Exhibit 2: Amended Modified Negative Declaration CEQA — Alameda City Council, July 1, 2025 (part 1 of 4)

IniƟal Study/Addendum to the
Jean Sweeney Open Space Park
IniƟal Study/MiƟgated NegaƟve DeclaraƟon
for the Alameda AquaƟc Center
June 2025
SCH #2015032026
In ConsultaƟon with
Prepared by
EXHIBIT 2

Alameda Aquatic Center i Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table of Contents
Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose ............................................................................................. 1 Purpose of the Initial Study/Addendum ............................................................................... 1 Notice of Determination ...................................................................................................... 2 Section 2.0 Project Information ...................................................................................................... 3 Project Title .......................................................................................................................... 3 Lead Agency Contact ............................................................................................................ 3 Project Sponsor .................................................................................................................... 3 Project Location ................................................................................................................... 3 Section 3.0 Project Description ....................................................................................................... 8 Project Location ................................................................................................................... 8 Summary of Approved Project ............................................................................................. 8 Proposed Changes to the Approved Project ......................................................................... 8 Section 4.0 Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Impact Discussion ........................................... 17 Resource Areas Not Analyzed Further ................................................................................ 18 Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................... 30 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 37 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 51 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................. 58 Energy ................................................................................................................................ 63 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................... 69 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................ 76 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................... 84 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................. 96 Noise ................................................................................................................................ 105 Public Services .................................................................................................................. 125 Recreation ........................................................................................................................ 131 Transportation ................................................................................................................. 134 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................ 143 Section 5.0 References ................................................................................................................ 154 Section 6.0 Lead Agency and Consultants ................................................................................... 157 Lead Agency ..................................................................................................................... 157

Alameda Aquatic Center ii Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Consultants ...................................................................................................................... 157 Section 7.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................... 158

Alameda Aquatic Center iii Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table of Contents

Figures

Figure 2.4-1: Regional Map ................................................................................................................. 5 Figure 2.4-2: Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2.4-3: Aerial Map and Surrounding Land Uses ......................................................................... 7 Figure 3.2-1: Conceptual Site Plan (Approved Project) ...................................................................... 10 Figure 3.3-1: Conceptual Site Plan (Modified Project) ....................................................................... 11 Figure 3.3-2: Conceptual Building Elevations (Modified Project) ...................................................... 12 Figure 4.4-1: Locations of Project Construction Site, Off-Site Sensitive Receptors, and Maximum TAC Impacts (MEI) .................................................................................................................................... 48 Figure 4.4-2: Project Site and Nearby TAC and PM2.5 Sources ........................................................... 49 Figure 4.12-1: Noise Measurement Locations ................................................................................. 111

Photos

Photos 1 & 2 .................................................................................................................................... 32 Photos 3 & 4 .................................................................................................................................... 33 Photos 5 & 6 .................................................................................................................................... 34

Tables

Table 3.3-1: Proposed Hours of Operation ........................................................................................ 15 Table 4.3-1: Sources and Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants and Toxic Air Contaminants ........ 38 Table 4.3-2: Bay Area Air District Air Quality Significance Thresholds ............................................... 43 Table 4.3-3: Bay Area Air District Health Risks and Hazards Thresholds ............................................ 43 Table 4.3-4: Construction Period Emissions (pounds/day) ................................................................ 44 Table 4.3-5: Construction Risk Impacts at the Off-Site MEI ............................................................... 47 Table 4.3-6: Impacts from Combined Sources at Off-Site MEI ........................................................... 50 Table 4.6-1: Estimated Annual Energy Use ........................................................................................ 67 Table 4.11-2: Receiving Land Use Noise Level Standards, dB(A) – Single or Multiple Family Residential, School, Hospital, Church, or Public Library Properties ................................................. 108

Alameda Aquatic Center iv Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.11-3: Receiving Land Use Noise Level Standards, dB(A) – Commercial Properties ............. 108 Table 4.11-4: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurements (dBA) ................................................ 110 Table 4.11-5: Standards Applied from 10:15 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.to Each of the Surrounding Receptors . .................................................................................................................................. 115 Table 4.11-6: Operational Noise Levels Due to Rooftop Mechanical Equipment ............................ 117 Table 4.11-7: Operational Noise Levels for the Aquatics Center on Typical Days ............................ 119 Table 4.11-8: Operational Noise Levels for the Aquatics Center during Swim Meet Tournaments . 121 Table 4.11-9: Operational Noise Levels for the Aquatics Center during Small Events ..................... 122

Appendices

Appendix A: Resolution No. 14955
Appendix B: Construction Air Quality Assessment
Appendix C: Hydrogeological Evaluation
Appendix D: Removal Action Report
Appendix E: Noise and Vibration Assessment
Appendix F: Transportation Analysis

All appendices are incorporated herein by reference.

Alameda Aquatic Center 1 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose
Purpose of the Initial Study/Addendum
This Initial Study (IS)/Addendum has been prepared by the City of Alameda as the Lead Agency, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations §15000 et seq.), and the regulation and policies of the City of Alameda, California.

On July 15, 2014, the City of Alameda City Council approved the Jean Sweeney Park Master Plan project (hereinafter referred to as the “approved project) and adopted Resolution 14955 approving the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (SCH # 2015032026). The approved project consists of the development of 22 acres of land with six primary uses: walking and bike trails, a community garden, natural playgrounds, open lawn, picnic areas, and natural open space.

Subsequent to the adoption of the Initial Study/MND and approval of the project, changes have been proposed (hereinafter also referred to as the “modified project”), resulting in the need for this IS/Addendum. The modified project would develop a 2.35-acre portion of the 22-acre site with an aquatic center and associated improvements. The approved project proposed to develop the 2.35- acre portion of the site with a park structure, parking lot, fruit tree orchard and lawn area.

The CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 states that when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for that project unless the Lead Agency determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:

(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration 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 or Negative Declaration 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 or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;

Alameda Aquatic Center 2 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
(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.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states that the Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously adopted MND if only minor or technical changes are necessary or if none of the conditions described in 15162 (see above) calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.

Based on the proposed project modifications, knowledge of the project site and surrounding area, and the following discussion and analysis, the modified project would not result in a new or substantially more severe significant impact than previously disclosed in the adopted IS/MND.

Therefore, the standard for subsequent environmental review has not been met, and an Addendum has been prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

This Addendum, which is to be considered together with the IS/MND prepared for the approved project, will not be formally circulated for public review, but will be attached to the IS/MND, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(c).

Notice of Determination
If the project is approved, the City will file a Notice of Determination (NOD), which will be available for public inspection and posted within 24 hours of receipt at the County Clerk’s Office for 30 days.

The filing of the NOD starts a 30-day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15075(g)).

Alameda Aquatic Center 3 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Section 2.0 Project Information
Project Title
Alameda Aquatic Center

Lead Agency Contact
Allen Tai, Director
City of Alameda Planning Building Transportation
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
(510) 747-6800
[email protected]

Steven Buckley, Planning Services Manager
City of Alameda Planning Building Transportation
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
(510) 747-6800
[email protected]

Henry Dong, Planner III
City of Alameda Planning Building Transportation
2263 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
(510) 747-6800
[email protected]

Project Sponsor
Justin Long, Recreation and Parks Director
City of Alameda
Recreation and Parks Department
2226 Santa Clara Avenue
Alameda, CA 94501
(510) 747-7570
[email protected]

Project Location

Alameda Aquatic Center 4 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
The 2.35-acre project site is located at 800 Atlantic Avenue in the City of Alameda at the western end of the Jean Sweeney Open Space.

A regional map and vicinity map of the project site are shown in Figure 2.4-1 and Figure 2.4-2., respectively. An aerial photograph with surrounding land uses is shown in Figure 2.4-3.

South San
Francisco
Daly City
San
Francisco
Alameda
San
Leandro
San Ramon
Danville
Moraga
>ĂĨĂǇĞƩĞ
Walnut
Creek
Hayward
Oakland
Emeryville
Berkeley
Albany
880 580
680
680
580
580
80 80
280
101
101
24 13
Sausalito
Project Site
Paciﬁc Ocean
San JoséSan José
FremontFremont
San BrunoSan Bruno
Daly CityDaly City
Redwood CityRedwood City
HaywardHayward
ConcordConcord
OaklandOakland
San FranciscoSan Francisco
Marin City
San Rafael
Novato
Petaluma
Santa Rosa
Napa
Vallejo
Suisun City
RichmondMarin City
San Rafael
Novato
Petaluma
Santa Rosa
Napa
Vallejo
Suisun City
Richmond
Mountain ViewMountain View
San
Francisco
Bay
San
Pablo
Bay
CuperƟnoCuperƟno
San RamonSan Ramon
Project SiteProject Site
0 .5 1 2 4 Miles
REGIONAL MAP FIGURE 2.4-1
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
5IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025
Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway
Sherman Street
AtlanƟc Avenue
Independence Drive
Marina Village Parkway
Challenge Drive
Wilma Chan Way
Webster Street
Buena Vista Avenue
Paciﬁc Avenue
Eagle Avenue
Eagle Avenue
Gresham Drive
Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway
Sherman S
treet
AtlanƟc Avenue
Independence Drive
Marina Village Parkway
Challenge Drive
Wilma Chan Way
Webster
Street
Buena Vista Avenue
Paciﬁc Avenue
Eagle Avenue
Eagle Avenue
Gresham Drive
Project Boundary
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS
0 100 400 600 1,000 Feet
VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2.4-2
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
6IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025
Housing Authority
of the
City of Alameda
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
Commercial
Commercial
Oﬃce
Oﬃce
College of Alameda
AtlanƟc Avenue
Wilma Chan Way
Thau Way
Eagle Avenue
8th Street
9th Street Wood Street
Mason Street
Stewart Court
Rose
ﬁeld Loop
BartleƩ
Drive
AtlanƟc Avenue
Wilma Chan Way
Thau Way
Eagle Avenue
8th St
reet
9th Street Wood Street
Mason St
reet
Stewart Court
Rose
ﬁeld Loop
BartleƩ
Drive
Photo Date: Apr . 2022
0 25 150 200 300 Feet
Project Boundary
Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Dec. 20, 2024.

AERIAL MAP AND SURROUNDING LAND USES FIGURE 2.4-3
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
7IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025

Alameda Aquatic Center 8 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Section 3.0 Project Description
Project Location
The project site is located at 800 Atlantic Avenue in the City of Alameda, east of the intersection of Wilma Chan Way and Atlantic Avenue. The project site is part of the larger 22-acre Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. The 2.35-acre portion of the site is currently vacant and undeveloped.

Surrounding land uses include residential and office to the north, residential to the south, Jean Sweeney Open Space Park to the east, and residential and commercial to the west.

Summary of Approved Project
The approved project from 2014 consists of a new 22-acre community park and open space, which would primarily support passive recreation, with some active recreation uses. The approved Park's Master Plan features six types of uses including walking and biking trails, natural open space, picnic areas, community garden, natural playgrounds, and open lawn areas. Active uses would generally be located towards the perimeter of the park, surrounding passive uses in the central area.

The approved project proposed to develop the 2.35-acre portion of the site with a restroom structure
1, 60-space parking lot, fruit tree orchard, entry garden, lawn area, and picnic tables (refer to Figure 3.2-1).2

Proposed Changes to the Approved Project

3.3.1 Proposed Development
The City of Alameda Recreation and Parks Department (ARPD) proposes to develop the 2.35-acre site with a new all-electric aquatic center, including a one-story building, one 30-meter competition swimming pool, one activity pool, and spectator seating (refer to Figure 3.3-1). The aquatic center is anticipated to serve as the primary swim center for the City of Alameda and would primarily be used for practices, swim meets, and public swimming.

The aquatic center would include an approximately 5,740 square foot, one-story, L-shaped building that would house a multi-purpose room, a director/manager’s office, staff break room, restrooms and locker rooms, lifeguard and first aid room, electrical, and mechanical rooms. 3 The building
would have a maximum height of 22 feet to the top of parapet. Proposed elevations are shown in Figure 3.3-2.

1 The intended use of the building included restrooms, storage, and trash collection. 2 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. Figure 2-3.
3 The modified project would relocate the approved storage and relocate into smaller shed structures.

Alameda Aquatic Center 9 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
The new aquatic center would house two outdoor pools, including one 30-meter swimming pool (approximately 7,500 square feet) and one activity pool (approximately 3,300 square feet). The aquatic center would include a total of 180 spectator seats around the perimeter of the 30-meter swimming pool. The typical regular hourly attendance is expected to be approximately 35 to 45 people. The aquatic center would have amplified sound during events and competitions. A permanent scoreboard would be mounted on the pool storage enclosure and would only be used during the competitions.

There would be perforated wind-wall around the exterior of the facility serving as the perimeter fencing. The fencing along the pool storage at the northern property line will be constructed of solid corrugated metal panels. It would be a maximum height of 15 feet with vegetation planting along the base and would not be lighted.

The service enclosure/trash would be located in the parking lot to the east side. It would be serviceable from both sides and approximately 10 feet tall. There would be pool storage on the south side of the building.

3.3.2 Site Access and Parking
Access to the aquatic center would be provided via a new project driveway off Atlantic Avenue.

Consistent with the approved project, a 60-parking space surface parking lot would be constructed to the east of the aquatic center. The modified project proposes adding 11 additional parking spaces, for a total of 71parking spaces (including four accessible spaces and seven electric vehicle [EV] charging spaces). The adjacent parking lot to the north for the College of Alameda would accommodate 125 shared spaces for overflow parking.
4 This would be available weekends, and for
special events.

The project would also include ten long-term bicycle parking spaces (south of the building) and 100 short-term bicycle spaces (west of the building).

Dependent on the availability of funding, the proposed project will include solar panels over the parking lot. If funding is not available, this aspect of the project may be constructed at a later date when funding becomes available. The solar structures would be made of steel posts and beams to support the solar array. The structures would be a maximum 18 to 20 feet tall. The array would cover the parking spaces leaving the parking path of travel open to the sky. The solar array would also have thermal heat sinks to collect thermal energy and transfer it to the mechanical room to assist heating of the water. Solar panels would also be located on the roof of the locker rooms and administrative space. There would also be solar panels over the spectator seating and pool storage area.

4 The City will enter into a shared parking agreement with the College of Alameda.

Source: KK Design Studio.

