of San José, including provisions regarding lateral forces.
Policy EC-3.2: Within seismic hazard zones identified under the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act, California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act and/or by the City of San José, complete geotechnical and geological investigations and approve development proposals only when the severity of seismic hazards have been evaluated and appropriate mitigation measures are provided as reviewed and approved by the City of San José Geologist. State guidelines for evaluating and mitigating seismic hazards and the City-adopted California Building Code will be followed.
Policy EC-3.3: The City of San José Building Official shall require conformance with State law regarding seismically vulnerable unreinforced masonry structures within the City.
Policy EC-3.10: Require that a Certificate of Geologic Hazard Clearance be issued by the Director of Public Works prior to issuance of grading and building permits within defined geologic hazard zones related to seismic hazards.
Policy EC-4.1: Design and build all new or remodeled habitable structures in accordance with the most recent California Building Code and municipal code requirements as amended and adopted by the City of San José, including provisions for expansive soil, and grading and storm water controls.
Policy EC-4.2: Approve development in areas subject to soils and geologic hazards, including unengineered fill and weak soils and landslide-prone areas, only when the severity of hazards have been evaluated and if shown to be required, appropriate mitigation measures are provided. New development proposed within areas of geologic hazards shall not be endangered by, nor contribute to, the hazardous conditions on the site or on adjoining properties. The City of San José Geologist will review and approve geotechnical and geological investigation reports for projects within these areas as part of the project approval process.
Policy EC-4.4: Require all new development to conform to the City of San José’s Geologic Hazard Ordinance.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
59
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.6.2
Policy EC-4.5: Ensure that any development activity that requires grading does not impact adjacent properties, local creeks and storm drainage systems by designing and building the site to drain properly and minimize erosion. An Erosion Control Plan is required for all private development projects that have a soil disturbance of 1 acre or more, are adjacent to a creek/river, and/or are located in hillside areas. Erosion Control Plans are also required for any grading occurring between October 15 and April 15.
Policy EC-4.11: Require the preparation of geotechnical and geological investigation reports for projects within areas subject to soils and geologic hazards, and require review and implementation of mitigation measures as part of the project approval process.
Policy EC-4.12: Require review and approval of grading plans and erosion control plans (if applicable) prior to issuance of a grading permit by the Director of Public Works.
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Geology and Soils
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as described on the most recent AlquistPriolo 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.) Strong seismic ground shaking? Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Landslides? Result in substantial soil erosion or the 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-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 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?
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3
1,2,3,11
1,2,3,11
1
60
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.6.2.1
Seismicity and Seismic Hazards
All structures in the Bay Area could be affected by ground shaking in the event of an earthquake along regional active faults. The amount of ground shaking depends on the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance from the epicenter, and the type of earth materials in between. Very strong ground shaking is expected at the project site during earthquakes on the Hayward, San Andreas, and other regional faults. This level of seismic shaking could cause extensive nonstructural damage to buildings at the site. In addition, limited structural damage may occur. However, as described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the proposed project would not be expected to expose people or structures to substantial risk of loss, injury, or death from rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated by the State Geologist, as the site is not located within an active or potentially active fault zone as defined by the A-PEFZA. The proposed project would not be subject to substantial risk from landslides, as the site is relatively flat and is not underlain by, nor adjacent to, an area subject to slope hazards. The proposed project is not located on an unstable geologic unit, the development of which would be subject to, or contribute to, on- or off-site fault rupture, landslide, or subsidence. The site is located within a California Department of Conservation Seismic Hazard Zone, as defined by the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. Specifically, the project site falls within a liquefaction hazard zone. Regional mapping by ABAG also indicates moderate susceptibility to liquefaction within the project site. 4.6.2.2
Unstable and Expansive Soils
Soils underlying the project site have moderate shrink/swell potential. Structural damage, warping, and cracking of roads and other infrastructure, and rupture of utility lines may occur if the potential expansive soils are not considered during design and construction of improvements. In addition to compliance with the Envision San José 2040 General Plan policies that are described above, the proposed project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2, identified below, to reduce potential impacts associated with unstable site soils. Implementation of these measures would ensure that the risks associated with unstable and expansive soils would be less than significant with implementation of the proposed project. Impact GEO-1:
Occupants of new development, (e.g., dwelling units and commercial space) associated with implementation of Strategy 2000 would be subject to seismic hazards. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would be implemented as part of the proposed project. MM GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of any site-specific grading or building permits, a design-level geotechnical investigation shall be prepared and submitted to the City of San José Public Works Department for review and confirmation that the proposed development fully complies with the California Building Code and the requirements of City Ordinance No. 25015 and Building Division Policy No. SJMC 24.02.310-4-94. The report shall determine the project site’s surface geotechnical conditions and address potential seismic hazards, such as liquefaction and subsidence. The report
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
61
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
shall identify building techniques appropriate to minimize seismic damage. In addition, the following requirement for the geotechnical and soils report shall be met: Analysis presented in the geotechnical report shall conform to the California Division of Mines and Geology recommendations presented in the “Guidelines for Evaluating Seismic Hazards in California.”15 All mitigation measures, design criteria, and specifications set forth in the geotechnical and soils report shall be followed. It is acknowledged that seismic hazards cannot be completely eliminated even with site-specific geotechnical investigation and advanced building practices (as provided in the mitigation measure above). However, exposure to seismic hazards is a generally accepted part of living in the San Francisco Bay Area and therefore the mitigation measures described above reduce the potential hazards associated with seismic activity to a less-than-significant level. Impact GEO-2:
Damage to structures or property related to shrink-swell potential and/or settlements of soils in the greater Downtown area could occur. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
MM GEO-2: In locations underlain by expansive soils and/or nonengineered fill, the designers of proposed building foundations and improvements (including sidewalks, roads, and utilities) shall consider these conditions. The design-level geotechnical investigation (required by Mitigation Measure GEO-1) shall include measures to ensure that potential damage related to expansive soils and non-uniformly compacted fill are minimized. Options to address these conditions may range from removal of the problematic soils and replacement, as needed, with properly conditioned and compacted fill, to design and construction improvements to withstand the forces exerted during the expected shrink-swell cycles and settlements.
All mitigation measures, design criteria, and specifications set forth in the geotechnical and soils report shall be followed to reduce impacts associated with shrink-swell soils to a less-than-significant level. 4.6.2.3
Septic Tanks
Project construction and operation would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would result. 4.6.3
Conclusion
The proposed project, with implementation of the above Mitigation Measure GEO-1 and GEO-2, would not result in new or more significant geologic impacts than those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
15
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997. Guidelines for Evaluating Seismic Hazards in California, CDMG Special Publication 117, 74 p.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
62
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.7
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.7.1
Setting
Greenhouse Gasses (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. However, over the last 200 years, human activities have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere, and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, which is believed to be causing global climate change. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are:
Carbon dioxide (CO2)
Methane (CH4)
Nitrous oxide (N2O)
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
While GHGs produced by human activities include naturally-occurring GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, some gases, like HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are completely new to the atmosphere. Certain other gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere compared to those GHGs that remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is generally excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. For the purposes of this analysis, the term “GHGs” will refer collectively to the six gases identified in the bulleted list provided above. 4.7.1.1
Background Information
Global climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other significant changes in climate (such as precipitation or wind) that last for an extended period of time. The term “global climate change” is often used interchangeably with the term “global warming,” but “global climate change” is preferred to “global warming” because it helps convey that there are other changes in addition to rising temperatures. Climate change may result from natural factors, such as changes in the sun’s intensity; natural processes within the climate system, such as changes in ocean circulation; or human activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels, land clearing, or agriculture. The primary observed effect of global climate change has been a rise in the average global tropospheric temperature of 0.36°F per decade, determined from meteorological measurements worldwide between 1990 and 2005. Changes to the global climate system, ecosystems, and the environment of California could include higher sea levels, drier or wetter weather, changes in ocean salinity, changes in wind patterns or more energetic aspects of extreme weather, including droughts, heavy precipitation, heat waves, extreme cold, and increased intensity of tropical cyclones. Specific effects in California could include a decline in the Sierra Nevada snowpack, erosion of California’s coastline, and seawater intrusion in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. For land use development projects (i.e., residential, commercial, industrial, and public land uses and facilities), the BAAQMD thresholds of significance for operational GHG emissions are: (1) compliance with a qualified climate action plan or qualified general plan; (2) annual GHG emissions of less City of San José Marshall Squares Project
63
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
than 1,100 metric tons of CO2eq per year; or (3) annual GHG emissions of less than 4.6 metric tons per service population (residents plus employees). Achievement of any one of these standards defines a less-than-significant project impact. 4.7.1.2
Envision San José 2040 General Plan Policies
Various policies in the General Plan 2040 have been adopted that avoid or mitigate climate change impacts resulting from planned development within the City. In Chapter 3, Environmental Leadership, the General Plan has the following goals and policies related to the proposed project that would reduce GHG emissions and address global climate change:
Policy MS-2.11: Require new development to incorporate green building practices, including those required by the Green Building Ordinance. Specifically, target reduced energy use through construction techniques (e.g., design of building envelopes and systems to maximize energy performance), through architectural design (e.g., design to maximize cross ventilation and interior daylight) and through site design techniques (e.g., orienting buildings on sites to maximize the effectiveness of passive solar design).
In October 2008, the City Council adopted the Private Sector Green Building Policy (6-32), which establishes baseline green building standards for private sector new construction, and provides a framework for the implementation of these standards. This policy requires that applicable projects achieve minimum green building performance levels using the Council adopted standards. A residential project of greater than 10 units, such as the proposed project, would be required to achieve a minimum of a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certified rating or a Build it Green (BIG) rating of 50 points. The project applicant must demonstrate compliance with the Private Sector Green Building Policy by submitting verification documents to the City’s Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement. The City of San José has prepared a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy16 along with the preparation of the General Plan. The purposes of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy are to:
Capture and consolidate GHG reduction efforts already underway by the City of San José;
Distill policy direction on GHG reduction from the General Plan 2040;
Quantify GHG reductions that could result from land use changes incorporated in the Envision General Plan Land Use/Transportation diagram;
Create a framework for the ongoing monitoring and revision of this Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy; and
Achieve General Plan-level environmental clearance for future development activities (through the year 2020) occurring within the City of San José.
Additionally, the Reduction Strategy provides a method to streamline the CEQA review process for projects that can demonstrate conformance to the Reduction Strategy. 4.7.1.3
Existing Conditions
On December 30, 2009, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted CEQA Guidelines Amendments related to climate change. These amendments became effective on March 18, 2010 and 16
San José, City of, 2011. Greenhouse Reduction Strategy, June.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
64
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
state that lead agencies retain discretion to determine the significance of impacts from GHG emissions based on individual circumstances and that the analysis of impacts may be described, calculated, or estimated using a model, qualitative analysis, or performance-based standards. 4.7.2
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporate d
Would the project: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
4.7.2.1
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,3,7
1,3,4
Impacts from Climate Change
Individual projects incrementally contribute toward the potential for global climate change on a cumulative basis in concert with all other past, present, and probable future projects. While individual projects are unlikely to measurably affect global climate change, each of these projects incrementally contributes toward the potential for global climate change on a cumulative basis, in concert with all other past, present, and probable future projects. GHG emissions associated with the project would occur over the short term from construction activities, consisting primarily of emissions from equipment exhaust. There would also be long-term regional emissions associated with the project through vehicle trips, energy consumption, and water consumption. The Strategy 2000 FEIR did not evaluate the project’s potential contribution to global climate change; however, at the time, there were no established thresholds of significance for evaluating a project’s contribution to such an impact. As discussed above, the BAAQMD has since established thresholds of significance for operational greenhouse gas emissions and encourages a discussion of construction emissions. Therefore, supplemental analysis is provided below, where necessary. 4.7.2.1.1
Construction Emissions
The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Neither the City of San José nor the BAAQMD have an adopted Threshold of Significance for construction-related GHG emissions. Construction activities would produce combustion emissions from various sources. During site preparation and construction of the project, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically uses fossil-based fuels to operate. Project excavation, grading, and construction would be a temporary condition (a total of approximately 28 months) and would not result in a permanent increase in emissions that would interfere with the implementation of the City’s GHG Reduction Strategy or the State’s AB 32. Therefore, the impact from construction emissions associated with the proposed project would be less than significant. City of San José Marshall Squares Project
65
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.7.2.1.2
Operational Impacts
As discussed above, the City of San José has an adopted GHG Reduction Strategy. In order to conform to the GHG Reduction Strategy, projects must be consistent with the Land Use/Transportation Diagram and incorporate features into the project that meet the mandatory implementation policies. Below is a listing of the mandatory criteria utilized to evaluate project conformance by the City of San José: Mandatory Criteria 1.
Consistency with the Land Use/Transportation Diagram (General Plan Goals/Policies: IP-1, LU-10)
2.
Implementation of Green Building Measures (General Plan Goals: MS-1, MS-2, MS-14) a. Solar Site Orientation b. Site Design c. Architectural Design d. Construction Techniques e. Consistency with the City Green Building Ordinance and Policies f.
3.
Consistency with GHG Reduction Strategy Policies: MS-1.1, MS0-1.2, MC-2.3, MS2.11, and MS-14.4.
Pedestrian/Bicycle Site Design Measures a. Consistency with Zoning Ordinance b. Consistency with GHG Reduction Strategy Policies: CD-2.1, CD-3.2, CD-3.3, CD-3.4, CD-3.6, CD-3.8, CD-3.10, CD-5.1, LU-5.5, LU-9.1, TR-2.8, TR-2.11, TR-2.18, TR3.3, TR-6.7.
4.
Salvage building materials and architectural elements from historic structures to be demolished to allow re-use (General Plan Policy LU-16.4), if applicable;
5.
Complete an evaluation of operational energy efficiency and design measures for energyintensive industries (e.g., data centers) (General Plan Policy MS-2.8), if applicable;
6.
Preparation and implementation of the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program at large employers (General Plan Policy TR-7.1), if applicable; and
7.
Limits on drive-through and vehicle serving uses; all new uses that serve the occupants of vehicles (e.g., drive-through windows, car washes, service stations) must not disrupt pedestrian flow. (General Plan Policy LU-3.6), if applicable.
The proposed project would develop a mixed-use building on the site, which would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram and Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the proposed project would be accessible by transit, which would reduce the use of single-occupancy vehicles by residents, visitors, and employees, and reduce associated GHG emissions. The proposed project would result in increased vehicle trips and an increase in energy use within the City of San José compared to existing conditions. However, the proposed project would be subject to the City’s Green Building Ordinance, which would ensure that operational GHG emission reductions are consistent with the GHG Strategy and would not result in a significant impact on the environment. The proposed project would construct the units with energy efficiency greater than required for Title 24, would use City of San José Marshall Squares Project
66
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
low volatile organic compound (VOC) architectural coatings, would provide shading mechanisms for windows and walkway overhangs, and would provide secure bicycle parking spaces. The proposed project would develop 195 residential units, which would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use/Transportation Diagram. The proposed project would result in increased traffic trips and an increase in energy use within the City of San José. However, it would also provide for new housing in the Downtown core within walking distance of jobs, other residences and retail, and various modes of transit. Additionally, the proposed project would be subject to the City’s Green Building Ordinance, which would ensure operational emissions reductions are consistent with the GHG Strategy. 4.7.2.2
Conformance With Applicable Plan
The Strategy 2000 FEIR did not include an evaluation of the project’s compliance with various plans and policies that now relate to GHG emissions as many of these plans were not in place at the time the FEIR was certified. A discussion of the project’s compliance with various plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions is included in this section. As discussed in the Regulatory Background section above, the City of San José has an adopted GHG Reduction Strategy which includes both mandatory measures for all projects and other measures which are considered voluntary. Voluntary measures could be incorporated in the project as mitigation measures for proposed projects, at the discretion of the City. Compliance with the mandatory measures and any voluntary measures required by the City would ensure an individual project’s consistency with the GHG Reduction Strategy. The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use/Transportation Diagram. The proposed project would be required to incorporate the mandatory green building measures and bicycle and pedestrian site design measures, as applicable. 4.7.3
Conclusion
The proposed project would not result in a significant source of GHG emissions nor conflict with plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Because current regulatory thresholds were not in place at the time the Strategy 2000 FEIR was certified, the above analysis was conducted to show that the project would result in a new less-than-significant impact related to GHG emissions. No new information of substantial importance has been identified in regard to the project or the project site such that the project would be expected to result in significant environmental effects not identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
67
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.8
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.8.1
Setting
As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, due to the previous development of the area with a variety of industrial, commercial, and residential land uses in the Strategy 2000 area, hazardous materials releases have been reported at or adjacent to many of the properties where redevelopment is envisioned in the area. Released contaminants include petroleum hydrocarbons, such as gasoline, diesel, and oils; metals; acids; solvents; and other organic compounds. According to the Phase I ESA17 prepared for the project, uses of the project site have included the following:
1884-1891: Boot and shoe manufacturing, painter, blacksmith, carriage house, lime cement processing, coal and hay barn, livery and concert hall, Salvation Army, and sheds and dwellings.
1915-1949: Elks Building, dance hall, offices, lodging hall, and garage and auto parking lots.
1950-1968: Elks Building, dance hall, offices, clothes cleaners, restaurants, candy factory, bowling alley, livery, Salvation Army, and dwellings.
1969-1984: North and eastern portions of the site contained parking lots, and offices covered the remaining portions.
1984-2014: Site contains six, one- to three-story commercial structures and associated parking areas. The buildings located at 90 North 1st Street and 65 North 2nd Street are occupied by City Year, a non-profit youth organization, and 22 Miles, Inc., a touch screen software developer, respectively. The 50, 52, 60, 66, and 80 N. 1st Street buildings are vacant.
Records indicate an onsite area-wide migration of volatile organic compound (VOC)-impacted groundwater. However, since VOCs were not detected in site soil samples, the source of identified groundwater impacts is likely from an upgradient source, and is not indicative of an onsite release associated with the project site. Local regulatory agencies have acknowledged the presence of the groundwater contamination in the vicinity of the parcel. Additionally, potentially contaminated fill materials were found to be dispersed across portions of the project site. No other recognized environmental conditions (RECs) were identified onsite. Of moderate contamination risk to the project site is the presence of VOC-impacted groundwater on an adjacent site which is currently regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The site was formerly used as a cleaning facility. The site is approximately 0.25 miles south of the project site, and groundwater in the area generally flows north. In written RWQCB correspondence dated April 25, 2006, the facility owner was directed to further evaluate remediation of groundwater impacts, and provide assessment of vapor intrusion risk for adjacent properties. Additionally, asbestos sampling identified asbestos in samples of resilient floor tiles located on the mezzanine level at the 66 North 1st Street building, and suspected asbestos-containing materials 17
Geocon Consultants, Inc., 2013. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment- Marshall Squares Multi-Use Development 50, 52, 60, 66, 80, and 90 N. 1st Street, and 65 N. 2nd Street, San José, CA. October.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
68
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
including gypsum board wall systems, resilient flooring materials, acoustical ceiling materials, ceramic floor tile systems, Thermal System Insulation, asphalt roofing systems, and cement-based pipes were observed in the site structures at the 50 & 52 North 1st Street buildings. Deteriorated potentially lead-containing paint was also noted on the site structures. The Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport is located approximately two miles northwest of the project site. Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77, “Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace” (referred to as FAR Part 77) sets forth standards and review requirements for protecting the airspace for safe aircraft operation, particularly by restricting the height of potential structures and minimizing other potential hazards (such as reflective surfaces, flashing lights, and electronic interference) to aircraft in flight. These regulations require that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be notified of certain proposed construction projects located within an extended zone defined by an imaginary slope radiating outward for several miles from an airport’s runways, or which would otherwise stand at least 200 feet in height above ground. For the project site, any proposed structure of a height greater than approximately 60 feet above ground is required under FAR Part 77 to be submitted to the FAA for review. As the project proposes a 89-foot tall building, with a maximum high point of 98 feet (per project description text and figures), notification to the FAA is required. In turn, City General Plan policy requires FAA issuance of “no hazard” determinations prior to development approval, with any conditions set forth in an FAA no-hazard determination also incorporated into the City’s project approval. Application of this General Plan policy ensures that the project will not be a hazard to aircraft operation. 4.8.2
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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?