ALAMEDA JEAN SWEENEY OPEN SPACE PARK
Atlantic Avenue
Constitution Way
Eagle AvenueEagle Avenue
Eighth Street
Nason Street
Ninth Street
Wood Street
Chapin Street
St. Charles Street
Bay Street
Sherman
Bay/Eagle
Community
Garden
Fruit T ree Orchard
Existing Oak T rees
Park Structure
1 Mile T rail & Bike Loop
Public Art
Water & Dry Creek
Foot Bridge
Plaza or Special Paving
Natural Landscape Project Site
Lawn Area
Existing Vegetation
Community Garden
0 100 200 400' 1” = 100’ SCALE
1 min. WalkN
Key
Parking Lot
(60 parking spaces)
Parking Lot
(60 parking spaces)
Parking Lot
(60 parking spaces)
Parking Lot
(60 parking spaces)
0 100 200 400 Feet
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN (APPROVED PROJECT) FIGURE 3.2-1
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
10IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025
Source: ELS Architecture and Urban Design, November 27, 2024. 0 10 20 60 Feet0 10 20 60 Feet
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN (MODIFIED PROJECT) FIGURE 3.3-1
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
11IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025

CHA NGE

OF PLAN E

CHA NGE

OF PLAN E
5' - 6"5' - 6"5' - 6"
3' - 8"
10' - 0"
13' - 6"

LEVEL 1
0’-0”
LEVEL 1
0’-0”
LEVEL 1
0’-0”
LEVEL 1
0’-0”

PO R OUS
10' - 0"

CHA NGE

OF P LANE
TY P. U.O .N.
8' - 0"

SO LI D
5' - 0"
A.F. F. ACTI VITY POOL DE CK
13' - 6"
8' - 0"8' - 0"
A.F. F. ACTI VITY POOL DE CK
10' - 0"
CHA NGE OF P LANECHA NGE OF P LANE TY P. U.O .N.
8' - 0"

PO R OUS
10' - 0"

SO LI D
5' - 0"
A.F. F. ACTI VITY POOL DE CK
13' - 6"
A.F .F. C OMP ET ITI ON PO OL DE CK
11' - 6"
10' - 0"
6' - 2" 6' - 2"

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION
CONCEPTUAL BUILDING ELEVATIONS (MODIFIED PROJECT) FIGURE 3.3-2 Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
12IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025

Alameda Aquatic Center 13 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

3.3.3 Lighting
The project proposes to provide lighting for the aquatic center through a combination of 30-feet tall pole lighting, illuminated building signage, wall grazer lighting, recessed down lighting, and wall mounted fixture lighting. All lighting would be down lights and the pools would have lighting in the water. The building will have exterior low-level lighting along the perimeter and walkways leading to the entrance. Typical lighting would occur on the pool deck and in the pools during winter months and dusk hours. The main pool deck lighting would go dark when the facility closed for the day. The building’s down lighting would remain on for security purposes.

3.3.4 Landscaping and Stormwater
The project would include an entrance plaza to the east of the building that would include the bike parking. There would also be information kiosks along the north side of the plaza displaying information about the electrification of the facility and Alameda Municipal Power’s programs for decarbonizing Alameda homes and businesses. The plaza would include landscaping plants, shrubs, and a small turf area for people to gather before entering the facility.

The project would remove eight existing trees. Seven on-site trees would be retained, including a large oak tree near the entrance plaza. The project would plant approximately 50 new trees on the site in the parking lot and along the perimeter fence, for a net increase of 42 trees at the site. The project would also provide landscaping in the form of a variety of trees and shrub plantings.

Following completion of the project, stormwater would be treated via an onsite bioretention area.

3.3.5 Roadway Improvements
The modified projects include implementation of the following roadway, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facility improvements:

• Install R26(S) (CA) “No Stopping Anytime” signs and paint red curb on both sides of Atlantic Avenue along Project frontage to prohibit vehicles from using the existing Class II bicycle facilities for pickups and drop-offs.
• Along the west side of the parking lot, Install R25(C) (CA) “Passenger Loading Only” signs and paint the curb white to discourage parking.
• Install the following at the proposed crosswalk across Atlantic Avenue between the Marina Village Research Park and the Project Driveways:
o High-visibility crosswalk markings
o Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) on both sides of the crosswalk o A raised center median between the Marina Village Research Park and the Project Driveways
• Stripe a 100-foot westbound left-turn lane with a 60-foot taper along Atlantic Avenue at the Project driveway.

Alameda Aquatic Center 14 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

3.3.6 Mechanical Equipment
The proposed building would contain mechanical equipment associated with the pool operations.

Additionally, an enclosure containing a transformer is shown at the north end of the pool deck.

The roof of the mechanical equipment building would include two exhaust fans, an HVAC rooftop unit, 25 pool heating heat-pump chillers, and two heat pump water heaters. The roof of the building shows two variable refrigerant volume condensing units, one variable refrigerant flow HVAC unit, a gravity relief exhaust, and a gravity intake vent.

3.3.7 Green Building and Energy Efficiency
The project includes the following green building and energy efficiency measures:

• All electric heat-pump equipment.
• Water efficient fixtures to reduce potable water use. • Water efficient landscaping to reduce irrigation by 50 percent. • Recycled water for landscaping.
• Energy efficient building performance.
• On-site renewable energy sources/green power (if funding is available). • Low Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) emitting building materials (i.e., adhesives, sealants, paints, coatings, carpet, and composite wood).
• Computer system to control lighting and temperature.

3.3.8 Chemical Equipment and Storage
Pool chemicals include chlorine5, acid (such as muriatic acid6), algaecides7, stabilizers, and other water treatment agents. The project would maintain the following storage levels for pool equipment:
• Chlorine: up to 500 gallons of chlorine (liquid or in solid form). • Acid: approximately 350 gallons of muriatic acid, which is used periodically to maintain pH levels.
• Other Chemicals: Smaller amounts of algaecides, clarifiers, and stabilizers are stored, often in solid or concentrated liquid form.

Pool chemicals are carefully tracked to prevent overstocking or shortages. The project would implement software solutions to monitor usage and reorder chemicals. The chemical levels in the

5 This is the most common disinfectant used to kill bacteria, viruses, and algae in pool water. It’s often available in liquid, granular, or tablet form.
6 Muriatic acid (hydrochloric acid) is commonly used to lower the pH level of pool water and reduce alkalinity.

Managing pH and alkalinity levels is key to ensuring the effectiveness of chlorine and avoiding issues like corrosion or skin irritation.
7 Algaecides are chemicals used to kill or prevent the growth of algae in various water bodies, including pools, ponds, and other aquatic systems.

Alameda Aquatic Center 15 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
pool would be regularly monitored, usually on a daily or weekly basis, to maintain water safety and quality. Spill kits and trained personnel would be required to handle accidental chemical leaks.

Pool chemicals are typically delivered in bulk by specialized chemical suppliers. Transportation of such chemicals is regulated to ensure safety, especially since chemicals like chlorine and acid are classified as hazardous materials. Chemicals are shipped in proper containers with specific labels, and in compliance with federal regulations such as the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA) in the U.S.

The project would be required to implement a Hazardous Business Plan to ensure compliance, safety, and environmental protection. The plan would include:

• Safety Protocols:
o Chemical safety training for employees, especially on handling chlorine and acids. o Personal protective equipment (PPE) like gloves, goggles, and respiratory protection. o Proper ventilation systems for indoor pools or storage areas. • Spill Response: Emergency procedures for handling chemical spills or leaks, including having neutralizing agents and trained staff on-site.
• Waste Disposal: Regulations for the proper disposal of chemicals, especially for chlorine and acid waste, to avoid environmental harm.
• Emergency Plans: Detailed steps to follow in case of a fire, chemical exposure, or other hazardous incidents. These include evacuation routes, emergency contact numbers, and access to local emergency response teams.

The project would comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations, and local safety laws, ensuring safe chemical handling, storage, and disposal.

3.3.9 Operations
The proposed aquatic center would be open seven days a week (except on City holidays). The proposed hours of operation are summarized in Table 3.3-1 below.

Table 3.3-1: Proposed Hours of Operation
Monday-Friday 5:30AM – 9:30PM
Saturday 7:00AM – 9:30PM
Sunday 7:00AM – 8:00PM

The aquatic center would be primarily used for swim lessons, practices, swim meets, and public swimming. As described above in Section 3.3.1, the pool deck and spectator seating would have a maximum occupancy of approximately 180 people. However, the typical hourly attendance is expected to be 35 to 45 people. It is anticipated that the aquatic center would have approximately

Alameda Aquatic Center 16 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
100,000 to 150,000 visitors a year, with a typical summer daily average of 450 visitors, 190 weekday average, and 225 weekend average.

Events that have the potential to generate up to 500 visitors include swim meet competitions that would occur approximately twice per year. The swim meet events are typically one to two days long and would take place primarily on weekends during the hours of 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The swim meet events would have approximately eight to ten teams with six to ten members per team. Not all teams would be present at the same time but rather staggered throughout the day with a maximum of 180 attendees on site at any given time. Most teams would carpool or use vans.

The facility would also host smaller community events that would be held six to eight times per year with approximately 100 people in attendance. These user events are community events such as watching a movie in the pool or holiday events such as Halloween or Santa events. These events usually occur on a Saturday or Sunday between noon and 4:00 PM with approximately 100 or less people. Movies in the pool events would take place during operating hours in the evening.

Water polo tournaments are not scheduled at this facility but may be requested by the School District if the District’s pools are not available. Water polo games would include 10 to 12 players per team with approximately 20 spectating viewers, or approximately 40 people per hour throughout the day. These are typically one to two day events that usually occur on the weekend.

The facility would employ three full-time staff and would have part-time staff supporting programming. During the winter season, part-time staff numbers would range from five to 10 per day with three staff members on deck per hour per day. The summer part-time staffing would range from 20 to 30 per day, with 10 to 15 staff members on deck per hour.

3.3.10 Construction
It is anticipated that construction would take a total of approximately 20 months. Construction phases of the proposed project would include site preparation, grading/excavation, building construction, and paving. The modified project would adhere to Chapter 4-10.5 of the City’s Municipal Code, which limits construction work hours to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays.

Alameda Aquatic Center 17 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Section 4.0 Environmental Setting, Checklist,
and Impact Discussion
This section presents the discussion of impacts related to the following environmental subjects in their respective subsections:

4.1 Resource Areas Not Analyzed Further

4.2 Aesthetics

4.3 Air Quality

4.4 Biological Resources

4.5 Cultural Resources

4.6 Energy

4.7 Geology and Soils

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality

4.11 Noise

4.12 Public Services

4.13 Recreation

4.14 Transportation

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems

The discussion for each environmental subject includes the following subsections:

• Environmental Setting – This subsection 1) provides a brief overview of relevant plans, policies, and regulations that compose the regulatory framework for the project and 2) describes the existing, physical environmental conditions at the project site and in the surrounding area, as relevant.
• Impact Discussion – This subsection 1) includes the recommended checklist questions from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines to assess impacts and 2) discusses the project’s impact on the environmental subject as related to the checklist questions. For significant impacts, feasible mitigation measures are identified. “Mitigation measures” are measures that will minimize, avoid, or eliminate a significant impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15370).

Mitigation measures are numbered to correspond to the impact they address. For example, MM BIO-1.3 refers to the third mitigation measure for the first impact in the Biological Resources section. This Initial Study/Addendum evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed aquatic center (as described in Section 3.0 Project Description) to determine whether the Project is within the scope of the approved project evaluated in the adopted IS/MND, and to determine whether the project has the potential to result in any new or substantially more severe environmental impacts. In comparing the proposed aquatic center to the approved project, this Initial Study/Addendum uses the following impact determinations:
o New Potentially Significant Impact
o New Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated o New Less than Significant Impact
o Same Impact as Approved Project

Alameda Aquatic Center 18 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
o Less Impact than Approved Project

Adopted IS/MND Mitigation Measures
The adopted IS/MND found that the approved project would not have a significant effect on the environment if the following mitigation measures were incorporated into the project.

Mitigation Measure AIR-1: During active construction, the City shall require construction contractors to implement all the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, listed below:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off- site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints.

This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Alameda Aquatic Center 19 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Mitigation Measure BIO-1a: To the extent practicable, construction activities including vegetation and tree removal, site remediation and grading, building renovation of the former yard house, and new site construction shall be performed between September 1 and January 31 in order to avoid breeding and nesting season for birds. If these activities cannot be performed during this period, preconstruction survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist.

In coordination with the City, surveys shall be performed during breeding bird season (February 1 – August 31) no more than 14 days prior to construction activities listed above in order to locate any active passerine nests within 250 feet of the project site and any active raptor nests within 500 feet of the project site. Surveys shall be performed in accessible areas within 500 feet of the project site and include suitable habitat within line of sight as access is available.

Building renovation, tree and vegetation removal, and new construction activities performed between September 1 and January 31 avoid the general nesting period for birds and therefore would not require pre-construction surveys.

If active nests are found on either the project site or within the 500- foot survey buffer surrounding the project site, no-work buffer zones shall be established around the nests. Buffer distances will consider physical and visual barriers between the active nest and project activities, existing noise sources and disturbance, as well as sensitivity of the bird species to disturbance. Modification of standard buffer distances, 250 feet for active passerine nests and 500 feet for active raptor nests, will be determined by a qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW. No building renovation, vegetation removal, or ground-disturbing activities including remediation or grading shall occur within a buffer zone until young have fledged or the nest is otherwise abandoned as determined by the qualified biologist. If work during the nesting season stops for 14 days or more and then resumes, then nesting bird surveys shall be repeated, to ensure that no new birds have begun nesting in the area.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1b: Potential direct and indirect disturbances to bats shall be identified by locating colonies and instituting protective measures prior to construction. No more than two weeks in advance of initiation of building renovation activities onsite or initiation of construction within 100 feet of trees or structures providing potential bat roosting sites, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for

Alameda Aquatic Center 20 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
bat roosts. No activities that could disturb active roosts shall proceed prior to the completed surveys.

If a maternity colony is located within the project site during pre- construction surveys, the project shall be redesigned to avoid impacts if feasible, and a no- disturbance buffer acceptable in size to the CDFW shall be created around the roost. Bat roosts (maternity or otherwise) initiated during construction are generally presumed to be unaffected by increased noise, vibration, or human activity, and no buffer is necessary as long as roost sites are not directly altered or destroyed. However, the “take” of individuals is still prohibited at any time.

If there is a maternity colony present and the project cannot be redesigned to avoid removal of the tree or structure inhabited by the bats, removal of that tree or renovation of that structure shall not commence until after young are flying (i.e., after July 31, confirmed by a qualified bat biologist) or before maternity colonies form the following year (i.e. prior to March 1).

If a non-maternity roost must be removed as part of the project, the non-maternity roost shall be evicted prior to building renovation by a qualified biologist, using methods such as making holes in the roost to alter the air-flow or creating one-way funnel exits for the bats.

If significant (e.g., maternity roosts or large non-maternity roost sites) bat roosting habitat is destroyed during building renovation/tree removal, artificial bat roosts shall be constructed in an undisturbed area in the project site vicinity away from human activity and at least 200 feet from project demolition/construction activities. The design and location of the artificial bat roost(s) shall be determined by a qualified bat biologist.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2a: Wetland Delineation. In coordination with the City, a qualified wetland ecologist shall conduct a wetland delineation of the 22- acre proposed project site to identify potential waters of the state which may be present. If no waters of the state are identified onsite, no further action is required. Should waters of the state be determined present within the project site, features shall be mapped and documented in a report for submission to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) which retains authority over isolated wetland features.

Alameda Aquatic Center 21 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Mitigation Measure BIO-2b: Wetland Protection. At the project site, the following measures shall be applied to protect state jurisdictional wetlands:
• A protective barrier (such as silt fencing) shall be erected around jurisdictional features identified on the project site to isolate and protect from impact during construction of the park features (e.g. vegetation removal and site grading).
• Signs that read “Environmentally Sensitive Area–Keep Out” shall be installed on the fencing to identify sensitive habitat. • No equipment mobilization, grading, clearing, or storage of equipment or machinery, or similar activity shall occur at the project site until wetland protection fencing has been inspected and approved by a qualified biologist.
• Temporary fencing shall be continuously maintained until all project construction is completed.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2c: Wetland Mitigation. If avoidance of state jurisdictional features found on the property is not feasible under the proposed project, impacts to these features shall be mitigated through one of the following options:
• Onsite mitigation, consisting of creation, restoration, enhancement or preservation, or combination thereof;
• Payment into an approved in-lieu fee program to preserve or restore wetlands in the same watershed;
• Purchase of appropriate amount of credits at an approved wetlands mitigation bank; or
• Off-site mitigation.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Coast Live Oak Tree Protection. The City shall ensure that prior to project development and throughout each phase of project activities that have the potential to result in impacts on coast live oak trees, protected under the City ordinance and located within the project area, the project applicant shall take the following steps to avoid direct and indirect impacts to protected trees:
• A Tree Protection Zone shall be established around each tree to be preserved prior to construction. No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials shall occur within that zone.

Tree Protection Zones shall be established with fencing at the tree dripline in all directions, and remain until construction is complete. Street trees will not be fenced to allow continued vehicle and pedestrian access as necessary. The lower 8- 10’ of protected street tree trunks shall be wrapped with straw wattles (or a similar material). Should excavation be necessary around street tree roots in support of street and sidewalk

Alameda Aquatic Center 22 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
improvements, or should root pruning be necessary, excavation and root pruning shall be monitored by a certified arborist. • Street tree canopy shall be pruned to allow construction and access clearance, under the supervision of a certified arborist, and prior to demolition of existing buildings. Demolition adjacent protected street trees shall be monitored by a certified arborist. • Should protected trees become damaged during construction, tree condition shall be evaluated by a certified arborist and appropriate treatments shall be applied.
• Where feasible, underground utilities, drain lines or irrigation lines shall be routed outside tree protection zones to avoid root damage.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Rehabilitation of Belt Line Yard House. Rehabilitation of the Alameda Belt Line yard house shall conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. The Standards require the preservation of character defining features that convey a building’s historical significance, and offers guidance about appropriate and compatible alterations to historical resources.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological Resources. If prehistoric or historic-period archaeological resources are encountered, all ground disturbing activities within 100 feet shall halt and the City of Alameda shall be notified. A Secretary of the Interior-qualified archaeologist shall inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery.

If it is determined that the project could damage a historical resource or a unique archaeological resource (as defined pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines), mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with PRC Section 21083.2 and Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, with a preference for preservation in place.

Consistent with Section 15126.4(b)(3), this may be accomplished through planning construction to avoid the resource; incorporating the resource within open space; capping and covering the resource; or deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. If avoidance is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a detailed treatment plan in consultation with the City of Alameda and a Native American representative. Treatment of unique archaeological resources shall follow the applicable requirements of PRC Section 21083.2. Treatment for most resources would consist of (but would not be not limited to) sample excavation, artifact collection, site documentation, and historical research, with the aim to target the recovery of important scientific data contained in the

Alameda Aquatic Center 23 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
portion(s) of the significant resource to be impacted by the project.

The treatment plan shall include provisions for analysis of data in a regional context, reporting of results within a timely manner, curation of artifacts and data at an approved facility, and dissemination of reports to local and state repositories, libraries, and interested professionals.

Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. If human remains are encountered, all ground disturbing activities within 100 feet of the find shall halt and the Alameda County Coroner shall be notified immediately. A qualified archaeologist shall also be contacted to evaluate the situation. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. Pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code, the Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Native American Most Likely Descendent to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroner’s authority.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to obtaining a grading or building permit, the City shall obtain a qualified environmental professional to complete any remaining Phase II and remediation actions consistent with the findings and recommendations of the 2014 Targeted Site Investigation by the Source Group in accordance with regulatory oversight from the Alameda County Environmental Health Department (ACEHD). Prior to receiving a building or grading permit, project applicant shall provide documentation from ACEHD that all identified
contamination has been remediated to levels where no threat to human health or the environment remains based on the proposed future use of the project site.

Mitigation Measure TRAN-1a: As part of pre-construction submittals, the contractor(s) shall submit a truck route plan to the City of Alameda Public Works Department for review and approval to help minimize impacts to adjacent neighborhoods.

Alameda Aquatic Center 24 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Mitigation Measure TRAN-1b: To the extent possible, heavy truck movements should be limited to the hours between 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. (or other times, if approved by the Public Works Department).

Resource Areas Not Analyzed Further
The following resource areas, for which the approved project’s impacts are dependent on the site conditions, are not analyzed further because the modified project was determined to have the same impacts as analyzed in the adopted IS/MND.8 A brief explanation is provided for each resource topic.

4.2.1 Agriculture and Forestry
The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would have no impact on agricultural and forestry resources. The project site is located on a vacant undeveloped site in an urbanized area of Alameda that is not designated or zoned for agricultural uses, is not under a Williamson Act contract, and is not considered forest land or zoned Timberland Production. The modified project would occur within the same site as the approved project and therefore, would also have no impact on agricultural or forestry resources. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

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
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?

c) 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))?

d) Result in a loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?

8 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026.

Alameda Aquatic Center 25 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

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
Would the project:
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?

4.2.2 Land Use and Planning
The modified project would not involve any features that would divide an established community, such as a large roadway or walls. The modified project would be consistent with the regulations and standards of the site’s Parks and Public Open Space General Plan designation and Open Space zoning. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

4.2.3 Mineral Resources
There are no mineral resources or recovery sites on the project site.9 Therefore, the modified project would not impact mineral resources and would not require further analysis. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

9 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 26 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

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
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?

4.2.4 Population and Housing
The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would not induce substantial population growth, and would result in no impact. The project site is vacant and undeveloped and does not provide any housing. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project does not propose any residential uses on the site. Further, the modified project would not extend any new infrastructure to undeveloped areas located off of the project site that could indirectly induce population growth. Operation of the aquatics center would require up to three full-time staff and would have part-time staff supporting programming.

Therefore, the modified project would not
induce substantial population growth, and would result in no impact.

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
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?

Alameda Aquatic Center 27 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.2.5 Tribal Cultural Resources
At the time of preparation of the adopted IS/MND, no California Native American tribe had formally requested to be placed on the City’s notification list for development projects undergoing review pursuant to AB 52. Therefore, no tribal consultation was required for the approved project. Tribal consultation pursuant to AB 52 is required for projects that will result in the release of a negative declaration, MND, or EIR.10 This Addendum will be attached to the adopted IS/MND and therefore, the modified project is not subject to any further tribal consultation efforts. The City has not received any requests to consult pursuant to AB 52.

A record search was completed at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) on May 6, 2014 (File No. 13-1693), no prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded in the central part of Alameda or within 0.5 mile of the project area. The adopted IS/MND determined that implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL-3 (described further in Section 4.5 Cultural Resources) would reduce potential impacts to unknown buried Native American resources to a less than significant impact. The modified project would implement Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and CUL-3 and therefore, would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

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
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe, and
that is:

a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k)?

10 California Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1

Alameda Aquatic Center 28 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
b) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.

4.2.6 Wildfire
The adopted IS/MND concluded that the project site is not within a designated wildland area and would not result in increased fire hazards from implementation of the approved project.11 The modified project would have the same less than significant wildfire impacts as the approved project. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

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
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, Would the project:

a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?

b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project occupants
to pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?

c) Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines, or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?

11 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026.

Alameda Aquatic Center 29 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

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
If located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, Would the project:

d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?

4.2.7 Conclusion
The modified project will incorporate all environmentally applicable mitigation measures, regulatory requirements, and conditions of approval approved by the City Council for the approved project. The requirements for the approved project are incorporated in this document by reference (refer to Appendix A).12 Therefore, as stated above, the impacts to the above resource areas would not change from the adopted IS/MND.

12 City of Alameda. Resolution No. 14955 Approve the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Mitigated Negative Declaration and Master Plan. June 16, 2014.

Alameda Aquatic Center 30 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Aesthetics

4.3.1 Environmental Setting

4.3.1.1 Regulatory Framework
State
Streets and Highway Code Sections 260 through 263
The California Scenic Highway Program (Streets and Highway Code, Sections 260 through 263) is managed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The program is intended to protect and enhance the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors through special conservation treatment. There are no state-designated scenic highways in Alameda.

City of Alameda
Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to aesthetics and are applicable to the project.

Policies Description
LU-24 Universal Design. Continue to promote and require universal design in new construction and rehabilitation to protect the public health, accessibility, and safety of all regardless of ability and ensure equal access to the built environment.

LU-26 Architectural Design Excellence. Promote high quality architectural design in all new buildings and additions to complement Alameda’s existing architectural assets and its historic pedestrian and transit-oriented urban fabric.

CC-34
(Action K.)
Ensure that all lighting installations are designed and installed to be fully shielded to minimize glare and obstructive light and avoid misdirected or excessive illumination.

Municipal Code
Design Review
All new buildings, additions to buildings, and exterior alterations of existing buildings in the City of Alameda require Design Review approval unless they are specifically exempted. Chapter XXX, Article II of the Alameda Municipal Code establishes the structural design review regulations that must be adhered to by covered construction projects. The City’s design review process is intended to conserve “the value of property by encouraging construction of buildings which are compatible and harmonious with the decision and use of surrounding properties, and to discourage the construction of buildings which will have a deleterious effect upon, impair the occupancy of, or jeopardize the value of, such properties.”

Alameda Aquatic Center 31 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Depending on the nature of a project, design review is conducted by Design Review Staff designated by the Planning Director, or is referred to the Zoning Administrator or the Planning Board for review and approval. Notices must be posted on the project site and be mailed to all property owners within 100 feet of the site at least 10 days prior to a final Design Review decision. Although public hearings are not required on Design Review applications, the Planning Director may elect to conduct one. In order to grant Design Review approval, the City must make the following findings:

a) The proposed design is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the City of Alameda Design Review Manual.
b) The proposed design is appropriate for the site, is compatible with adjacent or neighboring buildings or surroundings, and promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between different designated land uses; and
c) The proposed design of the structure(s) and exterior materials and landscaping are visually compatible with the surrounding development, and design elements have been incorporated to ensure the compatibility of the structure with the character and uses of adjacent development.

Nighttime Lighting
The type and intensity of outdoor lighting in Alameda is regulated by the City’s Dark Skies Ordinance, codified in Municipal Code Section 30-5.16(c). The Alameda Dark Skies Ordinance requires all exterior lighting to be fully shielded and downward directed except for low-voltage landscape lighting, special architectural and public art lighting, and historic lighting fixtures. Light trespass must not exceed 1 foot-candle at an adjacent property, and security lighting fixtures of more than 100 watts (or 20-watt LED) or 1,600 lumens must be controlled by a programmable motion-sensor device unless continuous lighting is required by the California Building Standards Code. Additional standards apply, including restrictions on the color temperature of light-emitting diode (LED) lighting.

4.3.1.2 Existing Conditions
Project Site
The project site is part of the larger 22-acre Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. The 2.35-acre portion of the site is currently vacant and undeveloped (refer to Photos 1 & 2). Portions of the larger 22- acre site have been developed with a parking lot, outdoor pavilion, picnic area, restrooms, and paved trails.

Surrounding Area
The project site is in an urban, developed area of Alameda. The project area is a mix of architectural styles and includes a variety of contemporary single-family dwellings and stucco clad utilitarian commercial properties. Structures adjacent to the project site range between one and two stories.

Photos of the surrounding area are shown in Photos 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Photo 1: View of Project Site from AtlanƟc
Photo 2: View of Western Entry JSOS
PHOTOS 1 & 2
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
32 IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025
Photo 3: View of Oﬃce from AtlanƟc
Photo 4: View of ResidenƟal from AtlanƟc
PHOTOS 3 & 4
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
33 IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025
Photo 5: View South from Site to ResidenƟal
Photo 6: View of Commercial IntersecƟon
PHOTOS 5 & 6
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
34 IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025

Alameda Aquatic Center 35 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.3.2 Impact Discussion

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
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?

b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?

c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of
public views of the site and its
surroundings?
13 If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?

a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

The shoreline areas of Alameda provide many scenic vistas of the surrounding waters of San Francisco Bay. Depending on the vantage point, the City of San Francisco is visible three miles to the west across the Bay, and the high-rise downtown section of Oakland is visible approximately one mile to the north. From the northern shoreline, Jack London Square and its shoreline marina are visible directly across the Oakland Estuary. The Montara Mountains and the Santa Cruz Mountains, are visible in the distance across San Francisco Bay from vantage points in Alameda. The project site, which is flat, and surrounding area have minimal to no scenic views due to the existing built environment with no designated scenic resources. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

13 Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points. 14 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026. Pages 14-19.

Alameda Aquatic Center 36 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

The project site is not located along a state-designated scenic highway. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not damage any scenic resources, such as trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?

The project site is located within an urbanized area of Alameda. The project involves construction of a new all-electric aquatic center, including a one-story building, one 30-meter competition swimming pool, one activity pool, and spectator seating. The building would have a maximum height of 22 feet to the top of parapet. The adopted IS/MND evaluated structures up to 20 feet.

The modified project would be subject to the City’s design review process (Chapter XXX, Article II of the Alameda Municipal Code) to ensure the proposed design is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the City of Alameda Design Review Manual. As discussed further in Section

4.4 Biological Resources, the project would remove eight trees and would be required to provide replacement trees to account for those removed during construction in accordance with Section 23-

3.2 of the City’s municipal code. Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would install LED lighting fixtures onsite.

Consistent with the City’s Municipal Code, all lighting would be reviewed to ensure light and glare impacts are reduced in accordance with the City’s Dark Skies Ordinance. The main pool deck lighting would go dark when the facility closed for the day. The building’s down lighting would remain on for security purposes. For these reasons, the modified project would not result in new or greater light or glare impacts than what was disclosed in the adopted IS/MND. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 37 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Air Quality
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Construction Emissions Health Risk Assessment prepared for the project by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. A copy of the report, dated January 15, 2025, is included as Appendix B to this IS/Addendum.

4.4.1 Environmental Setting

4.4.1.1 Regulatory Framework

4.4.1.2 Background Information
Criteria Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants are pollutants that have established federal or State standards for outdoor concentrations to protect public health. Pursuant with the federal and State Clean Air Acts, the EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established and enforced the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), respectively.

The NAAQS and CAAQS address the following criteria air pollutants: ozone (O 3), nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10), particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 micros or less (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. The CAAQS also includes visibility reducing particles, sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride.

Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) include airborne chemicals that are known to have short- and long- term adverse health effects. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, diesel fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter [DPM] near a freeway). Unlike criteria air pollutants, which have a regional impact, TACs are highly localized and regulated at the individual emissions source level.

DPM is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about three-quarters of the cancer risk from TACs. DPM is comprised of diesel exhaust which is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. Medium- and heavy-duty diesel trucks represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. The majority of DPM is small enough to be inhaled into the lungs. Most inhaled particles are subsequently exhaled, but some deposit on the lung surface or are deposited in the deepest regions of the lungs (i.e., areas most susceptible to injury). 15 Chemicals in
diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, are also TACs identified by the CARB.

An overview of the sources of criteria pollutants and TACs, as well as their associated health effects, is provided in Table 4.3-1.

15 California Air Resources Board. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health.

Alameda Aquatic Center 38 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.3-1: Sources and Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants and Toxic Air Contaminants Pollutants Description and Sources Primary Effects
Ozone (O3) O3 is a secondary criteria air pollutant that is the result of a photochemical (sunlight) reaction between reactive
organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Pollutants emitted by motor vehicles, power plants, industrial
boilers, refineries, and chemical plants are the common sources for this reaction. High O
3 levels are caused by the
cumulative emissions of ROG and NOX. These precursor or primary pollutants react under certain meteorological
conditions to form high O3 levels. Commons sources of
ROG and NOx are vehicles, industrial plants, and consumer products.
• Aggravation of respiratory
and cardiovascular diseases
• Irritation of eyes
• Cardiopulmonary function
impairment
Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO
2)
NO2 is a reactive gas that combines with nitric oxide (NO) to form NOx. NO2 is the byproduct of fuel combustion,
with common sources of NO2 being emissions from cars,
trucks, buses, power plants, and off-road equipment.