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3
1,2,3,12
1,2,3
1,2,3,12
69
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Hazards and Hazardous Materials New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
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?
4.8.2.1
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3,13
1,2,3,13
1,2,4
1,2,4
Use, Storage and Disposal of Hazardous Materials
The proposed project would not be expected to manufacture or generate large quantities of hazardous materials. However, specific businesses for the commercial/retail space associated with the project have not yet been determined and could include dry cleaners, photo processors, or medical facilities that use hazardous materials. Additionally, the proposed project could involve the use, handling, and storage of commercially-available hazardous materials associated with building maintenance, on-site vehicle use, and landscaping. These materials would likely include fuels, paints, flammable liquids, pesticides, and herbicides. However, hazardous materials stored and used at the site would be required to be managed in accordance with applicable local, State, and federal hazardous materials regulations and General Plan policies that would reduce risks associated with leakage, explosions, fires, or the escape of harmful gases. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, and because the proposed project would generate small quantities of hazardous materials similar in nature, type, and volume to those uses anticipated to be a part of foreseeable commercial development projects in the Strategy 2000 area, the project would not worsen or result in new impacts related to the routine use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials, beyond those impacts identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. Impact HAZ-1:
New businesses developed as part of Strategy 2000 may include the use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials. Improper management of hazardous materials could potentially expose workers and/or the public to health risks. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would be implemented as part of the proposed project.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
70
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
If future businesses were to use, store, or dispose of hazardous materials, the businesses would be required to comply with federal, State, and local requirements for managing hazardous materials. Depending on the type and quantity of hazardous materials, these requirements could include the preparation of, implementation of, and training in, the following plans, programs, and permits:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Hazardous Materials Business Plan (Business Plan). Facilities that use, store, or handle hazardous materials in quantities greater than 500 pounds, 55 gallons, or 200 cubic feet are required to prepare a Business Plan. The Business Plan would contain facility maps, up-to-date inventories of all hazardous materials for each area, emergency response procedures, equipment, and employee training.
Hazardous Waste Generator Requirements. Facilities that generate more than 100 kilograms per month of hazardous waste, or more than 1 kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste, must be registered with the U.S. EPA. DTSC administers hazardous waste generator registration in California.
Contingency Plan. All facilities that generate hazardous waste must prepare a Contingency Plan. The Contingency Plan identifies the duties of the facility Emergency Coordinator, identification and location of emergency equipment, and also includes reporting procedures for the facility Emergency Coordinator to follow after an incident.
California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP). Facilities that use significant quantities of acutely hazardous materials must prepare a Risk Management Program (RMP) if there may be a significant likelihood that this use could pose an accident risk. The RMP must include a description of acutely hazardous material accidents occurring at the facility within the past three years, a description of equipment, procedures, and training to reduce the risk of acutely hazardous materials accidents, and an off-site consequence analysis that models potential impacts from an accidental release to surrounding areas.
Injury and Illness Prevention Plan. The California General Industry Safety Order requires that all employers in California shall prepare and implement an Injury and Illness Prevention Plan which should contain a code of safe practice for each job category, methods for informing workers of hazards, and procedures for correcting identified hazards.
Emergency Action Plan. The California General Industry Safety Order requires that all employers in California prepare and implement an Emergency Action Plan. The Emergency Action Plan designates employee responsibilities, evacuation procedures and routes, alarm systems, and training procedures.
Fire Prevention Plan. The California General Industry Safety Order requires that all employers in California prepare and implement a Fire Prevention Plan. The Fire Prevention Plan specifies areas of potential hazard, persons responsible for maintenance of fire prevention equipment or systems, fire prevention housekeeping procedures, and fire hazard training procedures. 71
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Hazard Communication Plan. Facilities involved in the use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials are required to prepare a Hazard Communication program. The purpose of the Hazard Communication program is to provide methods for safe handling of hazardous materials, ensure proper labeling of hazardous materials containers, and ensure employee access to Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs).
MM HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of building permits for development or redevelopment in the project area that may involve the use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials, the City shall determine that the proposed use has adhered to current regulations and programs concerning hazardous waste. Adherence to current regulations and programs, as outlined above, would reduce this impact to a lessthan-significant level. 4.8.2.2
Release of Hazardous Materials
As discussed above, the site contains VOC-impacted groundwater. Contamination occurring on the site could be released during reasonably foreseeable construction activities. Contamination from such releases could present a health risk to construction workers and future users of these parcels. Prior to construction, the VOC-impacted groundwater must be further evaluated with respect to potential responsible party liability and potential project design and construction constraints (i.e., dewatering, vapor intrusion, etc.). Additionally, the project applicant should provide written approval to the appropriate regulatory agencies for submittal of the prior environmental reports to facilitate discussions regarding potential responsible party status, and any requirements for further groundwater assessment and/or vapor intrusion evaluation and remediation. In the event that soil/groundwater is impacted above the environmental screening levels for the proposed land uses, mitigation measures must be completed during construction activities and the appropriate regulatory agency must be notified to determine if regulatory oversight is warranted for the responsible party(s). The local agency is the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (SCCDEH) and the regional agency is the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) whom is currently the oversight agency for the neighboring case located at 35 & 43 Santa Clara Street. The SCCEHD provides oversight services through a Voluntary Cleanup Program for parties looking to expedite the assessment and remediation of any impacted soil. These measures would reduce construction-period risks associated with contamination on the project site. Buildings on the project site also contain asbestos and lead, and undocumented debris fill material is present in the soil, which could be released during the construction period. However, safe removal and disposal of the asbestos, lead, and undocumented fill on the project site, would be required to be undertaken in accordance with the City’s General Plan policies, and applicable local, State, and federal law. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, beyond those hazards identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. Impact HAZ-2:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Redevelopment of properties within the Strategy 2000 area could expose construction workers and/or the public to hazardous materials from existing soil and groundwater contamination during and/or following redevelopment. Sensitive receptors located near the development could potentially be 72
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
affected by releases of hazardous materials. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures) Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would be implemented as part of the proposed project. MM HAZ-2a: If a Phase I site assessment were to indicate that a release of hazardous materials could have affected the site, additional soil and/or groundwater investigations should be conducted by a qualified environmental professional to assess the presence and extent of contamination at the site. Soil and groundwater investigations should be conducted in conformance with State and local guidelines and regulations. MM HAZ-2b: If the results of the subsurface investigation(s) indicated the presence of hazardous materials, site remediation may be required by the applicable State or local regulatory agencies. Depending on the nature of contamination, remediation could consist of soils removal, groundwater extraction/treatment, or modification to site planning and building design to minimize risks of exposure. Specific remedies would depend on the extent and magnitude of contamination and the requirements of the regulatory agencies. MM HAZ-2c: For any site where contamination has been identified, construction should only occur in accordance with a site-specific health and safety plan (HASP) prepared by a certified industrial hygienist. The -HASP should include provisions for monitoring exposure to construction workers, delineate procedures to be undertaken in the event that contamination is identified above action levels, and identify emergency procedures and responsible personnel. If construction were to take place on sites adjacent to sensitive receptors, the HASP should include air monitoring at the perimeter of the construction site. The HASP should include performance standards identified to minimize the effects of airborne contaminants on sensitive receptors (for example, stopping work in dusty conditions, limiting excavation areas, or wetting down of surfaces). The presence of lead-based paint or asbestos-containing materials at the site may require additional site safety procedures. Construction workers at contaminated sites would be required to have received hazardous materials training in accordance with federal and State regulations. Completion of these mitigation measures should be a condition of approval for any grading, demolition, or building permit within the Strategy 2000 project area. This section proposes a HASP as a guideline for managing impacted soil and groundwater. While a HASP is warranted for handling hazardous materials, a Site Management Plan should also be prepared to manage any impacted soil/groundwater and unexpected hazardous materials, such as, abandoned underground storage tanks. Mitigation measures must be performed in the event contamination is identified or encountered during any soil/groundwater disturbance activities.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
73
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Impact HAZ-3:
Demolition or renovation of buildings containing lead-based paint and asbestos-containing building materials could release airborne lead and asbestos particles, which may potentially affect the health of construction workers and future site users. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would be implemented as part of the proposed project. MM HAZ-3a: For compliance with existing regulations, an asbestos survey shall be performed on all structures proposed for demolition that are known or suspected to have been constructed prior to 1980. If asbestos-containing materials are determined to be present, the materials shall be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with the regulations and notification requirements of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. MM HAZ-3b: For compliance with existing regulations, a lead-based paint survey shall be performed on all structures proposed for demolition that are known or suspected to have been constructed prior to 1980. If lead-based paint is identified, then federal and State construction worker health and safety regulations shall be followed during renovation or demolition activities. If loose or peeling lead-based paint is identified at the building, it shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. 4.8.2.3
Emission of Hazardous Materials within Quarter-mile of a School
The Ballet San José School is located at 40 North 1St Street, adjacent to the south side of the project site. Additionally, Lincoln Law School is located at 1 North 1st Street, approximately one block to the southwest. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and HAZ-3 would ensure that the potential for emissions of hazardous materials to impact sensitive receptors would be reduced to a less-than-significant impact. Therefore, contamination on the site would not adversely affect sensitive receptors at a school. 4.8.2.4
Hazardous Materials Site Pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5
The site is not identified on the Historic Cortese list, nor other regulatory databases compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, this would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. 4.8.2.5
Location within the Vicinity of a Private Airstrip
No private airstrips are located in the vicinity of the project site. 4.8.2.6
Emergency Response or Evacuation Plan
As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the proposed project would be required to comply with standard City conditions of approval related to the provision of adequate access for emergency vehicles, and secure evacuation routes. In addition, the project would not alter roadways in the vicinity of the project site and therefore would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. City of San José Marshall Squares Project
74
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.8.2.7
Wildland Fires
The project site is located in an urban area that is not prone to wildfires. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new or more severe impacts related to wildfires. 4.8.3
Conclusion
The proposed project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and HAZ-3 would not result in any new or more significant impacts related to hazardous materials beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
75
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.9
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.9.1
Setting
The project site is located within a relatively flat urbanized area and approximately 99 percent of the site is covered by impervious surfaces. No open creek or stream channels cross the site; the nearest open water is the confluence of the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek, which is approximately 0.5 miles to the west of the project site. Most of the rainfall at the site encounters impervious surfaces, travels to collectors in the paved areas and nearby roadways, into the City-maintained storm drain system, and is ultimately discharged into the Guadalupe River. Regulatory requirements regarding hydrology and water quality have evolved since certification of the Strategy 2000 FEIR. As described below, the primary changes are the completion of flood control projects for the Lower Guadalupe River, the City’s revised Post-Construction Urban Runoff Management Policy (Policy 6-29, revised October 2011), and the City’s adoption of Post-Construction Hydromodification Management (Policy 8-14). 4.9.1.1
Flooding
Existing flood conditions in the Strategy 2000 area have been changed by the completion of flood control projects for the Lower Guadalupe River. The flood control projects have increased the stream channel flood capacity and reduced the potential for overflows from the stream channels into the surrounding areas. With the flood control projects, the flood potential has been reduced to shallow flooding along the channel banks primarily due to storm drain excess flows which exceed the capacity of the storm drain systems during a 100-year storm. The project site is not located within the 100-year flood hazard zone, as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), but the site is located within an urbanized area classified as Zone “D”. Flood Zone “D” describes areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible.18 The location of the project site (more than 7 miles from the southern portion of San Francisco Bay) would be expected to preclude exposure of the site to coastal hazards, such as tsunamis, seiche, extreme high tides, or sea level rise. While catastrophic structural dam failure can be caused by an earthquake or overflow, the vicinity of the project site is not within a mapped flood inundation area due to dam failure.19 4.9.1.2
Regulatory Requirements
As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the discharge of stormwater from the City’s municipal storm sewer system is regulated by the Federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Nonpoint Source Program (established through the Clean Water Act). The program is administered by the California Regional Water Quality Control Boards and the project site is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board), through the stormwater municipal runoff permit (MRP) issued to the City as a participant in the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP). City compliance with the MRP is mandated by State and federal laws, statutes, and regulations. On October 14, 2009 (since the
18
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel Number, 06085C0234H, dated May 18, 2009. 19
Association of Bay Area Governments, 2003. Dam Failure Inundation Hazard Map for NW San José/Milpitas/ Santa Clara. Website: www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/pickdamx.pl (accessed April 17, 2014).
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
76
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
adoption of the Strategy 2000 FEIR), the Water Board adopted a new MRP for the San Francisco Bay Region,20 including the City of San José. Within the Water Board’s newly adopted permit are new Hydromodification Management Requirements for new development and redevelopment projects, including the proposed project. As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the City must comply with the provisions of the MRP by ensuring that new development and redevelopment mitigate water quality impacts to storm water runoff both during the construction and operation of projects. Water Board Order No. R2-2009-0074 (NPDES Permit No. CAS612008) requires the City to manage development-related increases in peak runoff flow, volume and duration, where it is likely to cause increased erosion, silt pollutant generation, or other impacts to beneficial uses of local rivers, streams and creeks. Applicable projects consist of all new public and private projects that create 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface collectively over the entire project site and redevelopment projects that add or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area on the project site. Additional requirements must be met by large projects (formerly known as Group 1 projects) located within a Hydromodification Management area that create and/or replaces 1 acre or more of impervious surfaces. These large projects must control increases in runoff peak flow, volume, and duration (referred to as hydromodification), as the increase in stormwater runoff has the potential to cause erosion or other adverse impacts to receiving streams. In addition, projects disturbing 1 acre or more of land during construction are required to file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Water Board to be covered under the State NPDES General Construction Permit (Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ) for discharges of storm water associated with construction activity. A developer must propose control measures that are consistent with the State General Permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be developed and implemented for each site covered by the general permit. A SWPPP should include best management practices (BMPs) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality to the maximum extent practicable during construction of the project. 4.9.1.2.1
City of San José Post-Construction Urban Runoff Management (Policy 6-29)
The City of San José’s Council Policy No. 6-29 requires all new and redevelopment projects to implement Post-Construction BMPs21 and Treatment Control Measures (TCMs).22 This policy also establishes specific design standards for Post-Construction TCMs for projects that create, add, or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces.
20
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2009. San Francisco Bay Region, Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order R2-2009-0074. (NPDES Permit No. CAS612008) 21 Post-Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) are methods, activities, maintenance procedures, or other management practices designed to reduce the amount of stormwater pollutant loading from a site. Examples of PostConstruction BMPs include proper materials storage and housekeeping activities, public and employee education programs, and storm inlet maintenance and stenciling. 22
Post-Construction Treatment Control Measures are site design measures, landscape characteristics or permanent stormwater pollution prevention devices installed and maintained as part of a new development or redevelopment project to reduce stormwater pollution loading from the site; is installed as part of a new development or redevelopment project; and is maintained in place after construction has been completed. Examples of runoff treatment control measures include filtration and infiltration devices (e.g., vegetative swales/biofilters, insert filters, and oil/water separators) or detention/retention measures (e.g., detention/retention ponds). Post-Construction TCMs are a category of BMPs.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
77
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
The Permit also contains provision C.3.c, Low Impact Development, which has new requirements for the use of feasible Low Impact Development (LID) Stormwater Treatment measures on-site or at a joint stormwater treatment facility. These requirements apply to planning permits for new and redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces. In addition to measures that reduce the amount of pollutants that enter stormwater (source control) LID measures include the following techniques to reduce the quantity and/or improve the quality of stormwater at or near its source: rainwater harvesting, infiltration, evapotranspiration, and biotreatment. Considered a Special Project under the MRP, the proposed project would reduce the amount of existing impervious surfaces and automobile-related pollutant impacts due to its high density and transit-oriented nature. As a result, alternatives to the exclusive use of LID measures for the treatment of all or a portion of the project’s runoff, and incentive LID treatment reduction credits may be applied.23 24 4.9.1.2.2
City of San José Post-Construction Hydromodification Management (Policy 8-14)
In 2005, the City of San José adopted the Post-Construction Hydromodification Management Policy (Policy 8-14) to manage development-related increases in peak runoff flow, volume and duration, where such hydromodification25 is likely to cause increased erosion, silt pollution generation, or other impacts to local rivers, streams, and creeks. The policy establishes specified performance criteria for Post-Construction Hydromodification control measures (HCMs) and identifies projects which are exempt from HCM requirements. 4.9.1.2.3
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan 2040 provides policies which address hydrology, storm drainage, and water quality. Policies from the General Plan that are relevant to the proposed project include:
Policy EC-5.2: Allow development only when adequate mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design to prevent or minimize siltation of streams, flood protection ponds, and reservoirs.
Policy EC-5.7: Allow new urban development only when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design to ensure that new urban runoff does not increase flood risks elsewhere.
Policy EC-5.11: Where possible, reduce the amount of impervious surfaces as a part of redevelopment and roadway improvements through the selection of materials, site planning, and street design.
Policy EC-5.16: Implement the Post-Construction Urban Runoff Management requirements of the City’s Municipal NPDES Permit to reduce urban runoff from project sites.
Policy EC-5.17: Implement the Hydromodification Management requirements of the City’s Municipal NPDES Permit to manage runoff flow and volume from project sites.
Policy ER-8.1: Manage stormwater runoff in compliance with the City’s Post-Construction Urban Runoff (6-29) and Hydromodification Management (8-14) Policies.
23 California Regional Water Quality Control Board- San Francisco Bay Region, 2009. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. October 14. 24
San José, City of, 2011. Council Policy 6-29. October 4.
25
Hydromodification is defined as the alteration of the hydrologic characteristics of coastal and noncoastal waters, which in turn could cause degradation of water resources. In the case of a stream channel, this is the process whereby a stream bank is eroded by flowing water. This typically results in the suspension of sediments in the water course.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
78
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.9.2
Policy ER-8.3: Ensure that private development in San José includes adequate measures to treat stormwater runoff.
Policy ER-8.4: Assess the potential for surface water and groundwater contamination and require appropriate preventative measures when new development is proposed in areas where storm runoff will be directed into creeks upstream from groundwater recharge facilities.
Policy ER-8.5: Ensure that all development projects in San José maximize opportunities to filter, infiltrate, store and reuse or evaporate stormwater runoff onsite.
Policy ER-8.7: Encourage stormwater reuse for beneficial uses in existing infrastructure and future development through the installation of rain barrels, cisterns, or other water storage and reuse facilities.
Policy ER-8.10: Participate in the SCVURPPP and take other necessary actions to formulate and meet regional water quality standards which are implemented through the NPDES permits and other measures.
Policy IN-3.13: Encourage the use of flood protection guidelines in development, such as those recommended by the SCVWD, FEMA, and California Department of Water Resources (DWR).
Policy IN-3.10: Incorporate appropriate stormwater treatment measures in development projects to achieve stormwater quality and quantity standards and objectives in compliance with the City’s NPDES permit.
Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts
Hydrology and Water Quality
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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 level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting 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 onor 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?