Other sources of NO2 include high temperature stationary combustion and atmospheric reactions.
• Aggravation of respiratory
illness
• Reduced visibility
Carbon
Monoxide (CO)
CO is a colorless, odorless, and toxic gas that is the
product of incomplete combustion of carbon-containing
substances (e.g., when something is burned). Common
outdoor sources of CO include mobile vehicles (passenger cars and trucks) and machinery that burn fossil fuels.
• Interferes with oxygen
delivery to the body’s organ
due to binding with the
hemoglobin in the blood
• Fatigue, headaches,
confusion, and dizziness
Fine
Particulate
Matter (PM

2.5)
and Coarse
Particulate
Matter (PM
10)
PM is any material that is emitted as liquid or solid
particles or a gaseous material, such as dust, soot,
aerosols, and fumes. PM
10 and PM2.5 are both small
enough particulates to be inhaled into the human lungs, and PM

2.5 is small enough to deposit into the lungs, which
poses an increased health risk compared to PM10. Typical sources of PM include stationary combustion of solid
fuels, construction activities, vehicles, industrial processes, and atmospheric chemical reactions.
• Reduced lung function,
especially in children
• Aggravation of respiratory
and cardiorespiratory
diseases
• Increased cough and chest
discomfort
• Reduced visibility
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO
2)
SO2 is a pungent and colorless gaseous pollutant. SO2 is part of the sulfur oxides (SOx) group and is the pollutant of greatest concern in the SOx group. SOx can react with
other compounds in the atmosphere to form small
particles. These particles contribute to pollution. SO
2 is
primarily formed from fossil fuel combustion at power
plants and other industrial facilities. Sources of SO
2 include motor vehicles, locomotives, ships, and off-road diesel equipment that are operated with fuels that contain high levels of sulfur. Industrial processes, such as natural gas and petroleum extraction, oil refining, and metal
processing.
• Aggravation of respiratory
illness
• Respiratory irritation such
as wheezing, shortness of
breath and chest tightness
• Increased incidence of
pulmonary symptoms and
disease, decreased
pulmonary function
Lead Lead is a naturally occurring element that can be found in all parts of the environment including the air, soil, and water. As an air pollutant, lead is present in small
particles. The most common historic source of lead
exposure was the past use of leaded gasoline in motor
• Adversely affect the
nervous system, kidney
function, immune system,
reproductive and

Alameda Aquatic Center 39 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Pollutants Description and Sources Primary Effects
vehicles. The exhaust resulting from use of leaded
gasoline would release lead emissions into the air. Now, major sources of lead in the air are from ore and metals processing plants and piston-engine aircraft operating on leaded aviation fuel. Other sources are waste incinerators, utilities, and lead-acid battery manufacturers. The highest air concentrations of lead are usually found near lead
smelters.
developmental systems and
the cardiovascular system
Toxic Air
Contaminants
(TACs)
TACs include certain air pollutants known to increase the risk of cancer and/or a range of other serious health
effects. Sources of TAC include, but are not limited to, cars and trucks, especially diesel-fueled; industrial sources, such as chrome platers; dry cleaners and service stations; and building materials and products.
• Cancer
• Chronic eye, lung, or
skin irritation
• Neurological and
reproductive disorders

Sensitive Receptors
Some groups of people are more affected by air pollution than others. CARB has identified the following groups who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 16, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, and elementary schools. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site are the single- family homes to the north across Atlantic Avenue and the single and multi-family homes to the south. There are also young adults at the College of Alameda’s Science Annex to the northeast as well as infants present at the ViVi Family Daycare to the south.

4.4.1.3 Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Clean Air Act
At the federal level, the EPA is responsible for overseeing implementation of the Clean Air Act and its subsequent amendments. The federal Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set national ambient air quality standards for the six common criteria pollutants, discussed previously; PM, O 3, CO, SO2, NO2,
and lead.16

CARB is the state agency that regulates mobile sources throughout the state and oversees implementation of the state air quality laws and regulations, including the California Clean Air Act.

The EPA and the CARB have adopted ambient air quality standards establishing permissible levels of these pollutants to protect public health and the climate. Violations of ambient air quality standards

16 NOx is the group of nitrogen compounds (NO2 and nitric oxide [NO]) that typically represents NO2 emissions because NO2 emissions contribute the majority of NOx exhaust emissions emitted from fuel combustion.

Alameda Aquatic Center 40 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
are based on air pollutant monitoring data and are determined for each air pollutant. Attainment status for a pollutant means that a given air district meets the standard set by the EPA and/or CARB.

Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
To address the issue of diesel emissions in the state, CARB developed the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. In addition to requiring more stringent emission standards for new on-road and off-road mobile sources and stationary diesel-fueled engines to reduce particulate matter emissions by 90 percent, this plan involves the application of emission control strategies to existing diesel vehicles and equipment to reduce DPM and other pollutants. Implementation of this plan, in conjunction with stringent federal and CARB-adopted emission limits for diesel fueled vehicles and equipment, including off-road equipment, will significantly reduce emissions of DPM and NO X.

Regional and Local
2017 Clean Air Plan
The Bay Area Air District 17 is the agency primarily responsible for assuring that the federal and state ambient air quality standards are maintained in the San Francisco Bay Area, which includes the project area. Regional air quality management districts, such as the Bay Area Air District, must prepare air quality plans specifying how federal and state air quality standards will be met. The Bay Area Air District’s most recently adopted plan is the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan (CAP).18The 2017 Clean Air Plan focuses on the following two related Bay Area Air District goals and how to achieve them:

• Protect air quality and health at the regional and local scale by attaining all state and national air quality standards and eliminating disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from TAC; and
• Protect the climate by reducing Bay Area greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2040 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. 19 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The Bay Area Air District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are intended to serve as a guide for those who prepare or evaluate air quality impact analyses for projects and plans in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin utilize the thresholds and methodology for assessing air quality impacts developed by the Bay Area Air District within their CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. The guidelines include information on legal requirements, Bay Area Air District rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures. The latest CEQA Air Quality

17 Formerly known as the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 18 At the time the adopted IS/MND was prepared, the 2010 CAP was in effect. 19 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19, 2017. Page 12.

Alameda Aquatic Center 41 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Guidelines are the 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines adopted on April 20, 2023 by the Bay Area Air District’s Board of Directors.

Community Air Risk Evaluation Program
Under the Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) program, the Bay Area Air District has identified areas with high TAC emissions, and sensitive populations that could be adversely affected by them.

The Bay Area Air District uses this information to establish policies and programs to reduce TAC emissions and exposures. The City of Alameda is part of the seven CARE program impacted communities in the Bay Area.

The main objectives of the program are to:

• Evaluate health risks associated with exposure to TACs from stationary and mobile sources;
• Assess potential exposures to sensitive receptors and identify impacted communities; • Prioritize TAC reduction measures for significant sources in impacted communities; and • Develop and implement mitigation measures to improve air quality in impacted communities.

Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to air quality and are applicable to the project.

Policies Description
HS-63 Continue to work with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to reduce diesel related air quality impacts throughout the region and in Alameda.

HS-65 Protect public health by requiring best management practices at construction sites and carefully evaluating the potential health risks of projects that generate substantial toxic air contaminants or projects that propose to place a sensitive user in proximity to an existing source of contaminants.

HS-68 Minimize and avoid exposure to toxic air contaminants

4.4.1.4 Existing Conditions
The San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) Air Basin is designated a nonattainment area for the federal O3 and PM2.5 standards and for the state O3, PM10, and PM2.5 standards.20,21 The Bay Area is designated as an attainment area for both the NAAQS and CAAQS for CO, SO2, and NO2. As the regional air district, the Bay Area Air District is responsible for attaining the NAAQS and CAAQS for

20 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. “Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status.” Last Updated January 5, 2017.
21 The area has attained both state and federal ambient air quality standards for CO. The project does not include substantial new emissions of SO2 or lead. These criteria pollutants are not discussed further.

Alameda Aquatic Center 42 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
these pollutants. As part of an effort to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards for O3, PM10, and PM2.5, the Bay Area Air District has established thresholds of significance for these air pollutants and their precursors that apply to both construction period and operational period impacts. Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area Air District’s attempts to reduce O
3 levels. The highest O3 levels in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys where temperatures are higher, there is less wind circulation, and sources of the precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NO
x) are prominent. In the Bay Area, most
particulate matter is generated from the following activities: combustion, factories, construction, grading, demolition, agriculture, and motor vehicles. Elevated concentrations of PM 10 and PM2.5 are
the result of both region-wide emissions and localized emissions.

4.4.2 Impact Discussion

b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal
or state ambient air quality standard?

c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?

d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND determined that the approved project would result in less than significant air quality impacts with the incorporation of the Bay Area Air District’s basic construction control measures in the form of Mitigation Measure AIR-1 (refer to Section 4.1 of this Initial Study).

4.4.2.1 Thresholds of Significance
As discussed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b), the determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for judgment on the part of the lead agency and must be based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data. The City of Alameda has considered the Bay Area Air District’s air quality thresholds and regards these thresholds to be based on the best information available for the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin and conservative in

Alameda Aquatic Center 43 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
terms of the assessment of health effects associated with TACs and PM2.5.22 The Bay Area Air District CEQA Air Quality thresholds for criteria air pollutants and fugitive dust used in this analysis are identified in Table 4.3-2. Table 4.3-3 below lists the Bay Area Air District health risk and hazards thresholds for single-source and cumulative-sources.

Table 4.3-2: Bay Area Air District Air Quality Significance Thresholds Criteria Air
Pollutant
Construction Thresholds* Operation Thresholds Operation Thresholds Average Daily Emissions
(pounds/day)
Average Daily Emissions
(pounds/day)
Annual Average
Emissions (tons/year)
ROG and NOx 54 54 10
PM10 82 (exhaust) 82 15
PM2.5 54 (exhaust) 54 10
CO Not Applicable 9.0 ppm (eight-hour) or 20.0 ppm (one-hour) Fugitive Dust Dust Control Measures/Best
Management Practices Not Applicable
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 10 micrometers or less; PM2.5= fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less; CO = carbon monoxide * The Air District recommends that for construction projects that require less than one year to complete, lead agencies should annualize impacts over the scope of actual days that peak impacts would occur rather than over the full year. Additionally, for phased projects that results in concurrent construction and operational emissions. Construction-related exhaust emissions should be combined with operational emissions for all phases where construction and operations overlap.

Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April 2023. Pages 3-5 and 3-6.

Table 4.3-3: Bay Area Air District Health Risks and Hazards Thresholds Health Risk Single Source Combined Cumulative Sources
Cancer Risk 10 per one million 100 per one million
Non-Cancer Hazard Index 1.0 10.0
Annual PM2.5 Concentration 0.3 µg/m3 0.8 μg/m3 (average) Notes: µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; PM2.5= fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic resistance diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less
Thresholds are applicable to construction and operational activities.

Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April 2023. Pages 3-5 and 3-6.

22 BAAQMD updated its CEQA Guidelines in April 2023; the numeric thresholds of significance remain unchanged from those adopted in 2010.

Alameda Aquatic Center 44 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

2017 Clean Air Plan
As noted in Section 4.3.1.3, at the time the adopted IS/MND was prepared, the 2010 CAP was in effect. The adopted IS/MND found that the approved project would not conflict with the adopted CAP. The modified project would not conflict with the 2017 CAP because it would not result in the generation of construction criteria air pollutants and/or precursors that exceed the thresholds shown in Table 4.3-4 (refer to discussion below). In addition, the proposed aquatic center (5,740 square feet) would be below the Bay Area Air District’s operational criteria pollutant screening threshold of 376,000 square feet for recreation swim pools; therefore, it is assumed the project would not result in a significant operational criteria pollutant impact. 23 Thus, the modified project is
not required to incorporate project-specific control measures listed in the 2017 CAP. Further, implementation of the modified project would not inhibit the Bay Area Air District or partner agencies from continuing progress toward attaining state and federal air quality standards and eliminating health-risk disparities from exposure to air pollution among Bay Area communities, as described within the 2017 CAP.

Construction Period Emissions – Criteria Pollutants
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022 was used to estimate annual emissions from construction activities for the modified project. Table 4.3-4 shows the estimated average daily air emissions from construction of the modified project compared to the approved project.

Table 4.3-4: Construction Period Emissions (pounds/day) Year ROG NOx PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5
Exhaust
Approved Project
2015 4 43 2 2
2016 3 19 1 1
Modified Project
2025 + 2026 (305 construction workdays) 0.81 6.86 0.25 0.23 2027 (107 construction workdays) 1.10 3.30 0.06 0.05
Bay Area Air District Thresholds (pounds per
day) 54 lbs./day 54 lbs./day 82 lbs./day 54 lbs./day
Exceed Threshold? No No No No

23 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 CEQA Guidelines. April 2023. Page 4-4.

Alameda Aquatic Center 45 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
As shown in Table 4.3-4 above, the modified project’s unmitigated construction criteria pollutant emissions would not exceed the Bay Area Air District thresholds. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would implement the Bay Area Air District’s basic construction control measures (Mitigatoin Measure AIR-1) to reduce fugitive dust (refer to checklist question c below).

Operational Period Emissions – Criteria Pollutants
The Bay Area Air District developed screening criteria to provide lead agencies with an indication of whether a project could result in significant operational air quality impacts (e.g., daily or annual emissions above stated thresholds). Screening criteria are used to determine the extent of additional analysis required for a specific project. If a project is determined to be below the Bay Area Air District’s screening criteria for a specific pollutant, then the project is said to have less than significant operational air quality impacts and no further analysis is required under CEQA.

Operational period criteria pollutant emissions associated with the modified project would be generated primarily from vehicles driven by future visitors to the aquatic center, and to a lesser extent by waste disposal and daily energy and water usage. The modified project, which involves 5,740 square feet, falls below the Bay Area Air District operational criteria air pollutants screening threshold of 376,000 square feet for a “Recreation Swimming Pool” land use type. Consistent with the Approved Project, the modified project would result in a less than significant air quality impact due to operational-related criteria air pollutant emissions.

For these reasons, the modified project would not disrupt or hinder the implementation of the 2017 Bay Area Air District CAP. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?

As discussed under checklist question a), the project size is below the Bay Area Air District screening threshold for operational criteria air pollutant emissions, which conservatively means its operational emissions would not exceed the Bay Area Air District’s operational criteria air pollutant emissions thresholds. In addition, based on the project’s computed construction criteria pollutant emissions (refer to Table 4.3-4) and the Bay Area Air District construction best management practices (BMPs) that would be implemented during construction activities (Mitigation Measure AIR-1), construction criteria pollutant impacts would also be below the Bay Area Air District’s emission thresholds. Because the modified project would have less than significant criteria pollutant impacts, it would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any criteria pollutants for which the region is in non-attainment. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 46 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Criteria Pollutant Emissions
In a 2018 decision (Sierra Club v. County of Fresno), the state Supreme Court determined CEQA requires that when a project’s criteria air pollutant emissions would exceed applicable thresholds and contribute a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative regional criteria pollutant impact, the potential for the project’s emissions to affect human health in the air basin must be disclosed. State and federal ambient air quality standards are health-based standards, and exceedances of those standards result in continued unhealthy levels of air pollutants. As stated in the 2017 Bay Area Air District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, air pollution by its nature is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, the Bay Area Air District considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project has a less than significant impact for criteria pollutants, it is assumed to have no adverse health effect.