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
79
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Hydrology and Water Quality New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
4.9.2.1
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3,14
1,2,3,14
1,2,3,15 1,2,3
Water Quality Standards
As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, implementation of development projects in the Strategy 2000 area, including the project site, would increase the intensity of built uses in the project area. The project site is currently mostly covered with impervious surfaces. Development of the proposed project would reduce impervious surface coverage on the site from 99 percent (60,180 square feet) to 91 percent (55,350 square feet). As described above, the proposed project meets all of the qualifying criteria for LID credits under Category B (High Density Projects) of the Special Projects provisions of the MRP. As a result, the project is not required to implement LID measures. The Stormwater Control Plan for the project divides the site into two separate drainage areas, with each conveying roof, podium deck, and ground surface runoff to a 48” manhole which would connect to the public storm drain system. Construction and operation of the project could expose soils to the forces of erosion, and result in the release of small amounts of hazardous materials, such as fuel, oil, paint, and solvents that are routinely used during construction. As a result, some of these contaminants could reduce the water quality of the Guadalupe River and Los Gatos Creek. The Strategy 2000 FEIR identified potential impacts to water quality associated with development within the Strategy 2000 area. These impacts are described in this section, as are the Mitigation Measures recommended to reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure HYD-1, which is consistent with the regulatory requirements of the current NPDES Permit and associated City policies City of San José Marshall Squares Project
80
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
discussed above. The measures would further reduce potential construction and post-construction impacts to surface water quality. Impact HYD-1:
Construction activities and post-construction operation of specific development projects within the project area could result in degradation of water quality in the Guadalupe River and the Bay by reducing the quality of storm water runoff. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would also be implemented as part of the proposed project. MM HYD-1: The applicant of a development or redevelopment project shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction and life of the project. The SWPPP would act as the overall program document designed to provide measures to mitigate potential water quality impacts associated with implementation of the project. The SWPPP shall include:
Specific and detailed BMPs designed to mitigate construction-related pollutants. These controls shall include practices to minimize the contact of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with storm water. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these materials out of the rain. An important component of the storm water quality protection effort will be the education of the site supervisors and workers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain awareness of the importance of storm water quality protection, site supervisors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to discuss pollution prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be implemented by the construction site supervisor, and must include both dry and wet weather inspections. City of San José and RWQCB personnel may make unannounced site inspections and are empowered to levy considerable fines if it is determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented. Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil stabilization controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of straw wattles, and sediment basins. The potential for erosion is generally increased when grading occurs during the rainy season, as disturbed soil can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. If grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the primary BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control, that is, keeping sediment on the site. End-ofpipe sediment control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. Access to and egress from the construction site shall be carefully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
81
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Vehicle and equipment wash down facilities shall be designed to be accessible and functional both during dry and wet conditions.
4.9.2.2
Measures designed to mitigate post construction-related pollutants. Planting with locally grown plant stock is encouraged, but cannot be guaranteed in every case due to limited availability of stock. The project shall include measures designed to mitigate potential water quality degradation of runoff from all portions of the completed development, including roof and sidewalk runoff. Design teams for new projects should review Start at the Source, Design Guidance Manual for Stormwater Quality Protection. The selected permanent stormwater treatment measures must meet the hydraulic sizing criteria specified in the most current NPDES municipal stormwater permit issued to the City of San José, unless the developer demonstrates that it is impracticable to meet the criteria; and the project includes an alternative method for treating an equivalent pollutant loading or quantity of stormwater runoff, or provides another equivalent water quality benefit. Landscaping that is installed adjacent to either the Guadalupe River of Los Gatos Creek should consist of locally grown seedlings or cuttings from these respective watersheds. Because such seedlings and plants may take from one to several years to grow to size prior to installation, and should be grown by a local nursery, project sponsors should begin early to secure the sources for such stock.
Deplete Groundwater Supplies
As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the Strategy 2000 area is highly urbanized and is largely covered with impervious surfaces. However, the proposed project would include areas of landscaping and new trees, and would result in a net reduction in impervious surfaces. Therefore, the groundwater recharge rate at the site would be expected to be the same or potentially greater than under current conditions. The proposed project would not require the pumping of groundwater (aside from necessary construction period dewatering operations to clear excavations) and therefore would not deplete local groundwater supplies. Therefore, additional depletion of groundwater resources associated with the proposed project is not expected. 4.9.2.3
Drainage Pattern and Surface Run-off
The proposed project would not alter the course of an established stream or river at or adjacent to the project site. The Guadalupe River is located approximately 0.5 miles west of the project site and its course would not be altered by the proposed project. Drainage patterns at the site would be modified with implementation of the Stormwater Control Plan, but associated effects would be beneficial (as water quality would likely be improved compared to existing conditions). Additionally, as described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the project would also be required to comply with City Council Policies 6-29 and 8-14, as applicable, at the Development Permit stage. As documented previously, the project would decrease the amount of impervious surface area and associated runoff on the site compared to existing conditions. The proposed project is not in a Hydromodification Management area, as the project is within an area of greater than or equal to 65 percent impervious surface and the conditions of Council Policy 8-14 would not apply. Therefore, potential impacts associated with hydromodification from the proposed project would not be greater than those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
82
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.9.2.4
Flooding and Dam Failure Inundation
The Strategy 2000 FEIR identified significant impacts from periodic flooding in the Strategy 2000 area that could cause harm to people or structures. However, due to the completion of flood management improvements to the Lower Guadalupe River, flood impacts are not expected to occur in the future. The proposed project would be evaluated for the adequacy of on-site and off-site stormwater collection systems prior to issuance of Site Development or Planned Development Permits and would also be subject to any criteria contained in the City’s Floodplain Management Ordinance. The Strategy 2000 area could be impacted if one or more of the several dams in the vicinity were to fail catastrophically. Catastrophic structural dam failure can be caused by earthquake or overflow. The Dams include Lexington (renamed James H. Lenihan Dam at Lexington Reservoir in 1996), Leroy Anderson, and Austrian Dam at Lake Elsman. Each of these dams is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), Division of Safety of Dams. Existing dams under DWR’s jurisdiction are periodically inspected to ensure that they are adequately maintained and to direct the owner to correct any identified deficiencies. Regular inspections and required maintenance of the dams substantially reduces the potential for catastrophic failure. The project would not result in new or increased flooding impacts beyond those already identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.9.2.5
Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow
The distance from the Bay would be expected to protect the site from coastal flooding hazards, including tsunami, extreme high tides, seiche and sea level rise. There are no surface water bodies in the vicinity of the project site that could generate damaging seiches. The site is not located within a mapped dam failure inundation zone. 4.9.3
Conclusion
Compliance with the applicable General Plan 2040 policies and hydrology regulations identified above, and implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1 would ensure that impacts to hydrology would be less than significant and would not exceed those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
83
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING 4.10.1 Setting The 1.4-acre site is located in the Strategy 2000 Area of Downtown San José, adjacent to the VTA St. James Station. The project site contains six existing buildings designed for commercial uses that comprise approximately 43,300 square feet of building space. 4.10.1.1 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses Surrounding land uses include East St. John Street, Old San José Post Office, and St. James Park to the north; North 2nd Street and office and commercial uses to the east; institutional, commercial, and office uses to the south; and North 1st Street and commercial and surface parking uses to the west. VTA light rail service along north and south lines is available via transit centers adjacent to the St. James Park across East St. John Street. 4.10.1.2 Land Use Regulations 4.10.1.2.1 General Plan Land Use Designation The project site is designated Downtown by the General Plan 2040. This designation is applied to areas planned for highly intensive uses and includes office, retail, service, residential, and entertainment uses. Residential projects within the Downtown designation should generally incorporate ground floor commercial use and development intensities of up to a floor area ratio (FAR) of 15 (3 to 30 stories) are allowed. 4.10.1.2.2 Zoning Designation and Historic District The project site is currently zoned Downtown Commercial (DC). The DC zoning district is intended for properties that are located within the Downtown zoning district and allows for a variety of uses and the highest development densities allowed for under the zoning code. Additionally, the northern portion of the project site is located within the St. James Square City Landmark District and new development is guided by a set of design guidelines26 established for the District. 4.10.1.2.3 Habitat Conservation Plans The project site is classified as “Urban – Suburban” in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan.
26
San José, City of. 1989 op. cit.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
84
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.10.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Land Use and Planning
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
1,2,3,9
4.10.2.1 Disrupt or Divide an Established Community Projects that have the potential to physically divide an established community include projects such as new freeways and highways, major arterials, streets, and railroad lines. The proposed project would develop new residential and commercial uses on a site containing existing commercial uses and surface parking. The proposed project would provide public access by including sidewalks throughout the project site that connect with the existing sidewalks along North 1st Street, North 2nd Street, and East St. John Street. Additionally, numerous pedestrian access points would be provided along the edges of the proposed building that front public right-of-ways. Similarly, bicycle and vehicle access would be provided via the public streets surrounding the site. Therefore, the project design would not inhibit public connectivity, and would not physically divide a community. 4.10.2.2 Conformance with Land Use Plans 4.10.2.2.1 General Plan Land Use Designation The project site is designated Downtown by the General Plan 2040. This designation is applied to areas planned for high development densities and highly intensive uses. The development of a 195unit residential building with approximately 9,737 square feet of retail use and ancillary facilities in a 7-story building is allowed within the Downtown designation. Therefore, the project would conform to the General Plan, since the proposed building is consistent with the Downtown designation. 4.10.2.2.2 Zoning Designation and Historic District The proposed project site is located within the Downtown Commercial (DC) zoning district. The DC zoning district allows for residential and commercial uses, and would easily accommodate the 4.97 FAR of the proposed project. The proposed project would result in the development of one mixed-use building within the project site, containing a total of 195 residential units. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to conform to the St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines as adopted by the City. No industrial uses are located in the immediate vicinity of the project site; therefore, the project would not interfere with the operation of local industrial facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the zoning designation. City of San José Marshall Squares Project
85
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.10.2.2.3 Strategy 2000: San José Greater Downtown Strategy for Development The Strategy 2000 program allows for the development of up to 10,000 residential dwelling units and over 1,000,000 square feet of retail space. The proposed project is a mixed-use development in the Downtown Core and adjacent to major transit systems. Mixed-use development is specifically encouraged and envisioned in Strategy 2000. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the Strategy 2000. As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, proposed development applications for sites directly south and southwest of St. James Park are required to include project-specific shade and shadow analyses. Figure 10 illustrates the shade and shadow analysis for the proposed project. In compliance with the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the analysis demonstrates that the proposed project would not result in a 10 percent or greater increase in the shadow cast on St. James Park on December 21, when the sun is lowest in the sky. Therefore, shadow impacts related to development of the proposed project would be less-than-significant. 4.10.2.2.4 Land Use Compatibility The project is surrounded by commercial uses on the east, west, and south. The proposed residential and commercial uses would be compatible with these surrounding uses, as they would not generate high levels of noise or air pollutants, or otherwise interfere with the operations of office and retail uses. Additionally, permanent residential populations would support existing commercial businesses and could support the development of future commercial and office uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the established or planned land uses surrounding the site. 4.10.2.3 Habitat Conservation Plan The project, which would redevelop an urbanized site with little habitat value, would not conflict with the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan study area, or any other natural community conservation plan. 4.10.3 Conclusion The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant land use impacts beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
86
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
FIGURE 10 Project Boundary
SOURCE: TCA ARCHITECTS, JULY 2014. I:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\figures\Fig_10.ai (1/6/15)
Marshall Squares EIR Addendum Shadow Analysis
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
This page intentionally left blank.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
88
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.11 MINERAL RESOURCES 4.11.1 Setting The project site is located in a developed urban area in Downtown San José and mineral exploration and extraction is not performed in the vicinity. Also, the project site is not located in an area designated as containing mineral resource deposits of regional importance. 4.11.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Mineral Resources
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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? 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?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3,4
1,2,3,4
Mineral resources known to exist in and near the Santa Clara Valley include sand, gravel, crushed rock, clay, and limestone. Santa Clara County has also supplied a significant portion of the nation’s mercury over the past century. Pursuant to the mandate of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975, the State Mining and Geology Board has designated the Communications Hill Area (Sector EE), which is about 7.0 miles south of the project site, as containing mineral deposits which are of regional significance as a source of construction aggregate materials. Neither the State Geologist nor the State Mining and Geology Board have classified any other areas in San José as containing significant mineral deposits. The project site is outside of the Communication Hill area and does not contain known mineral resources. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact from the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. 4.11.3 Conclusion The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to mineral resources beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
89
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.12 NOISE 4.12.1 Setting Implementation of the proposed project could expose persons to noise impacts. The existing noise and vibration conditions in the project vicinity have been documented in Strategy 2000 FEIR. Potential impacts of the proposed project are identified and mitigation measures are discussed below. 4.12.2 Existing Site Conditions Several noise measurement scales exist which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which indicates the relative intensity of a sound. The 0 point on the dB scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Changes of 3.0 dB or less are only perceptible in laboratory environments. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3.0 dB or more, as this level has been found to be barely perceptible to the human ear in outdoor environments. Sound levels in dB are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 dB represents a 10-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dB is 100 times more intense, 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense. Each 10-dB increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness. Sound intensity is normally measured through the A-weighted sound level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first is audible impacts, which refers to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3.0 dB or greater.. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1.0 and 3.0 dB. The last category is changes in noise level of less than 1.0 dB, which are inaudible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant. As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy so that the farther away the noise receiver is from the noise source, the lower the perceived noise level would be. Geometric spreading causes the sound level to attenuate or be reduced, resulting in a 6-dB reduction in the noise level for each doubling of distance from a single point source of noise to the noise sensitive receptor of concern. There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. Equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time-varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq and community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or the day-night average level (Ldn) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). CNEL is the time-varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and a 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the adjustment for events occurring during the evening hours. CNEL and Ldn are within one dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. The noise adjustments are added to the noise events occurring during the more sensitive hours. 4.12.2.1 Envision San José 2040 General Plan The City of San José addresses noise in the General Plan 2040 Noise Element27 and in the provisions of the City’s Municipal Code Noise Control Ordinance. The Noise Element standards specify an 27
San José, City of, 2011. Envision San José 2040 General Plan. November 1.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
90
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
exterior noise limit of 60 dBA Ldn for residential land uses impacted by transportation-related noise sources; a limit of 45 dBA Ldn is specified for interior living spaces. The Noise Element recognizes that full attainment of noise standards may not be achievable in the environs of the San José International Airport (SJIA) and the Downtown Core Area. Various policies in the General Plan 2040 have been adopted that avoid or mitigate noise impacts resulting from planned development within the City. The City of San José has the following goals and policies related to the proposed project that would reduce noise impacts:
Goal EC-1: Community Noise Levels and Land Use Compatibility. Minimize the impact of noise on people through noise reduction and suppression techniques, and through appropriate land use policies.
Policy EC-1.1: Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for the proposed uses. Consider federal, state and City noise standards and guidelines as a part of new development review. Applicable standards and guidelines for land uses in San José include:
○
Interior Noise Levels: The City’s standard for interior noise levels in residences, hotels, motels, residential care facilities, and hospitals is 45 dBA Ldn. Include appropriate site and building design, building construction and noise attenuation techniques in new development to meet this standard. For sites with exterior noise levels of 60 dBA Ldn or more, an acoustical analysis following protocols in the City-adopted California Building Code is required to demonstrate that development projects can meet this standard. The acoustical analysis shall base required noise attenuation techniques on expected General Plan 2040 traffic volumes to ensure land use compatibility and consistency over the life of this plan.
○
Exterior Noise Levels: The City’s acceptable exterior noise level objective is 60 dBA Ldn or less for residential and most institutional land uses. The acceptable exterior noise level objective is established for the City, except in the environs of the SJIA and the Downtown, as described below: ■
For new multi-family residential projects and for the residential component of mixed-use development, use a standard of 60 dBA Ldn in usable outdoor activity areas, excluding balconies and residential stoops and porches facing existing roadways. Some common use areas that meet the 60 dBA Ldn exterior standard will be available to all residents. Use noise attenuation techniques such as shielding by buildings and structures for outdoor common use areas. On sites subject to aircraft overflights or adjacent to elevated roadways, use noise attenuation techniques to achieve the 60 dBA Ldn standard for noise from sources other than aircraft and elevated roadway segments.
■
For single-family residential uses, use a standard of 60 dBA Ldn for exterior noise in private usable outdoor activity areas, such as backyards.
Policy EC-1.2: Minimize the noise impacts of new development on land uses sensitive to increased noise levels (Categories 1, 2, 3 and 6) by limiting noise generation and by requiring use of noise attenuation measures such as acoustical enclosures and sound barriers, where feasible. The City considers significant noise impacts to occur if a project would: ○
Cause the Ldn at noise sensitive receptors to increase by five dBA Ldn or more where the noise levels would remain “Normally Acceptable”; or
○
Cause the Ldn at noise sensitive receptors to increase by three dBA Ldn or more where noise levels would equal or exceed the “Normally Acceptable” level.
Policy EC-1.3: Mitigate noise generation of new nonresidential land uses to 55 dBA DNL at the property line when located adjacent to existing or planned noise sensitive residential and public/quasi-public land uses.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
91
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Policy EC-1.7: Require construction operations within San José to use best available noise suppression devices and techniques and limit construction hours near residential uses per the City’s Municipal Code. The City considers significant construction noise impacts to occur if a project located within 500 feet of residential uses or 200 feet of commercial or office uses would: ○
Involve substantial noise generating activities (such as building demolition, grading, excavation, pile driving, use of impact equipment, or building framing) continuing for more than 12 months.
For such large or complex projects, a construction noise logistics plan that specifies hours of construction, noise and vibration minimization measures, posting or notification of construction schedules, and designation of a noise disturbance coordinator who would respond to neighborhood complaints will be required to be in place prior to the start of construction and implemented during construction to reduce noise impacts on neighboring residents and other uses.
Policy EC-1.9: Require noise studies for land use proposals where known or suspected loud intermittent noise sources occur which may impact adjacent existing or planned land uses. For new residential development affected by noise from heavy rail, light rail, BART or other single-event noise sources, implement mitigation so that recurring maximum instantaneous noise levels do not exceed 50 dBA Lmax in bedrooms and 55 dBA Lmax in other rooms.
Policy EC-1.11: Require safe and compatible land uses within the SJIA noise zone (defined by the 65 CNEL contour as set forth in State law) and encourage aircraft operating procedures that minimize noise.
Policy EC-1.12: Encourage the Federal Aviation Administration to enforce current cruise altitudes that minimize the impact of aircraft noise on land use.
Policy EC-1.14: Require acoustical analyses for proposed sensitive land uses in areas with exterior noise levels exceeding the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards to base noise attenuation techniques on expected General Plan 2040 traffic volumes to ensure land use compatibility and consistency.
Goal EC-2 – Vibration: Minimize vibration impacts on people, residences, and business operations.
Policy EC-2.1: Near light and heavy rail lines or other sources of ground-borne vibration, minimize vibration impacts on people, residences, and businesses through the use of setbacks and/or structural design features that reduce vibration to levels at or below the guidelines of the Federal Transit Administration. Require new development within 100 feet of rail lines to demonstrate prior to project approval that vibration experienced by residents and vibration sensitive uses would not exceed these guidelines.
Policy EC-2.3: Require new development to minimize vibration impacts to adjacent uses during demolition and construction. For sensitive historic structures, a vibration limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV (peak particle velocity) will be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage to a building. A vibration limit of 0.20 in/sec PPV will be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage at buildings of normal conventional construction.
4.12.2.2 City of San José Municipal Code The Zoning Ordinance of the San José Municipal Code contains performance standards for the generation of noise at adjacent properties. Noise from air-conditioning or other mechanical equipment is limited to a maximum of 55 dBA at residential property lines. The Code restricts construction or demolition activity to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction or demolition work is permitted on Sundays or federal holidays.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
92
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.12.2.3 California Building Code The California Building Code (CBC) includes standards for interior noise levels. Specifically, noise levels from exterior noise sources must be reduced to a day-night sound level (Ldn) of 45 dBA or less in habitable rooms of multi-family housing. Projects exposed to exterior noise levels greater than 60 dBA Ldn require an acoustical analysis showing that the proposed design will limit interior noise levels to the allowable interior noise level of 45 dBA Ldn. Additionally, if windows must be closed to meet the interior standards the design of the buildings must include a ventilation or air-conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment with the windows closed. 4.12.2.4 Federal Transit Administration The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), in a document titled Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment,28 provides guidelines for levels of ground borne vibration due to rail lines adjacent to various land uses. Ground borne vibration related to human annoyance is generally related to root mean square (rms) velocity levels expressed in VdB. For proposed residential land uses, the guidelines suggest maximum vibration levels of 72 VdB for frequent events (more than 70 trains per day), 75 VdB for occasional events (30 to 70 trains per day), and 80 VdB for infrequent events (fewer than 30 trains per day). While these guidelines are generally intended to help assess the potential of new rail projects adjacent to existing land uses, they are frequently used to help assess the compatibility of new projects adjacent to existing rail lines. The above criteria in terms of vibration velocity decibels (VdB) and criteria in terms of inches per second (in/sec) are used to evaluate the effects of vibration on human response and structural damage, respectively. For example, for a building that is constructed with reinforced concrete with no plaster, the FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 102 VdB (0.5 in/sec)29 is considered safe and would not result in any construction vibration damage. For non-engineered timber and masonry building, the construction vibration damage criterion is 94 VdB (0.2 in/sec). For buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damages, the construction damage criterion is 90 VdB (0.12 in/sec). 4.12.3 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Noise New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
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?
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
28
Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. May.
29
FTA, 2006. Op. Cit.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
93
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Noise New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved 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?
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3,12
4.12.3.1 Construction-Period Noise Impacts The City considers significant construction noise impacts to occur if a project located within 500 feet of residential uses or 200 feet of commercial or office uses would involve substantial noise-generating activities (such as building demolition, grading, excavation, pile driving, use of impact equipment, or building framing) continuing for more than 12 months. As noted in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, noise levels from construction activities such as finished grading and building erection for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the active construction area for a limited time period. The closest existing noise sensitive receptor to the project would be the Trinity Episcopal Church building located approximately 52 feet from the northeastern boundary of the project site and the commercial building located within 50 feet of the southern project boundary. At these distance, noise from project construction may range up to 91 dBA Lmax during the loudest phase of construction as measured at the façade of the nearest off-site receptor. Mitigation that uses the best available noise suppression devices and techniques and limits construction hours would be required to reduce construction noise impacts to a less-than-significant level. Standard Project Conditions for Construction Noise As described in Section 4.12.1.4, City of San José Municipal Code, the proposed project would be subject to the following performance standards outlined in the City’s Municipal Code:
Construction will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday for any on-site or off-site work within 500 feet of any residential unit. Construction outside of these hours may be approved through a development permit based on a site-specific construction noise mitigation plan and a finding by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement that the construction noise mitigation plan is adequate to prevent noise disturbance of affected residential uses.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
94
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
The contractor shall use “new technology” power construction equipment with state-of-theart noise shielding and muffling devices. All internal combustion engines used on the project site shall be equipped with adequate mufflers and shall be in good mechanical condition to minimize noise created by faulty or poor maintained engines or other components.
Locate stationary noise generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Staging areas shall be located a minimum of 200 feet from noise sensitive receptors, such as residential uses.
Post-construction mechanical equipment shall conform to the City’s General Plan limitation of 55 Ldn at residential property lines and 60 Ldn at commercial property lines.
The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant construction-period noise impacts than were described in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, as included in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, would reduce this impact to less-thansignificant levels. Impact NOI-1:
Construction period activities could create significant short-term noise impacts. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are identified as part of the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR and proposed by the project: MM NOI-1a: The following policy contained in the General Plan 2040 serves to reduce significant noise impacts:
Policy EC-1.1: Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for the proposed uses. Consider federal, state and City noise standards and guidelines as a part of new development review. Applicable standards and guidelines for land uses in San José include: ○
Interior Noise Levels: The City’s standard for interior noise levels in residences, hotels, motels, residential care facilities, and hospitals is 45 dBA Ldn. Include appropriate site and building design, building construction and noise attenuation techniques in new development to meet this standard. For sites with exterior noise levels of 60 dBA Ldn or more, an acoustical analysis following protocols in the Cityadopted California Building Code is required to demonstrate that development projects can meet this standard. The acoustical analysis shall base required noise attenuation techniques on expected General Plan 2040 traffic volumes to ensure land use compatibility and consistency over the life of this plan.
○
Exterior Noise Levels: The City’s acceptable exterior noise level objective is 60 dBA Ldn or less for residential and most institutional land uses. The acceptable exterior noise level objective is established for the City, except in the environs of the SJIA and the Downtown, as described below: ■
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
For new multi-family residential projects and for the residential component of mixed-use development, use a standard of 60 dBA 95
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Ldn in usable outdoor activity areas, excluding balconies and residential stoops and porches facing existing roadways. Some common use areas that meet the 60 dBA Ldn exterior standard will be available to all residents. Use noise attenuation techniques such as shielding by buildings and structures for outdoor common use areas. On sites subject to aircraft overflights or adjacent to elevated roadways, use noise attenuation techniques to achieve the 60 dBA Ldn standard for noise from sources other than aircraft and elevated roadway segments. ■
For single-family residential uses, use a standard of 60 dBA Ldn for exterior noise in private usable outdoor activity areas, such as backyards.
Policy EC-1.7: Require construction operations within San José to use best available noise suppression devices and techniques and limit construction hours near residential uses per the City’s Municipal Code. The City considers significant construction noise impacts to occur if a project located within 500 feet of residential uses or 200 feet of commercial or office uses would: ○
Involve substantial noise generating activities (such as building demolition, grading, excavation, pile driving, use of impact equipment, or building framing) continuing for more than 12 months.
○
For such large or complex projects, a construction noise logistics plan that specifies hours of construction, noise and vibration minimization measures, posting or notification of construction schedules, and designation of a noise disturbance coordinator who would respond to neighborhood complaints will be required to be in place prior to the start of construction and implemented during construction to reduce noise impacts on neighboring residents and other uses.
MM NOI-1b: Implementation of the following multi-part measure would reduce potential construction period noise impacts to less-than-significant levels:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Construction activities will be limited to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. weekdays) for any construction within 500 feet of a residence.
All internal combustion engines for construction equipment used on the site will be properly muffled and maintained.
In the event that pile driving is proposed, nearby residents will be notified of the schedule for its use while it is in use. Portable acoustical barriers will be installed around pile driving equipment.
A name, address, and phone number of a contact person will be posted on the site to handle noise complaints.
Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines will be prohibited.
96
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
All stationary noise generating construction equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, will be located as far as practical from existing residences.
4.12.3.2 Construction Groundborne Vibration Impacts Construction activities are known sources of groundborne vibration. Vibration impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project, which would require the use of heavy excavation equipment, and the possible use of pile-driving equipment. To determine potential construction vibration impacts, LSA conducted an impact evaluation as described below. When assessing annoyance from groundborne noise, vibration is typically expressed as root mean square (rms) velocity in units of decibels of 1 micro-inch per second. To distinguish vibration levels from noise levels, the unit is written as “VdB.” However, construction vibration impacts on building structures are generally assessed in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV). Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, project-related impacts are expressed in terms of PPV. Typical groundborne vibration levels measured at a distance of 25 feet from heavy construction equipment in full operation, such as vibratory rollers, range up to approximately 0.210 PPV. Based on the FTA data, large bulldozers generate 0.089 PPV at 25 feet and small bulldozers generate 0.003 PPV at 25 feet. Loaded trucks generate 0.076 PPV at 25 feet, an impact pile driver generates 0.644 PPV at 25 feet, and a sonic pile driver generates 0.170 PPV at 25 feet. Except for the impact driver, these vibration levels would not be expected to cause damage to residential buildings of typical northern California construction. For buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damages such as the Trinity Episcopal Church and the Knights of Columbus building (34-40 North 1st Street), the vibration level generated by sonic pile drivers in addition to impact pile drivers could cause potential building damage at a distance of 25 feet. Per General Plan Policy EC-2.3 a vibration limit of 0.200 PPV must be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage at buildings of normal conventional construction, and a vibration limit of 0.080 PPV must be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage to buildings considered to be sensitive historic structures. These criteria are similar to the FTA’s construction vibration impact criteria. The FTA construction vibration impact threshold for structures made of non-engineered timber and masonry is 0.200 PPV; the threshold for structures of engineered concrete and masonry is 0.300 PPV; while structures of reinforced-concrete, steel or timber is 0.500 PPV. Based on the distance to the closest buildings to the project site, the operation of heavy construction equipment such as heavy vibratory rollers could result in groundborne vibration levels ranging up to 0.127 PPV. These vibration levels are below the FTA established construction vibration impact criteria for buildings of conventional construction. Groundborne Vibration Impacts to Adjacent Historic Structures The historic Trinity Episcopal Church building is approximately 52 feet from the project’s northeastern boundary. Specific construction details for the project are unknown at this time, therefore, it is not known if it will be necessary to use pile driving during construction. Assuming that pile driving and heavy duty construction equipment would occur or be operated at the project’s boundary nearest the church building; the minimum distance would be 52 feet from these on-site construction activities. Based on the distance attenuation curve for an impact pile driver, the vibration level would be attenuated to 0.0196 to 0.0216 PPV at a distance of 50 feet or 15 meters. Similarly, vibration generated by large bulldozers would be attenuated from the 0.089 PPV at 25 feet to 0.05 PPV or lower at 52 feet City of San José Marshall Squares Project
97
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
and vibration from loaded trucks would be attenuated from 0.076 PPV tat 25 feet to 0.040 PPV or lower at 52 feet. These vibration levels would be below the City’s 0.200 PPV vibration threshold for buildings of normal conventional construction, as well as below the 0.080 PPV threshold for potential cosmetic damage to buildings considered to be sensitive historic structures. Other structures in the project vicinity, including the historic Knights of Columbus building adjacent to the southern boundary of the project site, could be exposed to groundborne vibration levels of up to 0.127 PPV from the operation of heavy construction equipment at the location of the proposed new building construction sites. These levels are above the 0.080 PPV threshold for sensitive historic structures, but below the impact criteria threshold for non-historic buildings or normal construction. Therefore, consistent with the Downtown Strategy 2000 FEIR and the Envision San José 2040 General Plan FEIR, vibration impacts from construction activities would be considered less than significant with mitigation. Impact NOI-2:
The project could result in significant construction-related ground vibration impacts to structures in the vicinity, including sensitive historic structures. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are identified as part of the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR and proposed by the project: MM NOI-2.1: Avoid impact pile driving where possible. Drilled piers or rammed aggregate piers cause lower vibration levels and are preferred methods to pile driving where geological conditions permit. MM NOI-2.2: A list of all heavy construction equipment to be used for this project and the anticipated time duration of using equipment that has been known to produce high vibration levels (tracked vehicles, vibratory compaction, pile drivers, jackhammers, hoe rams, etc.) shall be submitted by the contractor to the structural engineer. This list shall be used to identify equipment and activities that would potentially generate substantial vibration and to define the level of effort required for continuous vibration monitoring (see MM NOI-4.3 below). MM NOI-2.3: A Construction Vibration Monitoring Plan shall be implemented to document conditions prior to, during, and after vibration-generating construction activities. All Plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry accepted standard methods. The Construction Vibration Monitoring Plan shall include the following tasks:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Identification of the sensitivity of nearby structures to groundborne vibration. Vibration limits shall be applied to all vibration sensitive structures located within 200 feet of the project.
Performance of a photo survey, elevation survey, and crack monitoring survey for each structure within 200 feet of pile driving activities and for each structure within 50 feet of other construction activities identified as sources of high vibration levels. Surveys shall be performed prior to any 98
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
construction activity, in regular interval during construction and after project completion and shall include internal and external crack monitoring in structures, settlement, and distress and shall document the condition of foundations, walls, and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of said structures.
Development of a vibration monitoring and construction contingency plan to identify structures where monitoring would be conducted, set up a vibration monitoring schedule, define structure-specific vibration limits, and address the need to conduct photo, elevation, and crack surveys to document before and after construction conditions. Construction contingencies would be identified for when vibration levels approach the limits.
At minimum, vibration monitoring shall be conducted during pavement demolition, excavation, and pile driving activities. Monitoring results may indicate the need for more or less intensive measurements.
If vibration levels approach limits, suspend construction and implement contingencies to either lower vibration levels or secure the affected structures.
Designate a person responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration. The contact information of such person shall be clearly posted on the construction site.
Conduct post-survey on structures where either monitoring has indicated high levels or complaints of damage has been made. Make appropriate repairs or compensation where damage has occurred as a result of construction activities.
MM NOI-2.4: The results of all vibration monitoring shall be summarized and submitted in a report to the City shortly after substantial completion of each phase identified in the project schedule. The report shall include a description of measurement methods, equipment used, calibration certificates, and graphics as required to clearly identify vibration-monitoring locations. An explanation of all events that exceeded vibration limits shall be included together with proper documentation supporting any such claims. 4.12.3.3 Operational-Period Impacts The project would result in an increase in traffic along local roadways. However, it would not generate enough traffic (more than 15 percent of the total traffic volumes without the project) to create a perceptible change in traffic noise in the vicinity of the project site above those existing without the project. Therefore, the project would not result in a perceptible permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project, and no mitigation would be required to reduce the project’s operational noise impacts to off-site uses. 4.12.3.3.1 Stationary Noise Source Impacts The proposed long-term use of this project site is mixed-use residential land use. Potential long-term stationary noise impacts at the project site would be primarily associated with outdoor activities and operations associated with parking lot and delivery truck activities. The proposed commercial uses could result in noise from mechanical equipment and other on-site sources (e.g., air-conditioning or City of San José Marshall Squares Project
99
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
other mechanical ventilation equipment, delivery loading docks or areas, emergency generators), which could create noise that emanates beyond the office use boundaries. To prevent noise impacts on adjacent land uses, loading docks or loading areas and noise-generating equipment associated with the office and retail uses should be located as far as practical from all existing and planned residential properties. Impact NOI-3:
Stationary noise sources could create significant long-term noise impacts. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are identified as part of the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR and proposed by the project: MM NOI-3a: The following policies contained in the General Plan 2040 serve to reduce significant noise impacts:
Policy EC-1.2: Minimize the noise impacts of new development on land uses sensitive to increased noise levels (Categories 1, 2, 3 and 6) by limiting noise generation and by requiring use of noise attenuation measures such as acoustical enclosures and sound barriers, where feasible. The City considers significant noise impacts to occur if a project would: ○
Cause the Ldn at noise sensitive receptors to increase by five dBA Ldn or more where the noise levels would remain “Normally Acceptable”; or
○
Cause the Ldn at noise sensitive receptors to increase by three dBA Ldn or more where noise levels would equal or exceed the “Normally Acceptable” level.
Policy EC-1.3 Mitigate noise generation of new nonresidential land uses to 55 dBA DNL at the property line when located adjacent to existing or planned noise sensitive residential and public/quasi-public land uses.
MM NOI-3b: The following measure is required for the operations of the proposed project:
Loading docks or loading areas and noise-generating equipment associated with the office and retail uses will be located as far as practical from all existing and planned residential properties.
4.12.3.3.2 Aircraft Noise Source Impacts According to the City’s current and projected noise contours for San José International Airport, the project site is exposed to aircraft noise levels of less than 60 dB CNEL. 4.12.3.3.3 Traffic Noise Impacts As stated above, the project would result in an increase in traffic along local roadways. However, it would not generate enough traffic to create a perceptible change in traffic noise in the vicinity of the project site above those existing without the project. City of San José Marshall Squares Project
100
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
The FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate highway traffic-related noise conditions in the vicinity of the project area in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. The resultant noise levels were weighted and summed over a 24-hour period in order to determine the CNEL values. CNEL contours are derived through a series of computerized iterations to isolate the 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL contour for traffic noise levels in the project area. Table V.D-2 of the Strategy 2000 FEIR shows that the project site would be exposed to traffic noise levels exceeding the City’s short-range noise quality standard of 60 dBA Ldn. Land uses located along Saint James Street, will be exposed to noise levels exceeding 65 dBA CNEL and the project site would be exposed to traffic noise levels of 67 dBA from noise on 1st Street. To meet the City’s short-range 60 dBA Ldn exterior noise standard, outdoor active uses (such as patios or backyards associated with the proposed residential uses) would require a 6-foot tall sound barrier along the property line. Standard residential construction in northern California would provide 25 dBA exterior-to-interior noise reduction with windows closed and 15 dBA noise reduction with windows open. Therefore, residential structures on the project site would meet the 45 dBA interior noise standard without building facade upgrades. However, to ensure that windows can remain closed for prolonged periods of time, an air-conditioning system is required. Therefore, as identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the proposed residential building would require the implementation of an air-conditioning system. Impact NOI-4:
Whereas project-generated traffic noise would not represent a significant impact, the effect of existing and future traffic noise on project use would be significant. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures are identified as part of the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR: MM NOI-4a: Implementation of MM NOI-1a and Policy EC-1.1 would reduce significant traffic noise impacts. MM NOI-4b: At the time future residential projects are proposed, implement Mitigation Measure NOI-1b. 4.12.3.3.4 Rail Noise Impacts Factors that influence the overall impact of railroad noise on adjacent uses include the distance of the uses from the tracks, surrounding land topography, the intermittent nature of train events, and the lack of sound walls or other barriers between the tracks and adjacent uses. Although the rail activity generates noise and groundborne vibration, the rail activity is intermittent. It is also influenced by the sporadic use of warning horns by trains when they approach at-grade crossings. The northern and southern boundaries of the project site are located adjacent to the VTA’s light rail line. Impact NOI-5:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
The effect of rail activity in the project vicinity would be significant. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
101
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Mitigation Measures: The proposed project would be required to implement the following mitigation measures from the Strategy 2000 FEIR: MM NOI-5a: Implementation of MM NOI-1a and Policy EC-1.1 would reduce significant rail activity noise impacts. Additionally, General Plan 2040 Policy EC-2.1 would further reduce the impacts related to rail activity noise and vibration.
Policy EC-2.1: Near light and heavy rail lines or other sources of groundborne vibration, minimize vibration impacts on people, residences, and businesses through the use of setbacks and/or structural design features that reduce vibration to levels at or below the guidelines of the Federal Transit Administration. Require new development within 100 feet of rail lines to demonstrate prior to project approval that vibration experienced by residents and vibration sensitive uses would not exceed these guidelines.
MM NOI-5b: At the time future residential projects or non-residential projects that include sensitive receptors are proposed, the following measures shall be required:
For sites within 200 feet of an operating rail lane, a site- and projectspecific noise/vibration analysis shall be prepared.
Train noise impacts shall be reduced by the construction of a sound wall, building orientation, building noise attenuation, and mechanical ventilation systems to reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels.