Fugitive Dust
Construction activities associated with the project, particularly during site preparation and grading, would temporarily generate fugitive dust in the form of PM10 and PM2.5. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site and trucks carrying uncovered loads of soils.

Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. The Bay Area Air District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines consider these impacts to be less than significant if best management practices are implemented to reduce the emissions. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project includes Mitigation Measure AIR-1 that incorporates the Bay Area Air District best management practices to reduce fugitive dust related impacts to a less than significant level.

Toxic Air Contaminants
Project impacts related to increased health risk can occur by generating emissions of TACs and air pollutants. Temporary project construction activity would generate emissions of DPM from equipment and trucks and generate dust on a temporary basis that could affect nearby sensitive receptors. Additionally, there are existing sources of TACs and localized air pollutants in the vicinity of the project.

Health risk impacts are addressed by predicting increased lifetime cancer risk, the increase in annual PM

2.5 concentrations, and computing the Hazard Index (HI) for non-cancer health risks.

Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a known TAC. These exhaust emissions pose health risks for sensitive receptors such as surrounding residents, school students, and daycare infants/children. The primary health risk impact issues associated with construction emissions are cancer risk and exposure to PM

2.5. A health risk

Alameda Aquatic Center 47 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
assessment of the project construction activities was conducted that evaluated potential health effects to nearby sensitive receptors from construction emissions of DPM and PM2.5.24 This assessment included dispersion modeling to predict the offsite and onsite concentrations resulting from project construction, so that lifetime cancer risks and non-cancer health effects could be evaluated.

The maximum increased cancer risks were calculated using the modeled TAC concentrations combined with the Bay Area Air District CEQA guidance for age sensitivity factors and exposure parameters. The modeled maximum annual DPM and PM

2.5 concentrations were identified at
nearby sensitive receptors (as shown in Figure 4.3-1) to find the maximally exposed individuals (MEI).

Results of this assessment indicated that the construction MEI was located on the first floor (five feet above the ground) of a single-family home north of the construction site. Table 4.3-5 summarizes the maximum cancer risks, PM2.5 concentrations, and HI for project related construction activities affecting the construction MEI.

Table 4.3-5: Construction Risk Impacts at the Off-Site MEI Source
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Construction 7.93 (infant) 0.09 0.01
Bay Area Air District Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No
Maximum School/Daycare Impact – ViVi Family Daycare
Project Construction 2.39 (infant) 0.01 <0.01
Bay Area Air District Single-Source Threshold 10 0.3 1.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No

As shown in Table 4.3-5, the uncontrolled risk values at these locations do not exceed the Bay Area Air District single-source significance thresholds.

Cumulative health risk assessments look at all substantial sources of TACs located within 1,000 feet of a project site (i.e., influence area) that can affect sensitive receptors. These sources include rail lines, highways, busy surface streets, and stationary sources identified by the Bay Area Air District.

The local roadways and four existing stationary sources of TACs were identified with the potential to affect the project MEI. Figure 4.3-2 shows the locations of the sources affecting the MEI within the influence area. Health risk impacts from these sources upon the MEI are reported in Table

4.3-6.

24 DPM is identified by California as a toxic air contaminant due to the potential to cause cancer.

Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.

LOCATIONS OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SITE, OFF-SITE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS, AND MAXIMUM TAC IMPACTS (MEI) FIGURE 4.4-1 Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
48IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.

PROJECT SITE AND NEARBY TAC AND PM2.5 SOURCES FIGURE 4.4-2 Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
49IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025

Alameda Aquatic Center 50 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.3-6: Impacts from Combined Sources at Off-Site MEI Source
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Impacts
Project Construction 7.93 (infant) 0.09 0.01
Bay Area Air District Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No
Cumulative Impacts
Nearby Roadways – Bay Area Air District GIS Screening Tool 13.39 0.31 0.04 G&I IX Marina Village Research (Facility ID #22128, Generator), MEI at 835 feet. 0.12 0.00 0.00
Heliotrope Technologies (Facility ID #23657, Generic Source), MEI at 600 feet. 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ology Bioservices, Inc. (Facility ID #201808, Generator), MEI at 470 feet. 0.16 0.00 0.00
Chevron Station #90290 (Facility ID #107722, Gas Dispensing Facility), MEI at 960 feet. 0.53 0.00 0.02
Cumulative Total 22.13 0.40 0.07
Bay Area Air District Cumulative Source Threshold >100 >0.8 >10.0 Exceed Threshold? No No No

As shown in Table 4.3-6, none of the Bay Area Air District single-source or cumulative-source thresholds are exceeded by the modified project.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1 during construction, the modified project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

Odors are generally considered an annoyance rather than a health hazard. Land uses that have the potential to be sources of odors that generate complaints include, but are not limited to, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, composting operations, and food manufacturing facilities.

Heavy-duty construction equipment and vehicles would emit odors, such as diesel exhaust, during use and while idling. These odors would be intermittent, and the odors would disperse with distance. All construction-related odors would cease upon completion of construction. During operations, the proposed aquatic center would not generate objectionable odors. The modified project would, therefore, not create objectionable odors that would affect a substantial number of people off-site. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 51 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Biological Resources

4.5.1 Environmental Setting

4.5.1.1 Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Endangered Species Act
Individual plant and animal species listed as rare, threatened, or endangered under state and federal Endangered Species Acts are considered special-status species. Federal and state endangered species legislation has provided the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited distribution and/or low or declining populations.

Permits may be required from both the USFWS and CDFW if activities associated with a proposed project would result in the take of a species listed as threatened or endangered. To “take” a listed species, as defined by the State of California, is “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill” these species. Take is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include harm of a listed species.

In addition to species listed under state and federal Endangered Species Acts, Sections 15380(b) and (c) of the CEQA Guidelines provide that all potential rare or sensitive species, or habitats capable of supporting rare species, must be considered as part of the environmental review process. These may include plant species listed by the California Native Plant Society and CDFW-listed Species of Special Concern.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits killing, capture, possession, or trade of migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior.

Hunting and poaching are also prohibited. This includes direct and indirect acts, except for harassment and habitat modification, which are not included unless they result in direct loss of birds, nests, or eggs. The CDFW also protects migratory and nesting birds under California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800. The CDFW defines taking as causing abandonment and/or loss of reproductive efforts through disturbance.

Sensitive Habitat Regulations
Wetland and riparian habitats are considered sensitive habitats under CEQA. They are also afforded protection under applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and are generally subject to regulation by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), CDFW, and/or the USFWS under provisions of the federal Clean Water Act (e.g., Sections 303, 304, 404) and State of California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.

Alameda Aquatic Center 52 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Fish and Game Code Section 1602
Streambeds and banks, as well as associated riparian habitat, are regulated by the CDFW per Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Work within the bed or banks of a stream or the adjacent riparian habitat requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW.

City of Alameda

Alameda General Plan 2024
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to biological resources and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
CC-26 Take actions to maintain and expand the number of trees in Alameda on public and private property to improve public health, reduce pollution, and reduce heat island effects.

CC-27 Protect and restore natural habitat in support of biodiversity and protect sensitive biological resources to prepare for climate change.

CC-33 Protect San Francisco Bay, San Leandro Bay, and the Alameda Oakland Estuary by promoting, requiring, and constructing green infrastructure that improves stormwater runoff quality, minimizes stormwater impacts on stormwater infrastructure, improves flood management, and increases groundwater recharge.

CC-34 Promote the preservation of on-site natural elements in new development, when feasible, that contribute to the community’s native plant and wildlife species value and to its aesthetic character.

Bird-Safe Building Ordinance
The Alameda Bird-Safe Building Ordinance, codified at Municipal Code Section 30-5.16, is intended to reduce bird mortality from windows or other specific building features known to increase the risk of bird collisions. It requires the use of bird-safe glazing on new buildings that are taller than 35 feet and that have one or more façades in which glass constitutes 50 percent or more of the area of an individual facade. The bird-safe glazing requirement must be met on any window or unbroken glazed segment with an area of 12 square feet or more. These same criteria apply to windows replaced in existing buildings meeting the size and glazing area thresholds. Additionally, bird-safe glazing is required for new or replaced glass walls with an unbroken glazed segment 24 square feet or more in size, regardless of building size. Replacement of existing glass on historic structures is generally exempt from the requirements of this ordinance.

Dark Skies Ordinance
The Alameda Dark Skies Ordinance, codified at Municipal Code Section 30-5.16, is intended to minimize light that can be attractive, disorienting, and hazardous to migrating and local birds, while also preventing excessive light and glare on public roadways and private properties and minimizing artificial outdoor light that can have a detrimental effect on human health, the environment,

Alameda Aquatic Center 53 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
astronomical research, amateur astronomy, and enjoyment of the night sky. The ordinance requires all exterior lighting fixtures to be fully shielded and downward- directed, with the exception of low voltage landscape lighting, historic lighting fixtures, and uplighting used to highlight special architectural features, historic structures, public art and monuments, and similar objects of interest.

In the case of architectural uplighting, lamps used for may not exceed 100 watts, or a 20-watt equivalent LED, and must emit less than 1,600 lumens per fixture. Light trespass onto neighboring properties may not exceed 1 foot-candle as measured at the nearest property line to the light source. The ordinance also imposes restrictions on security lighting. Parking lot lighting is regulated separately under Municipal Code Section 30-7.17.

Tree Removal Policy and Ordinance
The Alameda Master Street Tree Plan adopted in February 2010 includes a Protected Tree Removal Policy that prohibits the removal of any protected tree within the public right-of-way without a certificate of approval from the Historical Advisory Board. Protected trees include the palm trees in the public right-of-way on Burbank Street and Portola Avenue, any street tree on Thompson and Central Avenues, and any Coastal Live Oak with a 10-inch or greater diameter measured 4.5 feet above the ground. In addition, Section 23-3.2 of the City’s municipal code applies to street trees in general and requires that the Public Works Director permit any planting, removal, trimming, pruning, or cutting of street trees. City tree permits may specify the number, kind, and spacing for planting trees and shrubs and may limit the number of trees or shrubs to be removed or pruned and prescribe the methods to be used in any street tree or shrub removal.

4.5.1.2 Existing Conditions
On-Site Habitat
According to the adopted IS/MND, most of the larger 22-acre project site consists of non-native grassland, pampas grass hummocks, and acacia trees.25 The project site is in a highly urbanized area of Alameda and is surrounded by infill development. Wildlife species utilizing urban areas are adaptive to human activities. Common wildlife species found in Alameda include common raven, northern mockingbird, racoon, striped skink, Norway rat, Virginia opossum, and feral cats. 26 Special-Status Species
The adopted IS/MND determined that the following special-status species have a moderate to high potential to occur in the vicinity of the project site:

• Cooper’s hawk
• White-tailed kite
• California horned lark

25 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026. Page 28.
26 Ibid. Page 29.

Alameda Aquatic Center 54 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
• Peregrine falcon
• Loggerhead shrike
• Osprey
• Double-crested cormorant
• Caspian tern
• California least tern
• Townsend’s big-eared bat

Aquatic Resources
A wetland delineation was completed in April 201527 pursuant to mitigation measure MM BIO-2a in the adopted IS/MND. The results of this wetland delineation survey indicate that no state or federal jurisdictional wetlands are present with the project area.

4.5.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) or United States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS)?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations, or
by the CDFW or USFWS?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?

27 ESA. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Wetland Delineation Results. April 2015.

Alameda Aquatic Center 55 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

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
Would the project:
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?

e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND determined that the approved project would have no impacts to riparian habitat or conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan. The IS/MND found that the project would have less than significant impacts to special-status species, wetlands, migratory birds, and trees with incorporation of the Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3 presented in Section 4.1 of this Initial Study.

a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS?

As discussed in Section 4.4.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site has the potential to support special status bird (Cooper’s hawk, White-tailed kite, California horned lark, Peregrine falcon, Loggerhead shrike, Osprey, Double-crested cormorant, Caspian tern, California least tern) and bat species (Townsend’s big eared bad). Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be required to implement mitigation measure MM BIO-1a and 1b (refer to Section 4.1), which require pre-construction surveys for nesting birds and bats, along with the identification and protection of active nests. Therefore, with implementation of mitigation measures MM BIO-1a and 1b, the project would not result in significant impacts to special-status species and nesting birds. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 56 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS?

The project site does not contain riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities.28 Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not adversely affect any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

As discussed in Section 4.4.1.2 Existing Conditions, no state or federal jurisdictional wetlands are present with the project area.29 A wetland delineation was completed in April 2015 pursuant to mitigation measure MM BIO-2a in the adopted IS/MND. Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not adversely affect state or federally protected wetlands and would not be required to implement mitigation measures MM BIO-2a or 2b. [Less Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

d) Would the project 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?

The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project had the potential to interfere substantially with the movement of native resident or migratory avian and bat species within the project vicinity. Consistent with the approved project, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 1a and BIO-1b under checklist question a) would reduce these potential project-related impacts to a less-than-significant level. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

The modified project does not propose to remove any protected trees. 30 The project would retain
the protected Coast Live Oak located west of the project driveway. Consistent with the approved

28 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026.
29 ESA. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Wetland Delineation Results. April 2015. 30 Protected trees include the palm trees in the public right-of-way on Burbank Street and Portola Avenue, any street tree on Thompson and Central Avenues, and any Coastal Live Oak with a 10-inch or greater diameter measured 4.5 feet above the ground.

Alameda Aquatic Center 57 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
project, the modified project would implement Mitigation Measure BIO-3 to ensure that protection of the Coast live oak tree.

The project would remove a total of eight onsite trees. Trees would be removed in compliance with Section 23-3.2 of the City’s Municipal Code. The project would plant approximately 50 new trees on the site in the parking lot and along the perimeter fence. Therefore, with incorporation of these measures, the project would not conflict with any local ordinances protecting biological resources. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

There are no habitat conservation plans or natural communities conservation plans that apply to the project site.31 Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

31 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026.

Alameda Aquatic Center 58 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Cultural Resources

4.6.1 Environmental Setting

4.6.1.1 Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
National Historic Preservation Act
Federal protection is legislated by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and the Archaeological Resource Protection Act of 1979. These laws maintain processes for determination of the effects on historical properties eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Section 106 of the NHPA and related regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 800) constitute the primary federal regulatory framework guiding cultural resources investigations and require consideration of effects on properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP.

Impacts to properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA.

California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is administered by the State Office of Historic Preservation and encourages protection of resources of architectural, historical, archeological, and cultural significance. The CRHR identifies historic resources for state and local planning purposes and affords protections under CEQA. Under Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(c), a resource may be eligible for listing in the CRHR if it meets any of the NRHP criteria. 32 Historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet the significance criteria described previously and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the CRHR if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data.

The concept of integrity is essential to identifying the important physical characteristics of historical resources and, therefore, in evaluating adverse changes to them. Integrity is defined as “the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance.” The processes of determining integrity are similar for both the CRHR and NRHP and use the same seven variables or aspects to define integrity that are used to evaluate a resource's eligibility for listing. These seven characteristics include 1) location, 2) design, 3) setting, 4) materials, 5) workmanship, 6) feeling, and 7) association.

32 California Office of Historic Preservation. “CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6.” Accessed October 4, 2024. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/technical%20assistance%20bulletin%206%202011%20update.pdf.