4.12.4 Conclusion Compliance with Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-4, from the Strategy 2000 FEIR, would ensure that project-related construction and operational noise impacts would not exceed the impacts identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
102
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING 4.13.1 Setting The Strategy 2000 FEIR analyzed the potential impacts of the following projected level of development in the greater San José Downtown area during the planning horizon:
8,000,000 to 10,000,000 square feet of office space;
8,000 to 10,000 residential dwelling units;
900,000 to 1,200,000 square feet of retail space; and
2,000 to 2,500 guest rooms of hotel space, in 4 to 5 hotel projects.
The proposed project would include development of up to 195 residential units and 9,737 square feet of retail space. The parcels upon which the development would occur are currently covered with six one- to three-story commercial buildings and associated parking lots. None of the buildings that would be demolished are currently occupied by a residential population. The current and future population and housing estimates and assumptions have not substantially changed since certification of the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.13.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Population and Housing
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
The Strategy 2000 FEIR concluded that development and redevelopment of property in the Strategy 2000 area would result in the economic development of Downtown San José. The proposed land use changes and policy revisions under the Strategy 2000 (which includes the project site) were initiated in order to prevent sprawling development in other areas of the City by focusing redevelopment of the greater San José Downtown area by allowing higher density development and the replacement of underutilized uses. The proposed project would develop a mixed-use building with approximately 195 residential units and 9,737 square feet of retail space. The project would directly generate a permanent population increase in the area. However, the project would not displace a residential population or existing housing, as the existing structures on the project site contain commercial uses. Similarly, the project would not result in an expansion of urban services, nor would it open additional undeveloped land for future growth. It would facilitate the reuse of underutilized land in an existing urban setting that is well served by transit facilities and services. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in new City of San José Marshall Squares Project
103
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
or more significant population growth and/or housing impacts that were analyzed and described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.13.3 Conclusion The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant population growth or housing impacts beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
104
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES 4.14.1 Setting As described in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the City of San José provides police and fire protection for the Strategy 2000 area and the project site. The closest fire station is 0.5 miles northwest, at 255 N. Market Street. Police would dispatch to the project site from 201 West Mission Street, approximately 1.5 miles north of the site. The basic availability of public services has not changed since the certification of the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.14.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Public Services
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental 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: Fire Protection? Police Protection? Schools? Parks? Other Public Facilities?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3
1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3
4.14.2.1 Fire and Police Protection The project would be constructed in conformance with current building codes, which require features that would reduce potential fire hazards. The project design would also be reviewed by the San José Police Department to ensure that it incorporates appropriate safety features to minimize criminal activity. As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, a realization of the full buildout of the development approved in the Strategy 2000 would incrementally increase the need for fire and police protection services, which may create the need for additional staffing or resources, or a new fire station in the Strategy 2000 area. The increase in demand for fire and police services is not necessarily an environmental impact. The environmental impact, if it would occur, would generally result from the physical changes made in order to meet the increased demand for services. Future development of new fire or police facilities in the project area would require supplemental environmental review which could consist of an Addendum or Supplemental EIR to the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR (or equivalent document). Given the infill location of the project site and the fact that the site is already served by the San José Fire Department and San José Police Department, it is not anticipated that development of the proposed project would result in significant impacts to police and fire services, nor would this project alone require the construction of additional fire or police facilities. Furthermore, the proposed project City of San José Marshall Squares Project
105
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
would not result in any new or more significant impacts to fire and police service beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.14.2.2 Schools The project would result in the development of 195 new residential units, which could directly increase the demand for school facilities. According to the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the proposed project would generate approximately 98 new K-12 students.30 The closest schools to the project site are Horace Mann Elementary, approximately 0.50 miles east, Burnett Middle, approximately 1.0 miles north , and San José High, approximately 1.5 miles east. As of the certification of the FEIR, San José Unified School District schools serving the Strategy 2000 area were operating collectively at 86 percent capacity. Developers of new residential uses would be required to pay a school impact fee to the San José Unified School District (SJUSD) to offset the increased demands on school facilities caused by the development. The SJUSD would be responsible for implementing specific mitigation methods, which may include the expansion of existing facilities, construction of new schools, alterations to attendance boundaries, and/or modifications of class schedules. Therefore, the resulting school-age population expected to occur as a result of the proposed project would not be expected to result in any new or more significant school impacts beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.14.2.3 Parks and Other Public Facilities The project would generate a residential population that would increase demands on park and recreation facilities. However, an incremental increase in the need for parks and recreational facilities was evaluated in the Strategy 2000 FEIR which proposed that additional facilities would be developed in the Strategy 2000 area concurrent with residential development. As discussed in Section 4.15 Recreation below, the increase in demand for parks and recreational facilities would be satisfied by a combination of mechanisms, including (1) dedication of land; (2) payment of an as yet unspecified fee (with the eventual amount to be based on the unit count of the project); (3) credit for qualifying private recreational amenities (to be determined based on project design); and (4) improvement of parkland or recreation facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to parks facilities beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.14.3 Conclusion The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to public services or facilities than those addressed in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR.
30
Utilizes student generation rate of 0.5 students per unit as cited in Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
106
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.15 RECREATION 4.15.1 Setting The General Plan 2040 establishes a service benchmark of 3.5 acres of parks and community centers per 1,000 residents. As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the development of the Strategy 2000 area would result in a parkland obligation of 87.5 acres under the City’s Parkland Dedication Ordinance (PDO). Under Strategy 2000, the obligation would be satisfied through a combination of the following: (1) dedication of land; (2) payment of an as yet unspecified fee (with the eventual amount to be based on the unit count of the project); (3) credit for qualifying private recreational amenities (to be determined based on project design); and (4) improvement of parkland or recreation facilities. Nearby parks in the project site vicinity include the 6.8 acre St. James Park, across East St. John Street; Plaza de Cesar Chavez, approximately 0.4 miles south, and 2.3 acres in size; and portions of Guadalupe River Park, approximately 0.5 miles to the west. The existing parks and recreational facilities in the project area have not changed substantially since the certification of the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.15.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Recreation
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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 that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3
1,2,3
The proposed project would generate a residential population that would result in an increase for demands on park and recreational facilities. However, St. James Park, across St. John Street from the project is large, and could absorb the increase in use associated with the project. In addition, the proposed project would include approximately 16,534 square feet of shared open space (including a roof deck, two courtyards, and a pool), and an exercise facility. All recreational uses proposed as part of the project would be interior to the project building, and would not result in environmental impacts beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.15.3 Conclusion Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant recreational impacts beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
107
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.16 TRANSPORTATION 4.16.1 Setting Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. prepared a traffic impact analysis (TIA) for the Strategy 2000 FEIR. The Strategy 2000 FEIR described existing conditions (year 2000) and project conditions, which includes traffic volumes from existing traffic counts plus traffic generated by other approved developments in the vicinity of the site. Intersections in the project vicinity that were evaluated in the Strategy 2000 FEIR include: North 1st Street and East St. James Street, North 1st Street and Santa Clara Street, North 1st Street and Julian Street, North 2nd Street and Julian Street, North 2nd Street and St. James Street, 2nd Street and Santa Clara Street. The purpose of the traffic analysis prepared for the Strategy 2000 FEIR was to identify the potential traffic impacts of the Strategy 2000 area, according to the standards and methodologies of the City of San José and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The VTA administers the County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The proposed project area is located within the Downtown San José area (defined by the area formed by I-280, SR 87, Coleman Avenue freeway ramp, East Julian Street and 4th Street), which is exempt from the City of San José level of service policy. Hexagon also prepared a traffic operations study for the proposed project which identified potential operational issues that could occur with implementation of the project.31 The findings of the study have been incorporated below. 4.16.1.1 Envision San José 2040 General Plan Various policies in the General Plan 2040 have been adopted that avoid or mitigate transportation and traffic impacts resulting from planned development within the City. The City of San José has the following goals and policies related to the proposed project that would reduce transportation and traffic impacts:
Policy TR-1.1: Accommodate and encourage use of non-automobile transportation modes to achieve San José’s mobility goals and reduce vehicle trip generation and vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Policy TR-1.2: Consider impacts on overall mobility and all travel modes when evaluating transportation impacts of new developments or infrastructure projects.
Policy TR-1.4: Through the entitlement process for new development, fund needed transportation improvements for all transportation modes, giving first consideration to improvement of bicycling, and walking and transit facilities. Encourage investments that reduce vehicle travel demand.
Policy TR-1.5: Design, construct, operate, and maintain public streets to enable safe, comfortable, and attractive access and travel for motorists and for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users of all ages, abilities, and preferences.
Policy TR-1.6: Require that public street improvements provide safe access for motorists and pedestrians along development frontages per current City design standards.
Policy TR-2.8: Require new development where feasible to provide on-site facilities such as bicycle storage and showers, provide connections to existing and planned facilities, dedicate land to expand
31
Hexagon Transporation Consultants, Inc., 2014. Traffic Operations Study for a High-Rise Mixed-Use Development at North First Street and East St. John Street in Downtown San José, California. June 13.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
108
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
existing facilities or provide new facilities such as sidewalks and/or bicycle lanes/paths, or share in the cost of improvements.
Policy TR-3.3: As part of the development review process, require that new development along existing and planned transit facilities consist of land use and development types and intensities that contribute toward transit ridership. In addition, require that new development is designed to accommodate and to provide direct access to transit facilities.
Policy TR-5.3: The minimum overall roadway performance during peak travel periods should be level of service “D” except for designated areas. How this policy is applied and exceptions to this policy are listed in the following bullets: 1.
Vehicular Traffic Mitigation Measures. Review development proposals for their impacts on the level of service and require appropriate mitigation measures if development of the project has the potential to reduce the level of service to “E” or worse. These mitigation measures typically involve street improvements. Mitigation measures for vehicular traffic should not compromise or minimize community livability by removing mature street trees, significantly reducing front or side yards, or creating other adverse neighborhood impacts.
2.
Downtown. In recognition of the unique position of the Downtown as the transit hub of Santa Clara County, and as the center for financial, business, institutional and cultural activities, development within the Downtown is exempted from traffic mitigation requirements. Intersections within and on the boundary of this area are also exempted from the level of service “D” performance criteria.
Policy TR-8.4: Discourage, as part of the entitlement process, the provision of parking spaces significantly above the number of spaces required by code for a given use.
Policy TR-8.5: Promote participation in car share programs to minimize the need for parking spaces in new and existing development.
Policy TR-8.6: Allow reduced parking requirements for mixed-use developments and for developments providing shared parking or a comprehensive TDM program, or developments located near major transit hubs or within Urban Villages and other Growth Areas.
Policy TR-8.7: Encourage private property owners to share their underutilized parking supplies with the general public and/or other adjacent private developments.
Policy TR-8.9: Consider adjacent on-street and City-owned off-street parking spaces in assessing need for additional parking required for a given land use or new development.
Policy TR-9.1: Enhance, expand and maintain facilities for walking and bicycling, particularly to connect with and ensure access to transit and to provide a safe and complete alternative transportation network that facilitates non-automobile trips.
Policy CD-2.3: Enhance pedestrian activities by incorporating appropriate design techniques and regulating uses in private developments, particularly in Downtown, Urban Villages, Main Streets, and other locations where appropriate. 1.
Include attractive and interesting pedestrian-oriented streetscape features such as street furniture, pedestrian scale lighting, pedestrian oriented way-finding signage, clocks, fountains, landscaping, and street trees that provide shade, with improvements to sidewalks and other pedestrian ways.
2.
Strongly discourage drive-up services and other commercial uses oriented to occupants of vehicles in pedestrian-oriented areas. Uses that serve the vehicle, such as car washes and service stations, may be considered appropriate in these areas when they do not disrupt pedestrian flow, are not concentrated in one area, do not break up the building mass of the streetscape, are consistent with other applicable policies, and are compatible with the planned uses of the area.
3.
Provide pedestrian connections as outlined in the Community Design Connections Goals and Policies.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
109
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.
Locate retail and other active uses at the street level.
5.
Create easily identifiable and accessible building entrances located on street frontages or paseos.
6.
Accommodate the physical needs of elderly populations and persons with disabilities.
7.
Integrate existing or proposed transit stops into project designs.
Policy CD-2.10: Recognize that finite land area exists for development and that density supports retail vitality and transit ridership. Use land use regulations to require compact, low-impact development that efficiently uses land planned for growth, especially for residential development which tends to have a long life-span. Strongly discourage small-lot and single-family detached residential product types in Growth Areas.
In addition to the policies of the General Plan, the proposed project would be required to comply with the San José Residential Design Guidelines. 4.16.1.2 Site Circulation, Access, and Parking Regional access to the project site is provided by SR 87 and I-280. Local access to the project site is provided via North 1st Street, North 2nd Street, East Santa Clara Street and East St. John Street. Parking would be provided in an underground parking garage with access located on East St. John Street and North 2nd Street. 4.16.1.3
Existing Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities in the study area consist mostly of sidewalks along all of the surrounding streets. Crosswalks are located at all of the intersections in the area, and all signalized intersections in the area include pedestrian signal heads. The existing sidewalks have good connectivity and provide pedestrians with safe routes between the site and surrounding land uses in the area. The Guadalupe River multi-use trail system runs through the City of San José along the Guadalupe River and is shared between pedestrians and bicyclists and separated from motor vehicle traffic. The Guadalupe River trail is an 11-mile continuous Class I bikeway from Curtner Avenue in the south to Alviso in the north. This trail system can be accessed via West St. James Street, West St John Street, and West Santa Clara Street approximately 0.50 miles west of the project site. None of the roadways in the immediate vicinity of the project site contain Class II bicycle facilities (striped bike lanes), although West St. John Street is a designated bike route. Within the larger study area, the following roadways contain bike lanes:
Coleman Avenue, west of SR 87;
North Almaden Boulevard, south of West St. John Street;
San Fernando Street, between Bird Avenue and Tenth Street;
Third Street, between Jackson Street and I-280; and
Fourth Street, between Jackson Street and I-280.
The City of San José has developed a public Bike Share system that allows users to rent and return bicycles at various popular locations. A bike share station currently exists on North San Pedro Street at West St. John Street.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
110
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Existing transit services to the study area are provided by the VTA, Caltrain, Altamont Commuter Express (ACE), and Amtrak. The Downtown area is served directly by many local buses. The bus lines that operate within ¼ mile walking distance of the project site include local, community, express, and limited stop bus routes. The VTA also provides a shuttle service within the Downtown area. The Downtown area shuttle (DASH) provides shuttle service from the San José Diridon Caltrain station to San José State University, and the Paseo De San Antonio and Convention Center LRT stations via San Fernando and San Carlos Streets. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) currently operates the 42.2-mile VTA light rail line system extending from south San José through downtown to the northern areas of San José, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. The service operates nearly 24-hours a day with 15-minute headways during much of the day. The Mountain View–Winchester and Alum Rock–Santa Teresa LRT lines operate within walking distance of the project site. The St. James LRT station is located just across the street from the project site. The San José Diridon station is located approximately 1.0 mile from the project site and is served by Caltrain, ACE, and Amtrak. Commuter rail service between San Francisco and Gilroy is provided by Caltrain, which currently operates 92 weekday trains that carry approximately 47,000 riders on an average weekday. The San José Diridon Station provides 581 parking spaces, as well as 18 bike racks and 48 bike lockers. Trains stop frequently at the Diridon station between 4:30 a.m. and 10:30 p.m. in the northbound direction, and between 6:26 a.m. and 1:32 a.m. in the southbound direction. Caltrain provides passenger train service seven days a week, and provides extended service to Morgan Hill and Gilroy during commute hours. 4.16.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Transportation/Traffic
Issues
New Potentially Significant Impact
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3,4,16
111
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
Transportation/Traffic New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards 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? Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,4,16
13
1 1,2,3
1,2,3,4,16
4.16.2.1 Trip Generation Trip generation resulting from new development proposed within the City of San José is typically estimated using the rates contained in the San José Traffic Impact Analysis Handbook. The City’s rates were applied to the project as shown in Table 4, Project Trip Generation. After applying the City of San José trip rates, appropriate trip reductions, the project would generate 258 daily vehicle trips, with 112 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 123 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.
Table 4:
Project Trip Generation Estimates
Land Use Rate Size Apartments 6.0 195 units Retail 40.0 6,900 sq. ft. Alternate Mode and Mixed-Use Reduction b Total a b
ADT a 1,170 276
AM Peak Hour Total In Out 117 41 76 8 6 2
PM Peak Hour Total In Out 117 76 41 25 13 12
-188
13
5
8
-19
-11
-8
1,258
112
42
70
123
78
45
Average Daily Trips A 15 percent residential/retail mixed-use trip reduction was applied to the project per the Santa Clara VTA TIA Guidelines. The 15 percent trip reduction was first applied to the smaller trip generator (retail). The same number of trips were then subtracted from the larger trip generator (residential) to account for both trip ends. A 9 percent transit reduction was applied to the residential component of the project, since the project site is located within 2,000 feet of an LTR station.
Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc., 2014.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
112
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.16.2.2 Intersection and Freeway Level of Service Impacts Implementation of the proposed project would contribute to the overall LOS impact on local intersections and freeway segments in the Downtown San José area. The traffic impacts that would result from the proposed project were analyzed and accounted for in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts to the LOS of any local intersection or freeway segment than were previously identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR because the project site was evaluated as a residential mixed-use area in Strategy 2000 with similar traffic generation compared to the proposed mixed-use project. Even with the prescribed improvements identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, traffic impacts at some locations would remain significant and unavoidable and, as a result, the City of San José adopted a statement of overriding consideration for the Strategy 2000 FEIR transportation impacts in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093. 4.16.2.3 Site Circulation and Emergency Access 4.16.2.3.1 Vehicular On-Site Circulation On-site vehicular circulation was reviewed for the project in accordance with generally accepted traffic engineering standards. Access to the at-grade, below-grade and level two parking levels would be provided via East St. John Street and North 2nd Street. No dead-end drive aisles exist on the atgrade parking level, which would provide parking for the retail component of the project and residential guest parking. Ramps on the at-grade level would provide gated access to the below-grade and level two secured residential parking areas. The site plan indicates that two dead-end drive aisles on the basement parking level would exist. However, since the basement parking level would contain assigned resident parking only, the dead-end aisle would not be problematic. No dead-end drive aisles exist on parking level two. The City’s standard width for two-way drive aisles is 26 feet wide where 90-degree standard parking spaces are provided. The City’s standard width for one-way drive aisles is 20 feet wide where 90degree compact spaces are provided, allowing sufficient room for vehicles to back out of parking spaces. According to the site plan, the drive aisles on all parking levels measure either 24 feet or 26 feet in width. The 24-foot wide drive aisles are labeled one-way drive aisles. One-way drive aisles tend to restrict vehicle circulation, and a 24-foot wide drive aisle is adequate to provide two-way circulation. 4.16.2.3.2 Truck and Emergency Vehicle Circulation Based on the site plan, it appears that adequate vertical clearance would be provided at the project entrances to allow garbage trucks, moving trucks, large delivery vehicles, and some emergency vehicles (all truck types SU-30) to perform their operations within the at-grade parking garage level. The site plans show 18 feet of vertical clearance at the North 2nd Street entrance, reducing to 16 feet 8 inches of clearance at the East St. John Street entrance. A shared retail/resident loading space would be located on the at-grade level of the parking garage near the inbound North 2nd Street driveway (see Figure 4). The designated loading space is shown to be 10 feet wide by 30 feet deep. Based on the loading space orientation, which is perpendicular to the inbound driveway, large delivery and moving trucks would not have adequate room to maneuver in and out of the space, regardless of whether trucks entered the site from East St. John Street or North 2nd Street. Therefore, the on-site loading space should be rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise so it is parallel to the inbound driveway and lines up with the 24-foot wide drive aisle. With this recommended configuration, trucks could enter the garage from North 2nd Street, back into the loading space to perform their operations, and then exit the site via the East St. John Street driveway. Trucks could also exit via the North 2nd Street City of San José Marshall Squares Project
113
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
outbound driveway, although this would require a multi-point maneuver upon exiting the loading space. According to the City of San José Downtown Zoning Regulations, the project is required to provide at least one loading space for the residential component of the project and one loading space for the retail component of the project. The Planning Director may authorize the reduction of two on-site loading spaces to one on-site loading space in connection with the issuance of a development permit if the Director finds that sufficient on-street loading space exists to accommodate circulation and manipulation of freight. According to the site plan, the project is not providing any on-street loading spaces. Thus, the project applicant should coordinate with City staff to determine if one on-site loading space would be adequate to serve the project. Garbage trucks typically require about 15 feet of overhead clearance to enter a parking structure, but require approximately 24 feet of overhead clearance to service or empty a dumpster over the truck. Due to the height requirement, garbage collection activities would need to occur outside of the building within the public right-of-way. The site plan shows two trash enclosures would be located within the at-grade parking level. The project proposes to wheel the trash bins out to North 2nd Street on garbage collection days. This would block the bus lane until garbage is collected and the bins are moved back onto the site. In order to avoid blocking any travel lanes with trash bins, the bins could be placed on East St. John Street instead of North 2nd Street for garbage collection. The project applicant should coordinate with City of San José staff to determine the ideal street location for the trash bins on garbage collection days. Impact TRANS-1:
Construction of the proposed project could result in circulation impacts. (Same Impact as Approved Project- Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
MM TRANS-1: To allow for adequate project access and on-site circulation, as approved by the City of San José Public Works Department, the project site plan shall be modified as follows:
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
Move the entry gate at the North 2nd Street driveway inward 15 feet to provide a total of 50 feet of vehicle stacking space between the gate and the LRT tracks.