Alameda Aquatic Center 59 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act The California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act applies to both state and private lands. The act requires that upon discovery of human remains, construction or excavation activity must cease and the county coroner be notified.

Public Resources Code Section 5097.98
Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines specifies procedures to be used in the event of an unexpected discovery of Native American human remains on non-federal land. These procedures are outlined in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. These codes protect such remains from disturbance, vandalism, and inadvertent destruction, establish procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project, and establish the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) as the authority to resolve disputes regarding disposition of such remains.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, in the event of human remains discovery, no further disturbance is allowed until the county coroner has made the necessary findings regarding the origin and disposition of the remains. If the remains are of a Native American, the county coroner must notify the NAHC. The NAHC then notifies those persons most likely to be related to the Native American remains. The code section also stipulates the procedures that the descendants may follow for treating or disposing of the remains and associated grave goods.

City of Alameda
Historic Preservation Ordinance
The City of Alameda Historic Preservation Ordinance is promulgated in Chapter 13, Article VII of the Alameda Municipal Code. The purpose of the ordinance is “to promote the educational, cultural, and economic welfare of the City by preserving and protecting historical structures, sites, parks, landscaping, streets, and neighborhoods which serve as visible reminders of the history and cultural heritage of the City, State or Nation. Furthermore, it is the purpose of this chapter to strengthen the economy of the City by stabilizing and improving property values in historic areas, and to encourage new buildings and developments that will be harmonious with the existing buildings and neighborhoods.”

General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to cultural resources and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
LU-25 Promote the preservation, protection and restoration of historic sites, districts, buildings of architectural significance, archaeological resources, and properties and public works

Alameda Aquatic Center 60 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.6.1.2 Existing Conditions
The project site is part of the larger 22-acre Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. The 2.35-acre portion of the site is currently vacant and undeveloped.

The project area is the location of the former Alameda Belt Line Railroad and Union Pacific Railroad yards. Most of the larger 22-acre site was formerly occupied by parallel standard gauge spur tracks.

The Yard House is on Sherman Street in the southeast corner of the parcel. Concrete foundations remain from a former above ground fuel tank and the former maintenance buildings are on the west end of the parcel. Concrete foundations are also present on the northeast corner of the parcel.

Archaeological Resources
The project area is underlain by artificial fill over Holocene-age San Francisco Bay Mud and is in an area that has been highly disturbed from previous impacts related to the construction of the rail yard and associated facilities. No prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded in the central part of Alameda or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project area.33 The nearest prehistoric sites are approximately one mile to the southeast and consist of shell middens with burials on land that was historically bordering the Oakland marshland.

Historic Resources
The Alameda Belt Line Railway and its contributors, including the existing yard house, are considered historical resources for purposes of CEQA. However, these resources are not present on the 2.35-acre aquatic center project site. With the exception of the Yard House, the integrity of the project site, in terms of its ability to convey the historic importance of the Belt Line, is low: the tracks on and adjacent to the site have been removed, as have other structures. Moreover, under the approved project, the Yard House—the only remaining structure—was retained and rehabilitated.34

33 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026. Pages 46.
34 Ibid. Page 45.

Alameda Aquatic Center 61 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.6.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5?

c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that implementation of the approved project would result in less than significant cultural resources impacts with the implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-3 (refer to Section 4.1 of this Initial Study)

a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?

As discussed in Section 4.5.1.2 Existing Conditions, the adopted IS/MND found that the Alameda Belt Line Railway and its contributors, including the existing Yard House, are considered historical resources for purposes of CEQA. However, these resources are not present on the 2.35-acre site where the modified project would be developed. As part of the approved project, the City implemented Mitigation Measure MM CUL-1 (see Section 4.1, above), which required rehabilitation of the Alameda Belt Line Yard House (which is approximately 0.48 acres east of the modified project site) in conformance to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. For these reasons, the modified project would not cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. [Less Impact than the Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?

As discussed in Section 4.5.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is in an area that has been highly disturbed from previous impacts related to the construction of the rail yard and associated facilities.

Further, no prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded in the central part of Alameda or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project area. Consistent with the approved project, the modified

Alameda Aquatic Center 62 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
project would implement Mitigation Measure CUL-2, which would ensure that any unknown culturally significant archaeological resources encountered during construction would be identified, evaluated and appropriately treated in accordance with the recommendations of a qualified archaeologist. As such, the modified project would not result in new or greater impacts than what was disclosed in the adopted IS/MND. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

While there is no specific reason to anticipate it happening on the project site, human remains have the potential to be discovered during construction. If human remains were unearthed during project construction, damage to or destruction of culturally significant human remains would be a potentially significant impact. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure CUL-3, which would ensure that any human remains encountered during ground-disturbing activities are appropriately identified and treated and the impact reduced to a less than significant level. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 63 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Energy

4.7.1 Environmental Setting

4.7.1.1 Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Energy Star and Fuel Efficiency
At the federal level, energy standards set by the EPA apply to numerous consumer products and appliances (e.g., the EnergyStar™ program). The EPA also sets fuel efficiency standards for automobiles and other modes of transportation.

Renewables Portfolio Standard Program
In 2002, California established its Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, with the goal of increasing the percentage of renewable energy in the state's electricity mix to 20 percent of retail sales by 2010. Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, requiring statewide emissions reductions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In 2008, EO S-14-08 was signed into law, requiring retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. In October 2015, Governor Brown signed SB 350 to codify California’s climate and clean energy goals. A key provision of SB 350 requires retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2030. SB 100, passed in 2018, requires 100 percent of electricity in California to be provided by 100 percent renewable and carbon-free sources by 2045.

Executive Order B-55-18 and Assembly Bill 1279
Executive Order B-55-18 was issued in September 2018. It ordered a new statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045 and to maintain net negative emissions thereafter.

Assembly Bill 1279, also known as the California Climate Crisis Act, was approved on September 16, 2022, and codifies the statewide goal set by Executive Order B-55-18 of achieving net zero GHG emissions no later than the year 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. In addition, this bill has a statewide goal of reducing anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below the 1990 levels by the year 2045. The bill requires CARB to work with relevant state agencies to ensure that updates to the scoping plan, identify and recommend measures to achieve these policy goals, and implement strategies that enable CO
2 removal solutions and carbon capture,
utilization, and storage technologies in California. The bill requires CARB to submit an annual report.

California Building Standards Code
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, as specified in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), was established in 1978 in response to a

Alameda Aquatic Center 64 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. Title 24 is updated approximately every three years.35 Compliance with Title 24 is mandatory at the time new building permits are issued by city and county governments.36

California Green Building Standards Code
CALGreen establishes mandatory green building standards for buildings in California. CALGreen was developed to reduce GHG emissions from buildings, promote environmentally responsible and healthier places to live and work, reduce energy and water consumption, and respond to state environmental directives. CALGreen covers five categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality.

Advanced Clean Cars Program
CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Cars II program in 2022 in coordination with the EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The program combines the control of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated set of requirements for vehicle model years 2026 through 2035. The program promotes development of environmentally superior passenger cars and other vehicles, as well as saving the consumer money through fuel savings.37

City of Alameda
Alameda Climate Action and Resiliency Plan
Alameda’s Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP), adopted in April 2025, is intended to reduce GHG emissions 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.

Among its other provisions (discussed in more detail in Chapter 12, Greenhouse Gases), the CARP aims to decarbonize residential and nonresidential new construction and encourage the use of recycled and low embodied carbon materials, renewable energy, efficient design.

Alameda Municipal Code
Alameda Municipal Code Sections 13-10 and 13-11, respectively, adopt the California Green Building Standards Code and the California Energy Code as applicable building codes for the City of Alameda. The California Energy Code, codified at CCR Title 24, Parts 6 and 11, is discussed above under State Regulations.

35 California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo.
36 California Energy Commission (CEC). “2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building- energy-efficiency.
37 California Air Resources Board. “Advanced Clean Cars II.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean-cars-ii

Alameda Aquatic Center 65 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.7.1.2 Existing Conditions
Total energy usage in California was approximately 6,882 trillion British thermal units (Btu) in the year 2022, the most recent year for which this data was available.38 Out of the 50 states, California is ranked second in total energy consumption and 49th in energy consumption per capita. The breakdown by sector was approximately 18 percent (1,204 trillion Btu) for residential uses, 17 percent (1,193 trillion Btu) for commercial uses, 22 percent (1,539 trillion Btu) for industrial uses, and 43 percent (2,916 trillion Btu) for transportation. 39 This energy is primarily supplied in the form
of natural gas, petroleum, nuclear electric power, and hydroelectric power.

Electricity
Electricity in Alameda County in 2022 was consumed primarily by the non-residential sector (69 percent), followed by the residential sector consuming 31 percent. In 2022, a total of approximately 10,395 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity was consumed in Alameda County.40

Electric service in Alameda is provided by Alameda Municipal Power (AMP), which has nearly 35,000 residential and commercial customers. Electricity is delivered throughout AMP’s 22.8- square-mile service area in a network of approximately 178.1 circuit miles of underground distribution lines, 86.1 pole miles of overhead distribution lines, 6.8 miles of overhead transmission lines, and 1.9 circuit miles of underground transmission lines. 41 AMP purchases power from a variety of generators, providing 100 percent clean power to Alameda.

The renewable sources include hydroelectric (46.5 percent), geothermal (9.6 percent), wind (5.8 percent), and landfill gas-generated turbines (9 percent). The remaining power is provided from unspecified sources, but AMP states that all of its power is 100 percent clean as of January 1, 2020.

Natural Gas
PG&E provides natural gas services within Alameda County. In 2024, California’s natural gas supply came from a combination of in-state production and imported supplies from other western states and Canada.42

38 United States Energy Information Administration. “California State Energy Profile.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=CA.
39 Ibid.
40 Ibid.
41 City of Alameda. General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. Page 19-12. 42 California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2024 California Gas Report. Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2024-08/2024-California-Gas-Report-Final.pdf

Alameda Aquatic Center 66 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Fuel for Motor Vehicles
In 2023, California produced 118 million barrels of crude oil and in 2019, 15.4 billion gallons of gasoline were sold in California.43, 44 The average fuel economy for light-duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and sport utility vehicles) in the United States has steadily increased from about 13 miles per gallon (mpg) in the mid-1970s to 27.1 mpg in 2023.45 Federal fuel economy standards have changed substantially since the Energy Independence and Security Act was passed in 2007.

That standard, which originally mandated a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by the year 2020, was updated in April 2022 to require all cars and light duty trucks achieve an overall industry average fuel economy of 49 mpg by model year 2026.46,47

4.7.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?

b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration At the time the adopted IS/MND was prepared, the CEQA Appendix G checklist did not include questions related to energy use. However, the approved park would consume energy during both the construction and operational phases.

43 U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Petroleum & Other Liquids, California Field Production of Crude Oil.” February 28, 2023. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpca1&f=a 44 California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. “Net Taxable Gasoline Gallons.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/dataportal/dataset.htm?url=VehicleTaxableFuelDist. 45 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “The 2024 EPA Automotive Trends Report: Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Fuel Economy, and Technology since 1975.” November 2024. Accessed February 7, 2025. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P101CUZD.pdf. 46 United States Department of Energy. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed February 7, 2025. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/eisa.
47 United States Department of Transportation. USDOT Announces New Vehicle Fuel Economy Standards for Model Year 2024-2026.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/usdot-announces-new- vehicle-fuel-economy-standards-model-year-2024-2026.

Alameda Aquatic Center 67 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
a) Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?

Consistent with the approved project, energy is consumed during the construction and operational phases of the modified project.

Construction
The construction phase would require energy for the actual manufacture and transportation of building materials, preparation of the site (e.g., grading), and the actual construction of the project.

Construction contractors would be required by Mitigation Measure AIR-1 (see Section 4.3 Air Quality) to minimize equipment idling time and maintain equipment in proper operating condition, which would ensure that fuel powering the equipment would not be used in an inefficient or wasteful manner. Further, implementation of the CARB-adopted emission limits for diesel fueled vehicles and equipment, including off-road equipment, would significantly reduce emissions of DPM and NOx. While the intent of these regulations is to reduce Nox emissions, the newer engines would also be more fuel efficient. The modified project would also be required to comply with the CALGreen Code (as reinforced by the Alameda Municipal Code), which is explicitly intended to encourage sustainable construction practices in energy efficiency and other environmental parameters, and includes provisions for energy conservation during construction activities. As part of CALGreen Code requirements, project sponsors would be required to prepare and implement a construction waste management plan that would contribute to energy conservation. Consistent with the approved project, construction of the modified project would not result in a potentially significant impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.

Operation
Operation of the modified project would consume energy for multiple purposes including, but not limited to, building heating and cooling, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Electricity would also be consumed to charge EVs. Gasoline and diesel fuel would be consumed by employees, visitors, deliveries, and service vehicles traveling to and from the site.

As shown in Table 4.6-1 below, the modified project would consume approximately 612,036 kWh/yr of electricity annually. The modified project would be all electric and would not utilize any natural gas. Assuming the average fuel economy of 25.4 mg, vehicular travel to/from the modified project would consume approximately 46,515 gallons of gasoline per year.

Table 4.6-1: Estimated Annual Energy Use
Development Electricity Use
(kWh)
Natural Gas Use
(kBtu)
Gasoline
1 (gallons per year)
Modified Project 612,036 -- 46,5152

Alameda Aquatic Center 68 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Sources: Gordon, William. Principal Director of Interior Architecture, els architecture + urban design. Personal Communication. February 26, 2025.

Notes:
1 Gasoline use calculated based on estimated annual VMT of proposed uses in CalEEMod divided by average U.S. fuel economy. Per the 2021 EPA Automotive Trends Report, the average U.S. Fuel Economy is 25.4 mpg for light-duty vehicles.
2 The VMT for the project was estimated to be 1,181,463 VMT per year. Source: Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Alameda Aquatics Center Construction Emissions and Health Risk Assessment. January 2025.

The modified project’s related energy use would be greater than the approved project (refer to Section 3.2 of this IS/Addendum), but is less than significant in comparison with state and county consumption of electricity, natural gas, and gasoline identified under Section 4.6.1.2 Existing Conditions. Furthermore, although the modified project would use more energy than the approved project, the consumption would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.

The Alameda General Plan 2040 was developed with the explicit intention of reducing energy use and transitioning to renewable sources of energy in order to reduce environmental impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions and associated climate change. Accordingly, the Alameda Geneal Plan 2040 EIR found that compliance with the City’s General Plan policies, the CALGreen Building Code and the City of Alameda General Plan and Municipal Code would ensure that future development allowed under the General Plan (including the modified project 48) would not result in
a potentially significant impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. [New Less than Significant Impact]

b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

As discussed above, the modified project would comply with the CALGreen Building Code, CARB regulations, Alameda 2040 General Plan, and the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. [New Less than Significant Impact]

48 The modified project proposes to develop a 2.35-acre portion of the site with an aquatic swim center consistent with General Plan Policy OS-15.

Alameda Aquatic Center 69 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Geology and Soils
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Hydrogeological Investigation prepared for the project by Ninyo & Moore. A copy of the Hydrogeological Investigation report, dated May 13, 2024, is included as Appendix C to this IS/Addendum.

4.8.1 Environmental Setting

4.8.1.1 Regulatory Framework
State
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. The act regulates development in California near known active faults due to hazards associated with surface fault ruptures. Alquist-Priolo maps are distributed to affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new construction. Areas within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone require special studies to evaluate the potential for surface rupture to ensure that no structures intended for human occupancy are constructed across an active fault.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) was passed in 1990 following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The SHMA directs the California Geological Survey (CGS) to identify and map areas prone to liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking. CGS has completed seismic hazard mapping for the portions of California most susceptible to liquefaction, landslides, and ground shaking, including the central San Francisco Bay Area. The SHMA requires that agencies only approve projects in seismic hazard zones following site-specific geotechnical investigations to determine if the seismic hazard is present and identify measures to reduce earthquake-related hazards.

California Building Standards Code
The California Building Code (CBC) prescribes standards for constructing safe buildings. The CBC contains provisions for earthquake safety based on factors including occupancy type, soil and rock profile, ground strength, and distance to seismic sources. The CBC requires that a site-specific geotechnical investigation report be prepared for most development projects to evaluate seismic and geologic conditions such as surface fault ruptures, ground shaking, liquefaction, differential settlement, lateral spreading, expansive soils, and slope stability. The CBC is updated every three years.

Alameda Aquatic Center 70 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Regulations Excavation, shoring, and trenching activities during construction are subject to occupational safety standards for stabilization by the California Department of Industrial Relations, Cal/OSHA under Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Excavation Rules. These regulations minimize the potential for instability and collapse that could injure construction workers on the site.

Public Resources Code Section 5097.5
Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in geologic strata. They range from mammoth and dinosaur bones to impressions of ancient animals and plants, trace remains, and microfossils. These materials are valued for the information they yield about the history of the earth and its past ecological settings. California Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 specifies that unauthorized removal of a paleontological resource is a misdemeanor. Under the CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant impact on paleontological resources if it would disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

City of Alameda
Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to geology and soils and are applicable to the project.

Policies Description
HS-9 Maintain up-to-date local building codes that incorporate new standards for construction pertaining to development on areas of fill or underlain by bay mud or Merritt sand.

HS-13 Require owners of vulnerable structures, to the extent feasible, to retrofit existing structures to withstand earthquake ground shaking, and require retrofitting when such structures are substantially rehabilitated or remodeled.

HS-24 Require and enforce stringent groundwater management programs to prevent subsidence.

HS-29 Require new development to comply with the City’s current fire, seismic, and sprinkler codes.

4.8.1.2 Existing Conditions
Regional Geology
Alameda Island was prehistorically a sand dune that formed during the last ice age over 10,000 years ago on a low-lying peninsula. These sands were eroded from the Oakland Hills and deposited when sea levels were low and San Francisco Bay was a wide river valley. When the sea level rose, the tops of the dunes remained. The Pleistocene deposits were uplifted and dissected by stream channels that were later filled with younger stream and fan deposits of the Temescal formation.

During Holocene time, fluvial activity eroded these sediments and resulted in the estuary channel

Alameda Aquatic Center 71 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
between Oakland and Alameda. Recent Bay mud and estuary deposits filled portions of the channel and buried near-shore portions of the Merritt Sand.

Since the mid-1800’s, Alameda Island has been enlarged by placement of fill into the bay and estuaries, resulting in large sections of Alameda being underlain by artificial fill. In addition, the Oakland-Alameda Estuary was extended by man-made excavation and has been subjected to dredging to facilitate ship passage. Today, the geology of Alameda is quite uniform, with about half of Alameda Island and about three-quarters of Bay Farm Island underlain by artificial fill that was placed in the middle of the 19th century to reclaim marshland. The fill was composed mainly of Merritt sand, Bay Mud, Temescal formation debris, broken rock, and miscellaneous refuse. The central and eastern half of Alameda Island, occupying the original prehistoric peninsula, is underlain by dune sand from the Holocene and Pleistocene eras. The central portion of Bay Farm Island that occupies the original land mass is underlain by Merritt sand from the Holocene and Pleistocene eras.

On-Site Geologic Conditions
Soils and Topography
The project site is characterized by a low degree of topographic relief with a ground surface elevation that ranges between approximately 12 and 22 feet above mean sea level (MSL) with an average gradient across the site of approximately 2.3 percent to the east.

The project site is underlain by fill, and interfingered Dune Sand and Bay Mud.

Seismicity and Seismic Hazards
Alameda is located in the seismically active San Francisco Bay Region, where all locations are potentially subject to strong seismic shaking during an earthquake event on one of the regional faults that cross the region. Although there are no active faults in Alameda, there are a number of historic and Quaternary-age earthquake faults located to the west and east of the City.

The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. 49 The nearest active fault
to Alameda is the Hayward Fault, located about three miles to the east. The San Andreas Fault, located approximately 12 miles to the west, was the origin of the Great 1906 San Francisco Earthquake.

Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading
Liquefaction occurs when clean, loose, saturated, uniformly graded, fine-grained soils within 40 feet of the ground surface are exposed to strong seismic ground shaking. The soils temporarily lose strength and cohesion due to buildup of excess pore water pressure during earthquake-induced

49 California Geological Survey. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed February 19, 2025. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/

Alameda Aquatic Center 72 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
cyclic loading, resulting in a loss of ground stability that can cause building foundations to fail. Soil liquefaction may also damage roads, pavements, pipelines, and underground cables. Soils susceptible to liquefaction include saturated, loose to medium dense sand and gravel, low-plasticity silt, and some low-plasticity clay deposits.

The maps of seismic hazards prepared by the CGS under the Seismic Hazards Mapping Program that include the City of Alameda show the entire city as being within a Liquefaction Zone. 50 The project
site is designated with Moderate Susceptibility for liquefaction. 51

Landslides
Areas that are most susceptible to earthquake-induced landslides are steep slopes in poorly cemented or highly fractured rocks, areas underlain by loose, weak soils, and areas on or adjacent to existing landslide deposits. Although these geologic and terrain conditions exist in many parts of California, as an essentially level city, much of which is constructed on artificial fill, there is no potential for landslide in Alameda.

Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered during the December 2023 subsurface exploration at depths ranging between five feet and 14 feet below the ground surface. Regional groundwater records compiled by the CGS indicate that the historic high groundwater level at the site is about five feet below the ground surface. Variations or fluctuations in the groundwater levels across the site and over time may occur due to seasonal precipitation, spatial variations in topography or subsurface hydrogeologic conditions, or as a result of tidal variations or other factors.

Paleontological Resources
Most of the City of Alameda is underlain by artificial fill overlying estuarine mud (also referred to as Young Bay Mud), which is a silty clay that is rich in organic materials and is known to be soft and compressible. These soils have a very low potential for paleontological resources being present in the subsurface.

The geologic units underlying Alameda represent either historic (in the last 200 years) or Holocene- age (last 11,000 years) geologic units. Such recent deposits are unlikely to preserve the remains of organisms due to the lack of time and burial needed for the organisms to be fossilized. In addition, artificial fills are man-made, and have been mixed and reworked from native geologic materials, and therefore are not fossil-yielding.

50 City of Alameda. General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. Page 14-12. 51 Ibid. Figure GS-5.

Alameda Aquatic Center 73 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.8.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

- Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a
known fault (refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42)?

- Strong seismic ground shaking?
- Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?

- Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?

c) 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?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
the current California Building Code,
creating substantial direct or indirect risks
to life or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?

f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?

Alameda Aquatic Center 74 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would have less than significant geology and soils impacts.

a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides?

As discussed in Section 4.7.1.2, the project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, making fault rupture at the site unlikely.52 Consistent with the approved project, the project site is located in a seismically active region. The project site could experience a range of ground shaking effects during an earthquake on one of the aforementioned Bay Area faults (refer to Section 4.7.1.2). Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be required to comply with all applicable City of Alameda regulations and standards to address potential geologic impacts associated with development of the site. As the project site is located within a liquefaction Seismic Hazard Zone according to the CGS, the City would be required to comply with the Guidelines set by CGS Special Publication. The project site is relatively level, and is not located on or adjacent to a hillside. Improvements resulting from the proposed project would therefore not be affected by potential impacts associated with landslides or mudslides. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

The potential for erosion would be highest during the grading and excavation phase of the project.

These activities could increase the exposure of on-site soils to wind and water erosion. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would disturb more than one acre and would be subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for construction, including preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would include a description of appropriate BMPs that include erosion control measures.

Construction contractor(s) are responsible for implementation of the SWPPP, which includes maintenance, inspection, and repair of erosion and sediment control measures and water quality BMPs throughout the construction period. Once constructed, disturbed areas would be protected by coverings such as structures, pavement, concrete, or vegetation such the potential for erosion or loss of topsoil is very low. Implementation of these measures would reduce impacts associated with soil erosion to a less than significant level. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

52 California Geological Survey. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed February 19, 2025. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/

Alameda Aquatic Center 75 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
c) Would the project 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?

The City of Alameda landslide hazard maps show the entire city as being within a Liquefaction Zone.53 The project site is designated with Moderate Susceptibility for liquefaction. 54 Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be constructed in accordance with the CBC and City grading requirements.

As a result, potential impacts associated with unstable units would be less than significant. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in the current California Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?

Hazards from expansive soils can generally be eliminated through placement of non-expansive fill and proper structural design. It is not known whether the project site is located on expansive soils.

Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be required to complete a site- specific geotechnical investigation and incorporation of geotechnical recommendations, as required by the City’s Building Division and the California Building Code prior to issuance of a building permit, would ensure that site-specific information on shrink-swell capabilities of onsite soils is obtained.

The site-specific geotechnical investigation would include measures to minimize hazards associated with expansive soils, if present. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

e) Would the project 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?

The project would connect to existing City sewer services and would not include the construction or operation of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?

The project area is underlain by artificial fill overlying estuarine mud (also referred to as Young Bay Mud). These soils have a very low potential for paleontological resources being present in the subsurface. Therefore, the modified project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resources or site or unique geological feature. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

53 City of Alameda. General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. Page 14-12. 54 Ibid. Figure GS-5.

Alameda Aquatic Center 76 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Greenhouse Gas Emissions

4.9.1 Environmental Setting

4.9.1.1 Background Information
GHGs are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and regulate the earth’s temperature. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate.

In GHG emission inventories, the weight of each gas is multiplied by its global warming potential (GWP) and is measured in units of CO2 equivalents (CO2e). The most common GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor but there are also several others, most importantly methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These are released into the earth’s atmosphere through a variety of natural processes and human activities (anthropogenic). Natural and anthropogenic sources of GHGs are generally as follows:

• CO2 exchange between the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface • CO2, CH4, and N2O are emitted from wildfires and volcanic eruptions • CO2 and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion
• N2O is associated with agricultural operations such as fertilization of crops • CH4 is commonly created by off-gassing from agricultural practices (e.g., keeping livestock) and landfill operations
• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were widely used as refrigerants, propellants, and cleaning solvents, but their production has been stopped by international treaty • HFCs are now used as a substitute for CFCs in refrigeration and cooling • PFCs and SF6 emissions are commonly created by industries such as aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing

An expanding body of scientific research supports the theory that global climate change is currently causing changes in weather patterns, average sea level, ocean acidification, chemical reaction rates, and precipitation rates, and that it will increasingly do so in the future. Per the 2022 Scoping Plan from CARB, atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have increased by 50 percent since the Industrial Revolution and continue to increase at a rate of two parts per million each year, which will result in increased global temperatures.55 The climate within California are adversely affected by the global warming trend. Increased precipitation and sea level rise will increase coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion, and degradation of wetlands. Mass migration and loss of plant and animal species could also occur. Potential effects of global climate change that could adversely affect human health include more extreme heat waves and heat-related stress; an increase in climate-sensitive diseases; more frequent and intense natural disasters such as flooding, hurricanes and drought; and increased levels of air pollution.

55 California Air Resources Board. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. December 2022. Page 3.

Alameda Aquatic Center 77 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.9.1.2 Regulatory Framework
State
Assembly Bill 32 and State Bill 32
Under the California Global Warming Solutions Act, known as AB 32, CARB established a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, adopted mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHGs, and adopted a comprehensive plan, known as the Climate Change Scoping Plan, identifying how emission reductions would be achieved from significant GHG sources. The first Scoping Plan was approved by CARB in 2008 and must be updated at least every five years. Since 2008, there have been two updates to the Scoping Plan.

In 2016, SB 32 was signed into law, amending the California Global Warming Solution Act. SB 32, and accompanying Executive Order B-30-15, require CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030. CARB updated its Climate Change Scoping Plan in December of 2017 to accelerate 2030 statewide target in terms of million metric tons of CO
2e (MMTCO2e). Based on the emissions reductions directed by SB 32, the annual 2030 statewide target emissions level for California is 260 MMTCO2e.

2022 Scoping Plan
On December 15, 2022, CARB approved the 2022 Scoping Plan. The 2022 Scoping Plan provides a sector-by-sector guide on how to reduce man-made (i.e., anthropogenic) GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 over a 25-year horizon.56 The primary focus of the 2022 Scoping Plan is to reduce the usage of fossil fuels by electricizing the transportation sector, procuring electricity from renewable resources, phasing out natural gas in land use developments, and building transit-oriented communities that encourage multi-modal transportation. If implemented successfully, the 2022 Scoping Plan would not only reduce GHG emissions but also reduce smog-forming air pollution (NO x) by 71 percent and reduce fossil fuel
demand by 94 percent. The 2022 Scoping Plan also details natural carbon capture and storage process along with mechanical carbon capture programs to address the remaining 15 of anthropogenic GHG emissions that will remain post-2045. To meet these goals, CARB also includes a revised goal of reducing state GHG emissions 48 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

Senate Bill 375 and Plan Bay Area 2050
SB 375, known as the Sustainable Communities Strategy and Climate Protection Act, was signed into law in September 2008. SB 375 builds upon AB 32 by requiring CARB to develop regional GHG reduction targets for automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. The per capita GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles in the Bay Area include a seven percent reduction by 2020 and a 15 percent reduction by 2035.

56 California Air Resources Board. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. December 2022. Page 5.

Alameda Aquatic Center 78 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Consistent with the requirements of SB 375, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) partnered with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the Bay Area Air District, and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission to prepare the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan process. The SCS is referred to as Plan Bay Area 2050.

Plan Bay Area 2050 is a long-range plan for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area that provides strategies that increase the availability of affordable housing, support a more equitable and efficient economy, improve the transportation network, and enhance the region’s environmental resilience. Plan Bay Area 2050 promotes the development of a variety of housing types and densities within identified priority development areas (PDAs). PDAs are areas generally near existing job centers or frequent transit that are locally identified for housing and job growth. 57 Play Bay Area 2050 includes a goal to increase the number of households that live within 0.5 mile of frequent transit by 2050. Plan Bay Area 2050 promotes strategies that support active and shared modes, combined with a transit-supportive land use patterns, which together are forecasted to lower the share of Bay Area residents that drive to work alone from 50 percent in 2015 to 33 percent in 2050, resulting in a decrease in GHG emissions. Plan Bay Area 2050 also provides a path to emissions reductions via goals to expand TDM initiatives that support and augment employers’ commute programs.

SB 100
SB 100, known as The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018, was adopted on September 10, 2018.

The overall goal is to have all retail electricity sold in California be procured from 100 percent renewable and zero-carbon resources by the year 2045. SB 100 also modified the renewables portfolio standard to 50 percent by 2025 and 60 percent by 2030.

Assembly Bill 1279, also known as the California Climate Crisis Act, was approved on September 16, 2022 and codifies the statewide goal set by Executive Order B-55-18 of achieving net zero GHG emissions no later than the year 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. In addition, this bill has a statewide goal of reducing anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below the 1990 levels by the year 2045. The bill requires CARB to work with relevant state agencies to ensure that updates to the scoping plan identify and recommend measures to achieve these policy goals and implement strategies that enable CO2 removal solutions and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies in California. The bill requires CARB to submit an annual report.