Provide appropriate visible and/or audible warning signals at the project driveways to alert pedestrians and bicyclists of vehicles exiting the garage.
Label all the 24-foot drive aisles as two-way drive aisles.
Rotate the on-site loading space 90 degrees counterclockwise so it is parallel to the inbound North 2nd Street driveway and lines up with the 24-foot wide drive aisle.
The project applicant shall coordinate with City staff to determine if one on-site loading space is adequate to serve the project, and to determine the ideal street location (i.e., East St. John Street or North 2nd Street) for the trash bins on garbage collection days.
All residential tandem spaces should be assigned parking. 114
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, impacts related to site circulation and emergency access would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. 4.16.2.4 Air Traffic Patterns See Section 4.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials regarding required Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airspace safety review of the proposed development. 4.16.2.5 Public Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities The project would reconstruct the sidewalk in conformance with City standards along its frontages on North 1st Street, North 2nd Street and East St. John Street. Class I bike paths exist on North 4th Street between Jackson and East Julian Street, and along the Guadalupe River Trail. Class II bike lanes exist on East San Fernando Street from the Guadalupe River Trail to North 10th Street, and along North 10th Street up to East Taylor Street. Pedestrian facilities in the project area consist primarily of sidewalks along local roadways. The project proposes to include 53 bicycle parking spaces on the project site. The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) provides existing transit service. The project area is served by local, community, express, and limited stop bus routes. Local bus routes include Lines 66, 72, 73, and 82. Line 65 serves as a community bus route, and Lines 181 and 304 serve as express and limited stop bus routes, respectively. The St. James Light Rail Transit (LRT) station, located on First Street just south of St. James Street and 0.4 miles northeast of the project site, is the one VTA LRT station within the project vicinity. According to the City’s Bicycle and Motorcycle Parking Standards, the project is required to provide one bicycle parking space and one motorcycle parking space for every four residential units. This equates to 49 bicycle spaces and 49 motorcycle spaces. Since the project site is located in the Downtown Core, the project is not required to provide any bicycle or motorcycle parking for the retail component of the project. The project is proposing 53 bicycle parking spaces and 52 motorcycle parking spaces, which would be adequate to serve the project. Therefore, the project would not have an adverse effect on existing transit, bicycle or pedestrian facilities in the project vicinity. 4.16.3 Conclusion The proposed project would not result in new or more significant impacts to the transportation system beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
115
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS 4.17.1 Setting The provision of water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, solid waste, natural gas, and electricity services has not changed substantially since the certification of the Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.17.1.1 Water Service The project site is served by the San José Water Company, a private utility that provides water service to a large portion of the City. Existing water lines provide potable water, irrigation, and fire services to the project site. Coordination with the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) would be required in order to construct water line connections to the project site below the existing adjacent light rail tracks. The South Bay Water Recycling system does not currently serve the project site, with the closest pipe connection located at City Hall, approximately 0.4 miles east of the project site. 4.17.1.2 Sanitary Sewer/Wastewater Service The City of San José maintains the wastewater collection system in the Strategy 2000 area, and is capable of processing 167 million gallons per day (mgd). The project site is served by a 20-inch sewer main along East St. John Street, a 12-inch sewer main along North 2nd Street, and a 12-inch sewer main along North 1st Street. 4.17.1.3 Storm Drainage System The City of San José provides service to the existing storm drainage system within the Strategy 2000 area, and the system comprises storm lines which range in size from 12 inches to 18 inches in diameter. Flows from the project site and adjacent streets are conveyed to storm laterals and mains, which drain to the Guadalupe River. Storm drain capacity generally carries a 3- to 5-year storm. In 2004, the Guadalupe River Flood Control project was completed which has eliminated the 100-year flood hazards which had previously plagued portions of Downtown San José. 4.17.1.4 Solid Waste All commercial facilities in San José are currently served by Republic Services and there is sufficient landfill capacity for Santa Clara County needs for at least the next 25 years. Recycling services are available to most businesses.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
116
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.17.2 Environmental Checklist and Discussion of Impacts Utilities and Service Systems New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
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 stormwater 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?
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location 2,3
2,3
1,2,3
2,3
2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
4.17.2.1 Wastewater Treatment Requirements As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, growth envisioned for the greater Downtown San José area would increase wastewater flows to the City’s Water Pollution Control Plant, and could exceed the RWQCB’s limit of 120 mgd effluent released into the San Francisco Bay. As a result, implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 would ensure that the impacts related to increased wastewater flows remain less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts with regard to the ability to process wastewater than those previously analyzed in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. Impact UTIL-1:
Implementation of Strategy 2000 would result in new development that could increase the volume of wastewater sent to the City’s Water Pollution Control Plant and exceed the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s limit of 120 mgd effluent release into San Francisco Bay. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would also be implemented as part of the proposed project.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
117
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
MM UTIL-1: Consistent with General Plan policies related to wastewater services, the City shall review individual development proposals to ensure that the projects could be adequately served by the Water Pollution Control Plant prior to the approval of any specific development projects. At the time that specific development projects are proposed, the City shall require that indoor and outdoor water conserving technologies and practices are integrated into the development. 4.17.2.2 Water or Wastewater Facilities As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, the additional wastewater generated by the development of greater Downtown San José would not require substantial reconstruction or extension of major water or wastewater lines to serve new development. The proposed project would undergo review by the City prior to the issuance of permits in order to determine whether specific infrastructure upgrades would be required. The proposed project would not result in any new or more significant impacts related to water or wastewater infrastructure than those previously analyzed in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR. 4.17.2.3 Stormwater Drainage Facilities Implementation of the proposed project would result in a decrease in impervious surfaces on the project site. However, as required by Mitigation Measure HYD-1, prior to the issuance of Site Development Permits, the proposed project would undergo review by Public Works prior to the issuance of permits in order to determine whether specific infrastructure upgrades would be required. 4.17.2.4 Water Supply The proposed project would connect to the existing water main infrastructure serving the site and surrounding area. Implementation of the project would generate increased water demand from the approximately 372,706 square feet of new residential and retail uses proposed. As discussed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR, development associated with implementation of Strategy 2000 would substantially increase demands upon the water supply. While the Santa Clara Water District can meet the projected water demands during wet weather periods, the City could fall short of demand during dry and drought periods. Implementation of the Mitigation Measure UTIL-2, prior to the issuance of Site Development Permits, would ensure that the impacts from the proposed project on water supply would remain less-than-significant. Impact UTIL-2:
Implementation of Strategy 2000 would result in new development that could increase the demand for water, potentially resulting in the need for new or expanded water entitlements. (Same Impact as Approved Project-Less Than Significant with Mitigation Measures)
Mitigation Measure:
The following mitigation measure is identified as part of the Strategy 2000 FEIR and would also be implemented as part of the proposed project. MM UTIL-2: Consistent with General Plan policies related to water, the City shall review individual development proposals to ensure that the project could be adequately served by the City’s water supply prior to the approval of any specific development projects. The City shall also require that all new residential and commercial development incorporates water-saving measures,
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
118
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
including the use of reclaimed water for irrigation, and water-conserving fixtures, such as low-flow toilets and shower heads, flow-reducing aerators on sinks, and automatic shut-off faucets, in commercial buildings. All new development shall be in compliance with the Green Building Policies. 4.17.2.5 Solid Waste Implementation of the proposed project would result in a net increase in solid waste generated on the project site. The Strategy 2000 FEIR concluded that there is sufficient capacity in the existing solid waste disposal facilities serving San José to accommodate waste generated by the development approved in the Strategy 2000 area, which includes the proposed project site. 4.17.3 Conclusion The proposed project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures UTIL-1 and UTIL-2, would not result in any new or significant utilities impacts beyond those identified in the Strategy 2000 FEIR.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
119
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 4.0: Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Discussion of Impacts
4.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Mandatory Findings of Significance New Potentially Significant Impact
Issues
New Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated
New Less Than Significant Impact
Same Impact as “Approved Project”
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 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?
Less Impact than “Approved Project”
Information Source(s)/ Discussion Location
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
The certified Strategy 2000 FEIR evaluated the impacts of a group of related actions that would encourage economic development in the Greater Downtown San José area. The amount of total new development would allow for the following:
8,000,000 to 10,000,000 square feet of office space;
8,000 to 10,000 residential dwelling units;
900,000 to 1,200,000 square feet of retail space; and
2,000 to 2,500 guest rooms of hotel space, in four to five hotel projects.
The proposed project would include development of an eight-story mixed-use building containing 195 residential units, 9,737 square feet of retail uses, 16,534 square feet of open space and ancillary uses, and a maximum of 254 parking spaces. The project is consistent with the Strategy 2000 and fits within the development envelope analyzed in the Strategy 2000 FEIR. With implementation of the Mitigation Measures included in the project and described in this Addendum, the proposed project would not result in new or more significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in the certified Strategy 2000 FEIR, including those related to the protection of biological and cultural resources, cumulative conditions, and substantial adverse effects on human beings.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
120
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 5.0: References/Checklist Sources
SECTION 5.0
REFERENCES/CHECKLIST SOURCES
Professional judgment and expertise of the environmental specialist preparing this assessment, is based upon a review of the site, surrounding conditions, and review of the project plans. 1.
Professional judgment and expertise of the environmental specialist preparing this assessment, based upon a review of the site, surrounding conditions, and review of the project plans.
2.
City of San José. Final Environmental Impact Report, San José Downtown Strategy 2000. June 2005.
3.
City of San José. Envision San José 2040 General Plan.
4.
City of San José. Final Environmental Impact Report Envision San José 2040 General Plan. September 2011.
5.
California Department of Conservation. Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2010 Map.
6.
City of San José. Zoning Ordinance.
7.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. 2011.
8.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan. September 15, 2010.
9.
County of Santa Clara, et al. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan, 2013.
10. LSA Associates, Inc. Cultural Resources Technical Analysis for the Marshall Squares
Project, San José, Santa Clara County, California. January 8, 2015. 11. Geocon Consultants. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation- Marshall Squares Multi-Use
Development, San José, California. October 2013. 12. Geocon Consultants, 2013. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 50, 52, 60, 66, 80, and
90 N. 1st Street, and 65 N. 2nd Street, San José, California. October 2013. 13. Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Santa
Clara County, Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport. May 25, 2011. 14. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel
Number 06085C0231H, dated May 18, 2009. 15. Association of Bay Area Governments. Dam Failure Inundation Hazard Map for NW San
José/Milpitas/Santa Clara, 2003.
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
121
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
Section 6.0: Lead Agency and Consultants
SECTION 6.0
LEAD AGENCY AND CONSULTANTS
Lead Agency: City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3rd Floor, Tower San José, California 95113 Harry Freitas, Director Rebecca Bustos, Project Manager David Keyon, Planner Consultants: LSA Associates, Inc., Prime Consultant 2215 Fifth Street Berkeley, CA 94710 Judith H. Malamut, AICP, Principal-in-Charge and Project Manager Kelly Bray, Planner Patty Linder, Graphics Manager Charis Hanshaw, Word Processor 5084 N. Fruit Avenue, Suite 103 Fresno, CA 93711 Amy Fischer, Associate, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise Specialist 157 Park Place Point Richmond, CA 94801 Neal Kaptain, Associate, Cultural Resources Michael Hibma, Cultural Resources
City of San José Marshall Squares Project
122
P:\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\PRODUCTS\Addendum\2nd Final\Marshall Squares IS Second Final.docx (01/14/15)
EIR Addendum January 2015
APPENDIX A CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL ANALYSIS FOR THE MARSHALL SQUARES PROJECT, SAN JOSE, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 157 PARK PLACE PT. RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA 94801
510.236.6810 TEL 510.236.3480 FAX
BERKELEY CARLSBAD
FRESNO IRVINE PALM SPRINGS
RIVERSIDE ROCKLIN SAN LUIS OBISPO
January 14, 2015 Ed McCoy Vice President FF Realty II LLC 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 Subject:
Cultural Resources Technical Analysis for the Marshall Squares Project, San José, Santa Clara County, California (LSA Project No. FRC1401)
Dear Mr. McCoy: This letter presents the results of a cultural resources technical analysis conducted by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA), for the Marshall Squares Project in San José, Santa Clara County, California (Figures 1 and 2). The technical analysis consisted of a preliminary built environment assessment of six buildings in the project site constructed between 1925 and 1982 (including preparation of City of San José Historic Resources Inventory tally sheets), a preliminary archaeological sensitivity assessment of the project site parcels, and an analysis of potential project impacts to the St. James Historic District and the Knights of Columbus building (34-40 First Street; APN 467-21-021). The project site comprises part of a city block bordered by 1st Street, 2nd Street, St. John Street, and Santa Clara Street. The 1.39-acre project site contains five parcels (APNs 467-21-18, -19, -30, -38, and -39) with street addresses of 50-52, 60, 66, 80, and 90 N. 1st Street and 65 N. 2nd Street. The proposed project would demolish all project site buildings and construct a seven-story high-rise residential complex with 195 units. The purpose of this analysis is to (1) determine if additional study is needed to evaluate the buildings’ potential to qualify as historical resources under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in accordance with the City of San José (City) Revised Guidelines for Historic Reports (Guidelines) issued in February 2010; (2) identify the likelihood of excavation encountering intact historic-period or prehistoric archaeological deposits; and (3) analyze the project’s potential impact on the St. James Historic District and the Knights of Columbus building. To complete these tasks, LSA conducted background research, including records searches and a literature review; city and county archival records reviews; research at the California Room of the San Jose Public Library; and a field survey.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK City of San José Historic Preservation Ordinance The City of San José Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) is an officially recognized local list that identifies built environment cultural resources of known significance, including properties listed on or eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register, or on the local level as a City Landmark, Candidate City Landmark, Structure of Merit, Contributing Structure, or Identified Site/Structure. A City Landmark is a highly significant resource meeting the qualifications for landmark designation as defined in the Historic Preservation Ordinance. A Structure of Merit is a resource that does not merit Landmark designation, but that does contribute to the City’s historic fabric; a Structure of Merit is not considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.
PLANNING
|
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
|
DESIGN
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
A Contributing Structure contributes to historic fabric of the community and, in some cases, to a certain neighborhood. The category of Identified Site/Structure (IS) is applied when further evaluation of the significance of the building or structure should be undertaken.
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines If a cultural resource subject to potential project-related impacts is an archaeological site, CEQA (CCR Title 14(3) §15064.5(c)(1)) requires that the lead agency first determine if the site is a historical resource as defined in CCR Title 14(3) §15064.5(a). If the site qualifies as a historical resource, potential adverse impacts must be considered in the same manner as a historical resource (California Office of Historic Preservation 2001a:8). If the archaeological site does not qualify as a historical resource but does qualify as a unique archaeological site, then the archaeological site is treated in accordance with PRC §21083.2 (CCR Title 14(3) §15064.5(c)(3)). In practice, most archaeological sites that meet the definition of a unique archaeological resource will also meet the definition of a historical resource. CEQA defines a “unique archaeological resource” as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets one or more of the following criteria: •
Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; or
•
Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or
•
Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person (PRC §21083.2(g)).
PRELIMINARY BUILT ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT LSA conducted records searches (#13-1764 and #14-0816) of the project site and its immediate vicinity at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) on May 19 and December 23, 2014, and also conducted research at the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office, the City of San Jose’s Development Services Permit Center, and the California Room at the San Jose Public library on May 22, 2014. LSA conducted an architectural field review of the project site from the public right-of-way on May 22, 2014. The first records search identified a portion of P-43-000467, the St. James Square Historic District, in the project site. P-43-000467 is listed in the National Register and is also a City Landmark Historic District (HD84-36). As the St. James Square Historic District is included in the National Register of Historic Places and is listed in the City of San Jose Historic Resources Inventory, it is considered a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA (California Public Resources Code 5024.1(d)(1). The Trinity Episcopal Church, a contributor to P-43-000467, was identified adjacent to the project site. The second records search identified the Knights of Columbus Coop building in the project site at 5052 N. First Street. The building is listed in the Office of Historic Preservation’s Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File (HPD) as National Register Status 5S2, “Eligible for Local Listing only-likely to become eligible under Local Ordinance.” This building is not listed in the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, was not found to be historically significant in the evaluation documented in Attachment 1, and is, therefore, not a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
2
Richmond Pleasant Hill
580
101
Stockton
Walnut Creek
99
24 1
4
80 13
980
80
Danville San Ramon
San Francisco Alameda San F r a n c i s c o Oakland County
Daly City
82
Pacifica
San Leandro Castro Valley Ashland
South San Francisco
San Bruno 1
San Mateo County
680
84
5
Alameda County
Fremont
East Palo Alto
Milpitas
Palo Alto 82 Mountain View 35
San Joaquin County
Newark
Redwood City 280
Tracy Livermore Pleasanton
880 84
92
120
580
Union City
92
San Mateo
101
Manteca 205
San Lorenzo
Hayward
35
Contra Costa County
237
Project Location
Santa Clara
Sunnyvale
Stanislaus County
84
Cupertino
87
101
85
Santa Clara County
1
Morgan Hill
Santa Cruz County
101 17
Gilroy
Santa Cruz
152 1
Watsonville
Monterey Bay 1
Monterey County
San Benito County
156 1
FIGURE 1
0
5
10
MILES
SOURCE: ESRI StreetMap North America (2012). I:\FRC1401\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 1_Regional Location.mxd (5/27/2014)
Marshall Squares Project San Jose, Santa Clara County, California
Regional Location
Project Site
FIGURE 2
0
1000
2000
FEET
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quads - San Jose East, Calif. (1980), and San Jose West, Calif. (1980). I:\FRC1401\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 2_Project Area.mxd (5/27/2014)
Marshall Squares Project San Jose, Santa Clara County, California
Project Site
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
The second records search also identified P-43-002883, the Knights of Columbus building at 34-40 N. First Street (APN 467-21-021) adjacent to the project site. The Knights of Columbus building is City Historic Landmark #HL01-135 and is listed in the HPD as National Register Status 7S, “Not evaluated.” In accordance with California Public Resources Code 5024.1(5), “Local landmarks or historic properties designated under any municipal or county ordinance” are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). A resource eligible for inclusion in the California Register, such as the Knights of Columbus building, is a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA. Attachment 1 of this analysis contains Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Series forms and City of San José Historic Resources Inventory tally sheets prepared for 50-52 N. 1st Street in the Marshall Squares project site. Attachment 2 contains City of San José Historic Resources Inventory tally sheets prepared for the five other buildings in the Marshall Squares project site: 60, 66, 80 and 90 N. 1st Street and 65 N. 2nd Street. Buildings with a tally sheet score of 32 or below are considered nonsignificant structures and do not qualify as historical resources under CEQA. Buildings with a score of 33 or above require further evaluation. Each of the six buildings in the project site received a total of 2 or less points due to the fact that they do not possess direct associations with important themes in the city’s historical development, are not associated with notable persons, and/or do not embody distinctive architectural qualities. One building, 90 N. 1st Street, is within the boundaries of the St. James Historic District, but it does not contribute to the eligibility of the district. In summary, based on the preliminary assessment and ranking under City of San José quantitative evaluation, none of the buildings appear to require additional study or documentation, and none are historical resources for the purposes of CEQA.
ST. JAMES SQUARE HISTORIC DISTRICT IMPACTS ASSESSMENT The project proposes to demolish buildings at 50-52, 60, 66, 80 and 90 N. 1st Street and 65 N. 2nd Street and construct a seven-story high-rise residential complex with 195 units. The northwestern corner of the project will be constructed within a non-contributing portion of the St. James Square Historic District at 90 N. 1st Street. The current building at this location, constructed in 1981, is within the boundary of the historic district but does not contribute to the district’s significance. The project has been designed to be in conformity with the City’s St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines. These design guidelines facilitate the “compatible integration” of new buildings with the existing built environment and “maintain a sense of awareness of the District’s contribution to the City’s historic heritage.” The guidelines’ objectives are to (1) “Ensure that all rehabilitation and development in the District and its immediate vicinity is designed to enhance the character of the historic resources;” (2) “Ensure that all rehabilitation and development activity is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, particularly the Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources, and Urban Design policies;” (3) “Establish a framework to promote fair, consistent, and objective decisions related to development within the area;” and (4) “Inform property owners of the criteria upon which development applications will be evaluated.” The proposed project’s L-shaped residential complex will be constructed on a 1.39-acre project site, extending from the St. John Street/1st Street intersection south along 1st Street for 400 feet, and from there extending eastward to 2nd Street. The Trinity Episcopal Church, a contributor to the St. James Square Historic District, is adjacent to the project site at the southwest corner of the St. John
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
5
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Street/2nd Street intersection. Figures 3 and 4 provide renderings of the project as it relates to Trinity Episcopal Church. The view on Figure 3 shows the complex’s façades facing St. John Street and 1st Street. The church is seen to the east, on St. John Street, separated from the complex by a small building that lacks architectural distinction. The renderings on Figure 4 show the proposed complex’s relationship to Trinity Episcopal Church as seen from 2nd Street. The complex is seen rising behind the church and to the south along 2nd Street. The church building will be separated from the complex by buildings that are associated with the church on its parcel but lack architectural distinction. In addition, the complex is separated from the church parcel by a passive courtyard that has been designed into the complex. The residential complex embodies a contemporary design that contrasts with the Gothic Revival Trinity Episcopal Church but does not conflict with it. The residential complex will provide an unobtrusive backdrop to the church.
Summary The project’s effects to the St. James Historic District are summarized in the matrix in Table 1. The matrix presents each of the City’s New Building Guidelines in the left-hand column with ratings of “conforms,” “partially conforms,” and “does not conform” to reflect the project's consistency with the building guidelines. Of the 36 aspects of the project analyzed below, 26 (72 percent) fall within the “Conforms” category, four (11 percent) fall within the “Partially Conforms” category, and six (17 percent) fall within the “Does Not Conform” category. These results demonstrate that the proposed residential complex’s design is substantially in conformity with the City’s New Building Guidelines for projects in the St. James Square Historic District. The project has been designed to ensure that the new building will not result in an incongruous or architecturally unsympathetic addition to the St. James Historic District. The project’s conformity with the City’s guidelines ensures that implementation of the project will not result in a “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” (CCR Title 14(3) §15064.5(b)).
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
6
GROUND LEVEL VIEW OF CORNER CAFE ANCHORING EAST SAINT JOHN STREET FRONTAGE AS IT OVERLOOKS ST. JAMES PARK
A-3.1
FIGURE 3
Cultural Resources Technical Analysis Marshall Squares Project San Jose, Santa Clara County, California SOURCE: TCA Architects, January 5, 2014. P:\FRC1401\g\Cultural\Figure 3_Contextual Perspectives 1.ai (12/31/2014)
Contextual Perspectives 1
6
3
7
2
5
4
8
PL
PL
PL (beyond)
6’-2”
Top of structure
13’
Top of sheathing
10’
Level 7
10’ 10’
+/- 81’-6”
Level 5
Level 4
10’
85’ max. height from avg. grade plane
Level 6
Level 3
13’
(PODIUM)
Level 2
16’-4”
Level 1
(beyond)
Trinity C hurc h C a the d ra l i n f r o nt (N .A A . P.))
Offi c e in frro nt (N N .A.P. )
Level 1 Grade
Proposed +83.90’ Proposed +83.90’
Average grade plane +84.71’
B1 Unit Transformers at Grade
Flex Space
S1 Unit Gas Meters
IDF Room
S1 Unit Cycle Therapy & Lobby
Stair
B4 Unit Garage Entry
Pump Room
Straight Run Stair to Podium
Mech.
Average grade plane +84.71’
Passive Courtyard Beyond
E. St. John Street
Straight Run Stair to Podium
1. NORTH ELEVATION (NORTH 2ND STREET) 3
MATERIAL PALETTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Partial Glass Railing Corrugated Metal Full Height Glass Railing Stone Veneer Exterior Plaster Aluminum Storefront Metal Awning Vinyl Window Horizontal Metal Railing Metal Window Frame
2
1
EXTERIOR LIGHTING (DL-1) (DL-2) (AL-1) (AL-2) (AL-3) (WS)
Deck Light (ceiling mount) Deck Light (wall mount) Accent Light (awning) Accent Light (ceiling) Accent Light (wall washer) Wall Sconce
KEY MAP (NOT TO SCALE)
See sheet A-5.2 for lighting fixture details
2. AERIAL VIEW OF NORTH 2ND STREET
3. VIEW LOOKING WEST OVER TRINITY CATHEDRAL TO PASSIVE COURTYARD BEYOND
0’
10’
20’
40’
A-3.1
FIGURE 4
Cultural Resources Technical Analysis Marshall Squares Project San Jose, Santa Clara County, California SOURCE: TCA Architects, January 5, 2014. P:\FRC1401\g\Cultural\Figure 4_Contextual Perspectives 2.ai (12/31/2014)
Contextual Perspectives 2
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Table 1: Marshall Squares Project/St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines Comparison Matrix New Building Guidelines General Character • Buildings should be large in bulk and scale.
Conforms
The complex has been set back from the church so as not to crowd or overpower it.
The complex’s setback from St. John Street is the same as that of the adjacent church. The entirety of the complex’s setback along 1st and 2nd streets is the same as the façade on St. John Street and the church.
The complex does not impede pedestrian view of the church from any direction.
Off-street parking is within the complex does not interfere with the complex’s ability to define street edges and corners. There is an entrance for parking ingress on North 2nd Street and an entrance for ingress/egress on St. John Street. Due to the constraints associated with minimizing vehicular crossings over VTA lines and the Downtown Transit Mall, two of the four entrances were removed from the project. Although located facing the historic district, the entrance on St. John Street is minimally intrusive to the visual setting of St. James Square because it contains no high-visibility signage or other indicators of its presence that would degrade the streetscape or impede sightlines in the district. Additionally, the entrance is adjacent to a building that does not contribute to the significance of the district and is in a location that is not prominent when viewed from St. James Square.
Off-street parking is within the complex and is not visible from St. James Square.
Service facilities are within the complex and are not visible from the street.
The complex will be constructed in conformity with City of San Jose building code requirements pertaining to safety and access.
• The use of courtyards in building design is encouraged. Courtyards can act as storage for cool air, and can add cooling through lawns, trees, fountains and other landscaping. Balconies around this kind of courtyard space can increase enjoyment of them.
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
Although the complex is taller than the adjacent church spire, the complex is no taller than one story above the adjacent church spire.
The complex’s massing is more substantial than that of the nearby church; however, the complex is set back from the church and does not detract from the architectural qualities of the church. The church, in fact, embodies such distinctive architectural qualities that the construction of the modern complex in its vicinity does not detract from the church’s architectural qualities. The roof is not visible from St. James Square.
The complex’s façade on St. John Street faces St. James Square and provides a well-defined entry and lobby.
A courtyard has been included in the complex’s design.
• Where new buildings are to be constructed adjacent to historic building, the mass of the new buildings should be sensitive to, and harmonious with, the scale of the older buildings. • Roof pitch should be no greater than 6:12 vertical-to-horizontal. • All building entrances should front directly on streets surrounding the park. Provide well-defined pedestrian entries and building lobbies at street level. Buildings may be raised a half level or so above grade with major entry stairs, as in many of the surrounding historic buildings.
Comments The bulk and scale of the complex is in keeping with that of the contributing buildings in the historic district. Although the architectural elements of the complex’s St. John’s Street façade—windows and doors—are not symmetrically laid out, the overall shape of the façade is rectangular and symmetrical. The complex features massive proportions in its St. John Street façade and along 1st and 2nd Street.
• Parking lots or parking structures should not have frontage onto St. James Park, nor should they be accessed from the streets edging the park except where single-lot property ownership prevents access from said or rear streets.
• Parking should be designed as an integrated part of each site and/or structure and architecturally treated with the same materials, detailing and façade articulation as the principal structure on the site. Parking lots should not be visible from the street frontage of St. James Park. • Service functions (e.g. garbage, deliveries) also should be accessed from side or rear streets where property ownership permits. Service facilities should be screened from view. • In all cases, site planning should take into account issues of safety and security. Building entrance, exits, parking access, and walkways should be visible to pedestrians to ensure safety. Building Form and Scale • Allowable building heights for a one lot depth (137 feet) on blocks fronting directly on St. James Park and on diagonal corners defined by St. James and First, St. James and Third, St. John and First, and St John and Third should not deviate by more than one story from the heights of immediately adjacent historic building and in no case should exceed 70 feet.
Does Not Conform
• Buildings should be frontally symmetrical. • Buildings features should have massive proportions. Site Layout/Setbacks • New development directly adjacent to an existing historic structure should be designed so as to respect the historic structures. Historic structures should not be crowded by new development. • The setback of new structures should match that of the surrounding historic structures. • In all locations, structures should be set back to the average of the setbacks of existing historic buildings along the street frontage not including front entry stairs which may protrude from the building. • Where new construction occurs adjacent to historic structure, the siting of the new structure should respect the view of historic buildings from a pedestrian perspective. • Off-street parking should always be located away from the street, either under buildings, behind buildings, or in inside courts. In this way, the buildings can help define the street edges and corners.
Partially Conforms
9
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
New Building Guidelines
Conforms
Partially Conforms
Does Not Conform
Comments
Surface Treatment Fenestration • There should be a greater proportion of wall than window.
• Windows should reinforce the building design through placement, size, style and overall pattern.
• Individual windows should be rectangular in shape and oriented vertically and be recessed from the wall.
• Blank monolithic facades should be avoided. Facades facing the park should be articulated so that shadows will be cast by individual façade components. This can be accomplished by using wall elements such as windows, columns, and spandrels. All-glass and mirrored buildings are inappropriate. Avoid intensely colored glass and dark windows. • Windows in at least the first floors of buildings should be clear glass in order to allow pedestrians to see interior activity. Materials • Building materials should be appropriate to the architecture and style for which they are used and compatible to those used in the historic building. Detailing • Architectural definition of buildings on their lower levels (within the field of vision of a pedestrian) is encouraged to provide visual interest and human scale. • The detailing of new construction should incorporate typical detailing of historic structures as appropriate. • Delineate openings with surrounds and frames. • Utilize vertical elements such as pilasters or columns. • Utilize strong cornice lines. • All roof-mounted equipment should be incorporated within penthouses, which are architecturally part of the structure. Typical metal roof screens should not be allowed for this purpose. Locate service ports where they are not visible from the streets or sidewalks surrounding the park. Colors • Building colors should complement the building architecture, if not strengthen it, while being compatible to other building within the district, so as not to be contrary or a visual nuisance to the district.
Although the proportion of wall to window is approximately even in the proposed design, the walls visually dominate the façades by being projected forward, with the windows occupying niches in the walls. The overall effect is of the façades addresses the design guidelines goal of a greater proportion of wall to window. The window placement, size, style, and overall patterning is harmonious with the contemporary styling of the building. The proposed residential complex’s windows are rectangular in shape, oriented vertically, and are recessed from the walls. There are no blank, monolithic façades. The façade fronting St. James Square contains elements that will cast shadows during the portion of the year when sunlight shines across this northwest-facing façade. The complex’s design does not include mirrored, colored, or dark windows.
The St. John Street and 2nd Street façades include clear windows that allow passersby to see into the building.
The complex’s stone façades are in keeping with the character of the contributing buildings in the St. James Historic District.
The façade facing St. John Street has commercial windows and a glass door that create an open and interactive environment for pedestrians that adds a social dimension to the streetscape surrounding St. James Square. The complex’s design does not include details in common with other historic structures in the historic district. The window surrounds are prominently displayed. The complex’s stone façades contain strong vertical elements between the windows. The façade on St. John Street has prominent horizontal stone banding near the top of the building that echo the more traditional cornice lines of the contributing buildings in the St. James Historic District.
Roof-mounted equipment will not be visible from St. James Square.
The complex’s colors are compatible with the contemporary design of the building and do not intrude on the historic district’s integrity of setting.
Signs • Signs should be placed on the first floors of structures.
• Signs should be attached to the building face, non-illuminated, and either made of metal or etched into the building wall. • Text should be limited to building name and/or address. Landscaping • Setback areas should be landscaped. • Landscape unity within the District should be sought by repetition of plant materials and in keeping with the character found in the Park or that of the sites with contributing structures. • St. James Park is the focus of the District with the transition of the park to surrounding properties created by the existing planting strip with streets trees and existing lawns areas and planting within the setbacks of all the historical structures. Where street trees are missing on surrounding properties fronting the park, additional trees should be required with development permits.
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
Although the "SQUARES" Skyline Sign (SL-02) which is oriented toward the church is located above the one story level, it is situated high on the complex to prevent disruption to adjacent buildings. The vertically aligned "SQUARES" sign (SL-01) facing 1st Street is above the first floor. The “SQUARES” Skyline Sign (SL-02) will have orange halo-lit letters and the "SQUARES" Skyline Sign (SL-01) facing 1st Street will have white halo-lit letters. Soft backlighting of letters will provide visibility of signage in the evening while remaining unobtrusive to surrounding buildings. Down lighting and up lighting will not be utilized. The text of the signs will reflect the complex’s name: “Squares.”
The complex’s design includes minimal setback and no landscaping.
The complex’s design does not include plants.
The complex’s design does not include trees.
10
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS BUILDING IMPACT ASSESSMENT The southwestern corner of the project will be constructed adjacent to P-43-002883, the Knights of Columbus building, at 34-40 First Street. This four-story, Renaissance Revival-styled concrete building was designed by architect Leo J. Devlin, constructed in 1926, and is designated as City Historic Landmark #HL01-135. In accordance with California Public Resources Code 5024.1(5), “Local landmarks or historic properties designated under any municipal or county ordinance” are eligible for inclusion in the California Register. The project’s potential visual impact to the Knights of Columbus building is analyzed below, in accordance with CEQA guidelines at §15064.5(b)(2), which state that “The significance of an historical resource is materially impaired when a project (A) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; or (B) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to section 5020.1(K) of the Public Resources Code…” The project will not physically alter the Knights of Columbus building but it will alter the setting of building. Setting is defined as “the physical environment of a historic property” and “refers to the character of the place in which the property played its historical role” (National Park Service 1997). The analysis presented below considers the project’s effects to the physical setting of the Knights of Columbus building. The Knights of Columbus building is situated in a highly developed downtown urban environment adjacent to a busy street with vehicular traffic and a light rail train system. To the south of the building is a 10-story National- and California Register-eligible “Commercial Building,” at 28 1st Street; to the east is a four-story brick and concrete building at 31 N. 2nd Street; to the west is 1st Street and two-story commercial buildings; and to the north, within the project site, is a series of oneand two-story commercial buildings. The buildings to the east and north lack architectural distinction and are not visually consistent with the massing and form of the Knights of Columbus building. Removal and replacement of these buildings with the proposed Marshall Squares complex would not diminish any qualities of the Knights of Columbus building that make it eligible for inclusion in the California Register. The bulk and scale of the proposed complex is in keeping with that of the Knights of Columbus building as the project features monumental proportions that are more in keeping with the character of the Knights of Columbus building than the one- and two-story buildings currently on the site (see Figure 5). In addition, the 1st Street façade of the complex is characterized by planar, rectilinear surfaces, a subdued color scheme, and a straightforward pattern of fenestration that is in character with that of the Knights of Columbus building.
Summary Construction of the proposed complex adjacent to the Knights of Columbus building, would, in fact, appear to improve the overall architectural setting of the Knights of Columbus building by replacing the current spatial void to the north with a building of comparable scale and monumentality. Construction of the proposed complex would not demolish or materially alter in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of the Knights of Columbus building such as its Renaissance Revivalstyled windows, that convey its historical significance and or that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register. Implementation of the Marshall Squares project will not diminish the California Register eligibility of the Knights of Columbus building and there would be no significant impact to this historical resource with implementation of the project.
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
11
GROUND LEVEL VIEW OF NORTH 1ST STREET PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE WITH VERTICAL RESIDENTIAL MASSING ABOVE
A-3.1
FIGURE 5
Cultural Resources Technical Analysis Marshall Squares Project San Jose, Santa Clara County, California SOURCE: TCA Architects, January 5, 2014. P:\FRC1401\g\Cultural\Figure 5_Contextual Perspectives 3.ai (12/31/2014)
Contextual Perspectives 3
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
PRELIMINARY ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT The records search did not identify archaeological deposits in or adjacent to the project site, but it did identify the project site as sensitive for prehistoric archaeological cultural deposits. Geoarchaeological sensitivity mapping conducted by the California Department of Transportation, District 4, identifies the project site as sensitive for buried prehistoric archaeological deposits. Project excavation for the high-rise building foundations will likely occur at depths greater than those that could be reasonably assumed to have undergone previous disturbance during the 19th and 20th centuries. Therefore, it does not appear that prior ground disturbance can be cited as a factor that would preclude the potential for project construction to encounter intact prehistoric archaeological deposits. The records search also identified the project site as sensitive for historic-period archaeological deposits. The project site is situated in the historic center of San Jose, a location where early Spanish, Mexican, and American settlement occurred. Two adobe buildings were situated on 1st Street to the south of, and in the vicinity of, the project site. Remains of these adobes or associated structures may extend into the project site. In addition to the nearby adobe buildings, the project site has undergone continuous urbanization since 1848. Based on this information about past land uses, a cultural resources study conducted for 80 North 1st Street (APN 467-21-038) in 1982 by Basin Research Associates, Inc., concludes that the parcel is sensitive for historic-period archaeological deposits.
RECOMMENDATIONS Archaeological Cultural Resources The project site has the potential to contain prehistoric and/or historic-period archaeological deposits that may qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA, and that may be encountered during project construction. To identify and avoid or mitigate impacts to such archaeological deposits (should they be present), LSA recommends that a qualified archaeologist monitor construction-related ground disturbance in accordance with an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMEP). The AMEP should include a refined sensitivity to identify areas of heightened archaeological potential; construction worker training and archaeological monitoring protocols; archaeological deposits evaluation and significance thresholds; and provisions for mitigation planning (e.g., data recovery protocol), curation, and tribal coordination. If archaeological cultural resources are identified, a report of findings should be prepared that documents the methods outlined in the AMEP.
Architectural Cultural Resources As none of the buildings in the project site appears eligible for inclusion in the City of San José Historic Resources Inventory, their removal will not result in a significant impact under CEQA. Therefore, no recommendations are necessary for this less than significant impact scenario. Conformity with St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines. The project has been designed to conform to the St. James Square Historic District Design Guidelines and there would be no substantial adverse change in the significance of the historic district. Implementation of the project would not result in a significant impact under CEQA. Therefore, no recommendations are necessary for this less than significant impact scenario.
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
12
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Conformity with Knights of Columbus Building. The project would not adversely impact the setting of the Knights of Columbus building and there would be no substantial adverse change in the significance of the building. Implementation of the project would not result in a significant impact under CEQA. Therefore, no recommendations are necessary for this less than significant impact scenario.
PREPARER’S QUALIFICATIONS This document was prepared by LSA Associate/Architectural Historian and Archaeologist Neal Kaptain. Mr. Kaptain has a Master of Arts degree in Archaeology and Heritage from the University of Leicester, England, and 14 years of experience in California cultural resources management and architectural history. His master’s studies emphasized architecture and his thesis analyzed the architecture of Mission Dolores in San Francisco. Mr. Kaptain meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archeology and Architectural History (48 CFR 44716). He has extensive experience in survey, excavation, historical research, report writing, photography, site mapping, and artifact illustration. He conducts California and National Register cultural resource evaluations of archaeological and built environment resources. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
Neal Kaptain, M.A. Associate/Cultural Resources Manager Architectural Historian/Archaeologist
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
14
ATTACHMENT 1
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 523 SERIES FORMS AND CITY OF SAN JOSÉ HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY EVALUATION TALLY SHEET FOR 50-52 N. FIRST STREET
State of California C The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
PRIMARY RECORD
Primary # HRI # Trinomial NRHP Status Code 6Y
Other Listings Review Code ______ Reviewer ____________________Date Page 1 of 4 Resource Name or #: Knights of Columbus, Coop P1. Other Identifier: None P2. Location: Unrestricted a. County: Santa Clara b. USGS 7.5' Quad: San Jose West Date: 1961 T7 South; R 1 West; Unsectioned land of Pueblo San Jose; Mount Diablo Baseline & Meridian c. Address: 50-52 N. 1st Street City San Jose Zip 95112 d. UTM: NAD 83 Zone 3; Northeast: mE 8700299/mN 5143031 Southeast: mE 8700349/mN 5143079 Southwest: mE 8700251/mN 5143182 Northwest: mE 8700201/mN 5143134 e. Other Locational Data: APN 467-21-020 P3a.
Description: This resource is a single-story commercial building at 50-52 North 1st Street. The building measures 135 feet long by 65 feet wide and comprises 8,835 square feet of floor space. The original façade has been completely obscured by stucco and modern murals on plywood and no longer resembles its original appearance.
P3b.
Resource Attributes: HP6 (Commercial Building)
P4. P5.
Resources Present: Building P5b. Description of Photo: 50-52 N. 1st Street, San Jose, view to east-northeast P6. Date Constructed/Age and Source: Historic 1925 (Office of Historic Preservation Historic Property Directory 2012) P7. Owner and Address: Shon Finch Fairfield Residential Company, LLC 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92121 P8. Recorded by: Neal Kaptain LSA Associates, Inc. 157 Park Place Point Richmond, CA 94801 P9. Date recorded: January 12, 2014 P10. Survey Type: Intensive
P11. Report citation: Dill Design Group 2000 San Jose Downtown Historic Survey for the City of San Jose. Attachments: Location Map Building, Structure, and Object Record DPR 523A (1/95)
L:\Cultural\Forms\DPR Forms\LSA DPR FORMS\PRIMARY.doc (12/22/05)
State of California C The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Primary # HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 4 B1. B2. B3. B4. B5. B6. B7. B8. B9. B10.
NRHP Status Code: 5S2 Resource Name: Knights of Columbus Building, Coop Historic Name: Knights of Columbus Building, Coop Common Name: 50-52 N. 1st Street Original Use: Possibly owned by the Knights of Columbus. Present Use: Vacant. Architectural Style: Commercial Construction History: The building was constructed in 1925. The original façade has been completely obscured by stucco (date unknown) and modern murals and no longer resembles its original appearance. Moved? No Related Features: a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: Unknown Significance: Theme: Commerce Area: Downtown San José Period of Significance: N/A Property Type: Commercial Applicable Criteria: N/A The building at 50-52 N. 1st Street, the Knights of Columbus Building, Coop, does not appear to be significant under criteria 1, 2, 3, or 4 of the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). The building is associated with the general development of downtown San José and may have once been associated with the Knights of Columbus (Criterion 1); research at the San José Public Library California Room did not indicate an association of the property with individuals significant in the past (Criterion 2); the physical attributes of the building and background research indicate that it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual, or possess high artistic values (Criterion 3); and it is not likely to yield information important to history (Criterion 4).
The building’s original appearance has been completely obscured by exterior renovations. Because of this, the building lacks integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and feeling and no longer conveys its association with the early 20th century development of downtown San José or the Knights of Columbus. A study conducted for the San José Downtown Historic Resources Survey Year 2000, prepared by Dill Design Group, Inc., also concluded that the building “appeared to be too modified to warrant evaluation at that time” (Maggi 2015). This property does not appear eligible for inclusion in the California Register. The building was evaluated on the City of San José Historic Resources Inventory tally form and found not eligible for listing in the inventory under the same rationale presented above (see Continuation Sheet, page 4). B11. B12. B13. B14.
Additional Resource Attributes: None References: Maggi, Franklin, Email dated January 12, 2015 to LSA Associates, Inc. architectural historian Neal Kaptain. Remarks: None. Evaluator: Neal Kaptain, M.A. LSA Associates, Inc. 157 Park Place Point Richmond, CA 94801 Date of Evaluation: January 12, 2015 (This space reserved for official comments.)
DPR 523B (1/95)
P:\FRC1401/Marshall Squares/DPRs/50.52.DPRs.pdf
State of California C The Resources Agency
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
LOCATION MAP Page 3 of 4 Map Name: USGS 7.5’ topographic quadrangle: San Jose West. Scale: 1:24,000
DPR 523J (1/95)
Primary # HRI# Trinomial Resource Name: Knights of Columbus, Coop Date of Map: 1961 (PR1980)
State of California The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Primary # HRI#
CONTINUATION SHEET
Trinomial
Page 4 of 4
*Resource Name or # Knights of Columbus Building, Coop
*Recorded by: Neal Kaptain
*Date: 1/12/15
DPR 523L (1/95)
X Continuation
*Required information
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
ATTACHMENT 2
CITY OF SAN JOSÉ HISTORIC RESOURCES INVENTORY EVALUATION TALLY SHEETS FOR 60, 66, 80 AND 90 N. FIRST STREET AND 65 N. SECOND STREET
1/14/15 (P:\FRC1401\FRC1401 Marshall Squares\Revised Cultural Resources Report\Marshall Squares revised technical analysis 1.14.15.docx)
18
CITY OF SAN JOSE HISTORIC EVALUATION TALLY SHEET Historic Resource Name: 60 N. 1st Street (APN 467-21-019) RATING
VALUE
A. VISUAL QUALITY/DESIGN 1. EXTERIOR: undistinguished (door and fenestration not visible) 2. STYLE: commercial 3. DESIGNER: unknown 4. CONSTRUCTION: commonplace construction and materials 5. SUPPORTIVE ELEMENTS: none
FP FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL A:
0 0 0 0 0 0
FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL B:
0 0 0 0 0
B. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION 6. PERSON/ORGANIZATION: none identified
7. EVENT: 20th century development of San José 8. PATTERNS: no notable association 9. AGE: 1955 (Marshall Squares developer's website: Colliers International) C. ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXT
FP 0 0 FP FP 0 SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL A + SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL B: 0 PRELIMINARY TOTAL (A+B+C): 0 VALUE DEDUCTION RATING FP 0.10 0.00 FP 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.00 FP FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 INTEGRITY DEDUCTIONS SUBTOTAL: 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL: 0 RATING VALUE
10. CONTINUITY: not in area of primary or secondary importance 11. SETTING: unimportant 12. FAMILIARITY: inconspicuous
D. INTEGRITY 13. CONDITION: 14. EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS: 15. STRUCTURAL REMOVALS: none
16. SITE: not moved
E. REVERSIBILITY
17. EXTERIOR: reversible/ irreversible
FP
2
F. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/BONUS POINTS
18. INTERIOR/VISUAL QUALITY 19. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION OF INTERIOR 20. INTERIOR ALTERATIONS 21. REVERSIBILITY/INTERIOR 22 NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTER: does not appear eligible
REVIEWED BY: Neal Kaptain, M.A.
Not Applicable
REVERSIBILITY + BONUS POINTS SUBTOTAL: ADJUSTED TOTAL (Plus Bonus Points): DATE: 5/27/14
2 2
CITY OF SAN JOSE HISTORIC EVALUATION TALLY SHEET Historic Resource Name: 66 N. 1st Street (APN 467-21-018) RATING
VALUE
A. VISUAL QUALITY/DESIGN 1. EXTERIOR: undistinguished (façade has recently installed stone cladding and new door and windows) 2. STYLE: commercial 3. DESIGNER: unknown 4. CONSTRUCTION: commonplace construction and materials 5. SUPPORTIVE ELEMENTS: none
FP
0
FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL A:
0 0 0 0 0
FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL B:
0 0 0 0 0
B. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION 6. PERSON/ORGANIZATION: none identified
7. EVENT: 20th century development of San José 8. PATTERNS: no notable association 9. AGE: 1955 (Marshall Squares developer's website: Colliers International) C. ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXT
0 FP FP 0 FP 0 SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL A + SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL B: 0 PRELIMINARY TOTAL (A+B+C): 0 RATING VALUE DEDUCTION FP 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.00 FP FP 0.10 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 INTEGRITY DEDUCTIONS SUBTOTAL: 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL: 0 RATING VALUE
10. CONTINUITY: not in area of primary or secondary importance 11. SETTING: unimportant 12. FAMILIARITY: inconspicuous
D. INTEGRITY 13. CONDITION: 14. EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS: 15. STRUCTURAL REMOVALS: none
16. SITE: not moved
E. REVERSIBILITY
17. EXTERIOR: reversible/ irreversible
FP
2
F. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/BONUS POINTS
18. INTERIOR/VISUAL QUALITY 19. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION OF INTERIOR 20. INTERIOR ALTERATIONS 21. REVERSIBILITY/INTERIOR 22 NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTER: does not appear eligible
REVIEWED BY: Neal Kaptain, M.A.
Not Applicable
REVERSIBILITY + BONUS POINTS SUBTOTAL: ADJUSTED TOTAL (Plus Bonus Points): DATE: 5/27/14
2 2
CITY OF SAN JOSE HISTORIC EVALUATION TALLY SHEET Historic Resource Name: 80 N. 1st Street (APN 467-21-038) RATING
VALUE
A. VISUAL QUALITY/DESIGN 1. EXTERIOR: undistinguished 2. STYLE: commercial 3. DESIGNER: unknown 4. CONSTRUCTION: commonplace construction and materials 5. SUPPORTIVE ELEMENTS: none
FP FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL A:
0 0 0 0 0 0
FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL B:
0 0 0 0 0
B. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION 6. PERSON/ORGANIZATION: none identified
7. EVENT: 20th century development of San José 8. PATTERNS: no notable association 9. AGE: 1982 (Marshall Squares developer's website: Colliers International) C. ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXT
FP 0 0 FP FP 0 SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL A + SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL B: 0 PRELIMINARY TOTAL (A+B+C): 0 VALUE DEDUCTION RATING FP 0.10 0.00 FP 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.00 FP FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 INTEGRITY DEDUCTIONS SUBTOTAL: 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL: 0 RATING VALUE
10. CONTINUITY: not in area of primary or secondary importance 11. SETTING: unimportant 12. FAMILIARITY: inconspicuous
D. INTEGRITY 13. CONDITION: 14. EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS: 15. STRUCTURAL REMOVALS: none
16. SITE: not moved
E. REVERSIBILITY
17. EXTERIOR: reversible/ irreversible
FP
2
F. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/BONUS POINTS
18. INTERIOR/VISUAL QUALITY 19. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION OF INTERIOR 20. INTERIOR ALTERATIONS 21. REVERSIBILITY/INTERIOR 22 NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTER: does not appear eligible
REVIEWED BY: Neal Kaptain, M.A.
Not Applicable
REVERSIBILITY + BONUS POINTS SUBTOTAL: ADJUSTED TOTAL (Plus Bonus Points): DATE: 5/27/14
2 2
CITY OF SAN JOSE HISTORIC EVALUATION TALLY SHEET Historic Resource Name: 90 N. 1st Street (APN 467-21-038) RATING
VALUE
A. VISUAL QUALITY/DESIGN FP FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL A:
0 0 0 0 0 0
FP 7. EVENT: 20th century development of San José FP 8. PATTERNS: non-contributor to St. James Square Historic District FP 9. AGE: 1982 (Marshall Squares developer's website: Colliers International) FP SUBTOTAL B: C. ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXT
0 0 0 0 0
1. EXTERIOR: undistinguished 2. STYLE: commercial 3. DESIGNER: unknown 4. CONSTRUCTION: commonplace construction and materials 5. SUPPORTIVE ELEMENTS: none B. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION 6. PERSON/ORGANIZATION: none identified
FP 0 0 FP FP 0 SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL A + SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL B: 0 PRELIMINARY TOTAL (A+B+C): 0 RATING VALUE DEDUCTION FP 0.10 0.00 FP 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.00 FP FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 INTEGRITY DEDUCTIONS SUBTOTAL: 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL: 0.00 RATING VALUE
10. CONTINUITY: non-contributor to St. James Square Historic District 11. SETTING: adjacent to Trinity Episcopal Church 12. FAMILIARITY: inconspicuous
D. INTEGRITY 13. CONDITION: 14. EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS: 15. STRUCTURAL REMOVALS: none
16. SITE: not moved
E. REVERSIBILITY
17. EXTERIOR: reversible/ irreversible
FP
2
F. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/BONUS POINTS
18. INTERIOR/VISUAL QUALITY 19. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION OF INTERIOR 20. INTERIOR ALTERATIONS 21. REVERSIBILITY/INTERIOR
Not Applicable
22 NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTER: non-contributor to St. James Square Historic District REVERSIBILITY + BONUS POINTS SUBTOTAL: ADJUSTED TOTAL (Plus Bonus Points): REVIEWED BY: Neal Kaptain, M.A. DATE: 5/27/14
2 2
CITY OF SAN JOSE HISTORIC EVALUATION TALLY SHEET Historic Resource Name: 65 N. 2nd Street (APN 467-21-030) RATING
VALUE
A. VISUAL QUALITY/DESIGN 1. EXTERIOR: undistinguished 2. STYLE: commercial 3. DESIGNER: unknown 4. CONSTRUCTION: commonplace construction and materials 5. SUPPORTIVE ELEMENTS: none
FP FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL A:
0 0 0 0 0 0
FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL B:
0 0 0 0 0
B. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION 6. PERSON/ORGANIZATION: none identified
7. EVENT: 20th century development of San José 8. PATTERNS: no notable association 9. AGE: 1954 (1958 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map) C. ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXT
FP 0 0 FP FP 0 SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL A + SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL B: 0 PRELIMINARY TOTAL (A+B+C): 0 VALUE DEDUCTION RATING FP 0.10 0.00 FP 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.00 FP FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 FP 0.40 0.00 INTEGRITY DEDUCTIONS SUBTOTAL: 0.00 ADJUSTED TOTAL: 0.00 RATING VALUE
10. CONTINUITY: adjacent to St. James Historic District 11. SETTING: adjacent to St. James Historic District 12. FAMILIARITY: inconspicuous
D. INTEGRITY 13. CONDITION: 14. EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS: 15. STRUCTURAL REMOVALS: none
16. SITE: not moved
E. REVERSIBILITY
17. EXTERIOR: reversible/ irreversible
FP
2
F. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/BONUS POINTS
18. INTERIOR/VISUAL QUALITY 19. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION OF INTERIOR 20. INTERIOR ALTERATIONS 21. REVERSIBILITY/INTERIOR
Not Applicable
22 NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTER: REVERSIBILITY + BONUS POINTS SUBTOTAL: ADJUSTED TOTAL (Plus Bonus Points): REVIEWED BY: Neal Kaptain, M.A. DATE: 5/27/14
2 2
CITY OF SAN JOSE HISTORIC EVALUATION TALLY SHEET Historic Resource Name: 50-52 N. 1st Street (APN 467-21-020) ("Knights of Columbus Coop") RATING VALUE A. VISUAL QUALITY/DESIGN 1. EXTERIOR: undistinguished (small portion of orginal, vertical tiles at left) 2. STYLE: commercial 3. DESIGNER: unknown 4. CONSTRUCTION: commonplace construction and materials 5. SUPPORTIVE ELEMENTS: none
FP FP FP FP FP SUBTOTAL A:
0 0 0 0 0 0
G FP G G SUBTOTAL B:
7 0 5 3 15
B. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION 6. PERSON/ORGANIZATION: Knights of Columbus
7. EVENT: 20th century development of San José 8. PATTERNS: secondary association downtown San José's development. 9. AGE: 1925 C. ENVIRONMENTAL/CONTEXT
FP 0 FP 0 FP 0 SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL A + SUBTOTAL C: 0 SUBTOTAL B: 15 PRELIMINARY TOTAL (A+B+C): 15 RATING VALUE DEDUCTION FP 0.10 1.50 FP 0.20 3.00
10. CONTINUITY: not in area of primary or secondary importance 11. SETTING: unimportant 12. FAMILIARITY: inconspicuous
D. INTEGRITY 13. CONDITION: 14. EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS: stucco façade added Addition of the stucco façade has so altered the building's appearance that it no longer conveys its historical association with the Knights of Columbus. 15. STRUCTURAL REMOVALS: none
16. SITE: not moved
0.10 FP FP 0.40 FP 0.40 FP 0.40 INTEGRITY DEDUCTIONS SUBTOTAL: ADJUSTED TOTAL: RATING
1.50 0.00 6.00 6.00 18.00 -3 VALUE
E. REVERSIBILITY
17. EXTERIOR: reversible/ irreversible
FP
2
F. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS/BONUS POINTS
18. INTERIOR/VISUAL QUALITY 19. HISTORY/ASSOCIATION OF INTERIOR 20. INTERIOR ALTERATIONS 21. REVERSIBILITY/INTERIOR 22 NATIONAL OR CALIFORNIA REGISTER: does not appear eligible
REVIEWED BY: Neal Kaptain, M.A.
Not Applicable
REVERSIBILITY + BONUS POINTS SUBTOTAL:
2
ADJUSTED TOTAL (Plus Bonus Points): DATE: 1/5/15
-1