57 Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Plan Bay Area 2050.

October 21, 2021. Page 20.

Alameda Aquatic Center 79 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Advanced Clean Cars II Regulation
To continue reducing air pollutants and GHG emissions in the transportation sector, CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Cars II Regulations (Resolution 22-12) on August 25, 2022. The new regulation requires that by 2035 all new passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs sold in California will be zero- emission vehicles. This regulation bans the sale of new gasoline or diesel passenger cars, trucks, and SUVs in California from automakers. Beginning in 2026, 35 percent of new vehicle sales must be zero-emission vehicles and plug-in hybrid EVs and that percentage will increase per year. By 2030, 70 percent of new vehicle sales will be zero-emissions vehicles and by the 2035 model year 100 percent of new vehicle sales will be zero-emissions. CARB will limit the use of plug-in hybrid EVs in the percentage requirements to keep the manufacturing of zero-emissions as the primary goal.

Existing gasoline cars can continue to be driven and sold as used cars beyond 2035. CARB is required to track and report on the zero-emissions vehicle market development annually.

California Building Standards Code – Title 24 Part 11 and Part 6 The CALGreen Code is part of the California Building Standards Code under Title 24, Part 11.58 The CALGreen Code encourages sustainable construction standards that incorporate planning/design, energy efficiency, water efficiency resource efficiency, and environmental quality. These green building standard codes are mandatory statewide and are applicable to residential and non- residential developments. The most recent CALGreen Code (2022 CALGreen Code) was effective as of January 1, 2023.

The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Code) is under Title 24, Part 6 and is overseen by the CEC. This code includes design requirements to conserve energy in new residential and non-residential developments. This Energy Code is enforced and verified by cities during the planning and building permit process.

Requirements for EV charging infrastructure are set forth in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and are regularly updated on a three-year cycle. The CALGreen standards consist of a set of mandatory standards required for new development, as well as two more voluntary standards known as Tier 1 and Tier 2. The 2022 CALGreen standards require deployment of additional EV chargers in various building types, including multi-family residential, hotel, and non- residential land uses. They include requirements for both EV capable parking spaces and the installation of EV supply equipment for multi-family residential and nonresidential buildings. The 2022 CALGreen standards also include requirements for both EV readiness and the actual installation of EV chargers.

CALGreen also requires new construction and demolition projects to have a diversion of at least 65 percent of the construction waste generated.

58 Refer to https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen.

Alameda Aquatic Center 80 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Regional and Local
2017 Clean Air Plan
To protect the climate, the 2017 Clean Air Plan prepared by the Bay Area Air District includes control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane and other super-GHGs that are potent climate pollutants in the near-term, and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.

Bay Area Air District CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans
In April 2022, the Bay Area Air District Board of Directors adopted the Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans. The report includes the Bay Area Air District’s thresholds of significance for use in determining whether a proposed project or plan will have a significant impact on climate change and provides substantial evidence to support these thresholds. The April 2022 GHG thresholds replace the GHG thresholds set forth in the May 2017 Bay Area Air District CEQA Air Quality Guidelines and represent what is required of new land use development projects and plans to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045.

City of Alameda Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP) The City of Alameda CARP, adopted in April 2025, identifies mitigation and adaptation measures towards the vision of achieving net zero carbon emissions and community resiliency as soon as possible. The plan also contains a GHG reduction goal of 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The CARP aims to decarbonize residential and nonresidential new construction and encourage the use of recycled and low embodied carbon materials, renewable energy, efficient design.

4.9.1.3 Existing Conditions
Unlike emissions of criteria and toxic air pollutants, which have regional and local impacts, emissions of GHGs have a broader, global impact. Global warming is a process whereby GHGs accumulating in the upper atmosphere contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth and changes in weather patterns.

Given the existing site is undeveloped, it does not generate GHG emissions.

Alameda Aquatic Center 81 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.9.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the
environment?

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy,
or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of GHGs?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would result in less than significant GHG emissions.

4.9.2.1 Thresholds of Significance
In April of 2022, the Bay Area Air District adopted new CEQA Guidelines that included a new set of significance thresholds that are based on a qualitative analysis rather than the previously quantitative metrics, as CEQA allows for both quantitative and qualitative approaches to evaluating GHG emissions. For land use projects to result in a less than significant GHG emissions impact, the project would need to comply with threshold A or B below:

A. Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements:

1. Buildings
a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and
nonresidential development).
b. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis
required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section
15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.

2. Transportation
a. Achieve a reduction in project-generated VMT below
the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743
VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in
the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s

Alameda Aquatic Center 82 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA:
i. Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing
VMT per capita
ii. Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT
per employee
iii. Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT
a. Achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle
requirements in the most recently adopted version of
CALGreen Tier 2.

B. Be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).

a) Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

Construction
Short-term GHG emissions from the construction phase of the modified project would consist primarily of heavy equipment exhaust, worker travel, materials delivery, and solid waste disposal.

Neither the City nor the Bay Area Air District have adopted thresholds of significance for construction-related GHG emissions. Given that construction emissions would be temporary (20 months), project construction would not be considered a significant source of GHG emissions and would not interfere with the implementation of SB 32.

Operation
As described in Section 4.8.1.2 Regulatory Framework, the Bay Area Air District updated their recommended CEQA thresholds of significance for GHG emissions in 2022. Under these recently updated thresholds, projects must demonstrate either A) specific building design and transportation elements or B) consistency with a local GHG reduction strategy. The City of Alameda has adopted a qualiﬁed GHG reduction strategy that meets the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b) guidelines; however, the City’s CARP was not adopted at the time this Initial Study analysis was completed, and therefore this analysis relies on compliance with Threshold A.

The modified project would comply with the qualitative building measures under Threshold A. The modified project does not include any natural gas appliances and the aquatic center would be 100 percent electric. As discussed in Section 4.6 Energy, the modified project complies with the CALGreen Building Code, ensuring that energy would not be used wastefully, inefficiently, or unnecessarily. As discussed further in Section 4.14 Transportation, the modified project considered a local-serving use and presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Lastly, the modified project would provide seven EV charger parking spaces, consistent with CalGreen Tier 2 requirements.

Alameda Aquatic Center 83 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
As stated above, the modified project would result in temporary GHG emissions during construction which would not interfere with SB 32. The modified project’s operational GHG emissions would be consistent with the Bay Area Air District Threshold A measures, which include building design and transportation measures. Consistency with the Bay Area Air District project design qualitative thresholds would ensure consistency with the SB 32 and carbon neutral goals set by the State.

Therefore, the modified project would result in a less than significant GHG impact during construction and operations of the proposed project. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?

As described in Section 4.8.1.2 Regulatory Framework, the 2022 Scoping Plan is a document that plans how the state will achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and reduce human caused emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045. The Bay Area Air District qualitative thresholds were designed to ensure future projects complete their “fair share” of implementing carbon reduction design features to help achieve the state’s carbon neutrality goal. A project that can meet the energy and transportation design elements outlined in the Bay Area Air District thresholds or is consistent with a qualified GHG reduction strategy is consistent with the goals outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan and would not hinder the state from achieving carbon neutrality. As described above, the modified project would be consistent with the Bay Area Air District’s qualitative thresholds.

Therefore, the modified project would not exacerbate the cumulative GHG problem and the project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable as it does not impede California’s ability to achieve carbon neutrality.

As discussed in Section 4.3 Air Quality, the modified project is consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan because it supports the primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan and is consistent with applicable control measures that reduce both criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions.

Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 84 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Hydrogeological Evaluation prepared by Ninyo & Moore and a Removal Action Completion Report prepared by SLR International Corporation. Copies of these reports, dated May 13, 2024 and July 2018, are attached to this IS/Addendum as Appendix C and D, respectively.

4.10.1 Environmental Setting

4.10.1.1 Regulatory Framework
Overview
The storage, use, generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste are highly regulated under federal and state laws. In California, the EPA has granted most enforcement authority over federal hazardous materials regulations to the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). In turn, local agencies have been granted responsibility for implementation and enforcement of many hazardous materials regulations under the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) program.

Worker health and safety and public safety are key issues when dealing with hazardous materials.

Proper handling and disposal of hazardous material is vital if it is disturbed during project construction. Cal/OSHA enforces state worker health and safety regulations related to construction activities. Regulations include exposure limits, requirements for protective clothing, and training requirements to prevent exposure to hazardous materials. Cal/OSHA also enforces occupational health and safety regulations specific to lead and asbestos investigations and abatement.

Federal and State
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. Over five years, $1.6 billion was collected and the tax went to a trust fund for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. CERCLA accomplished the following objectives:

• Established prohibitions and requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites;
• Provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and

Alameda Aquatic Center 85 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
• Established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified.

The law authorizes two kinds of response actions:

• Short-term removals, where actions may be taken to address releases or threatened releases requiring prompt response; and
• Long-term remedial response actions that permanently and significantly reduce the dangers associated with releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances that are serious, but not immediately life-threatening. These actions can be completed only at sites listed on the EPA’s National Priorities List.

CERCLA also enabled the revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List.

CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act on October 17, 1986.
59 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted in 1976, is the principal federal law in the United States governing the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste. RCRA gives the EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the "cradle to the grave." This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA also sets forth a framework for the management of non-hazardous solid wastes.

The Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) are the 1984 amendments to RCRA that focused on waste minimization, phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste, and corrective action for releases. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased enforcement authority for the EPA, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.
60 Government Code Section 65962.5
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code requires CalEPA to develop and update a list of hazardous waste and substances sites, known as the Cortese List. The Cortese List is used by state and local agencies and developers to comply with CEQA requirements. The Cortese List includes hazardous

59 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Superfund: CERCLA Overview.” Accessed May 11, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cercla-overview. 60 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.” Accessed February 20, 2025. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-resource-conservation-and- recovery-act.

Alameda Aquatic Center 86 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
substance release sites identified by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).61

Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 provides the EPA with authority to require reporting, record-keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. Certain substances are generally excluded from TSCA, including, among others, food, drugs, cosmetics, and pesticides. The TSCA addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of specific chemicals including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos, radon, and lead-based paint.

California Accidental Release Prevention Program
The California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program aims to prevent accidental releases of regulated hazardous materials that represent a potential hazard beyond the boundaries of a property. Facilities that are required to participate in the CalARP Program use or store specified quantities of toxic and flammable substances (hazardous materials) that can have off-site consequences if accidentally released. The Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH) reviews CalARP risk management plans as the CUPA.

Asbestos-Containing Materials
Friable asbestos is any asbestos-containing material (ACM) that, when dry, can easily be crumbled or pulverized to a powder by hand, allowing the asbestos particles to become airborne. Common examples of products that have been found to contain friable asbestos include acoustical ceilings, plaster, wallboard, and thermal insulation for water heaters and pipes. Common examples of non- friable ACMs are asphalt roofing shingles, vinyl floor tiles, and transite siding made with cement.

The EPA began phasing out use of friable asbestos products in 1973 and issued a ban in 1978 on manufacture, import, processing, and distribution of some asbestos-containing products and new uses of asbestos products.
62 The EPA is currently considering a proposed ban on on-going use of asbestos.63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines require that potentially friable ACMs be removed prior to building demolition or remodeling that may disturb the ACMs.

CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1
The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission banned the use of lead-based paint in 1978. Removal of older structures with lead-based paint is subject to requirements outlined by the Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1 during demolition activities.

61 California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Accessed February 20, 2025. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
62 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA Actions to Protect the Public from Exposure to Asbestos.” Accessed April 19, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/epa-actions-protect-public-exposure-asbestos 63Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 87 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Requirements include employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. If lead-based paint is peeling, flaking, or blistered, it is required to be removed prior to demolition.

Regional and Local
Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.12.f
PCBs were produced in the United States between 1955 and 1978 and used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications, including building and structure materials such as plasticizers, paints, sealants, caulk, and wood floor finishes. In 1979, the EPA banned the production and use of PCBs due to their potential harmful health effects and persistence in the environment.

PCBs can still be released to the environment today during demolition of buildings that contain legacy caulks, sealants, or other PCB-containing materials.

With the adoption of the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board on November 19, 2015, Provision C.12.f requires that permittees develop an assessment methodology for applicable structures planned for demolition to ensure PCBs do not enter municipal storm drain systems. 64 Municipalities throughout the Bay Area are currently modifying demolition permit processes and implementing PCB screening protocols to comply with Provision C.12.f. Buildings constructed between 1950 and 1980 that are proposed for demolition must be screened for the presence of PCBs prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Single family homes and wood-frame structures are exempt from these requirements.

Regional and Local
City of Alameda Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
The City of Alameda Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) (June 2016) was prepared in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, which required states, cities, and Indian tribes to prepare a hazard mitigation plan in order to be eligible for mitigation funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The purpose of the City’s LHMP is to identify the City of Alameda’s natural hazards, review and assess past disaster occurrences, estimate the probability of future occurrences, and set goals to mitigate potential risks, in order to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards.

City of Alameda Emergency Operations Plan
The Emergency Operations Plan (March 2019) sets forth the City’s responsibilities during emergencies associated with natural disaster, human-caused emergencies, and technological incidents. It provides a framework for coordination of response and recovery efforts within the City in coordination and with local, State, and federal agencies. The plan establishes an emergency

64 California Regional Water Quality Control Board. San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. November 2015.

Alameda Aquatic Center 88 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
organization to direct and control operations during a period of emergency by assigning responsibilities to specific personnel.

Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials and are applicable to the project.

Policies Description
HS-38 Require adequate and safe separation between areas and uses with hazardous materials and sensitive uses such as schools, residences and public community facilities.

HS-39 Require that all facilities that handle and/or store hazardous materials are designed to minimize the possibility of environmental contamination and adverse off-site impacts and that they are in compliance with state and federal standards and requirements designed to protect public health and the environment.

4.10.1.2 Existing Conditions
Historic Uses of the Project Site
The larger 22-acre approved project site was formerly used as a railroad maintenance and railcar storage facility for the Alameda Belt Line (ABL) railroad. The placement of tracks appears to be extensive as early as 1939 and the site was developed with several buildings as early as 1949. The maintenance yard area, including the maintenance building and one other building, were located at the west end of the 22-acre site (in the vicinity of where the modified project would develop a 2.35- acre portion of the 22-acre site). By 1959, two additional buildings were present on the eastern side of the property, a Yard House, and a small shed.

Maintenance cranes with two underlying maintenance pits were located within the maintenance building, with railroad tracks running into the building to provide access for the rail cars. Several smaller structures and two aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) were also observed in the vicinity of the maintenance building. One AST reportedly was a diesel tank and the second was thought to contain water. The maintenance building burned in 1980 and the Yard House was relocated in the early 1990s, to facilitate realignment of adjacent Sherman Street.

ABL ran railcars at the Site until 1998, and then Union Pacific Railroad continued to run cars until 2001.

The majority of the railroad ties were removed from the parcels in 2004 and 2005; the rails having been removed prior to that time (presumably between 2001 and 2004). The maintenance pits are believed to have been filled. Debris remaining on the Site, including debris illegally dumped, also was removed at that time. It is unclear when the majority of the ballast rock was removed.

Potential On-Site Sources of Contamination
As discussed above, the 22-acre approved project site’s historic uses involved hazardous materials use including petroleum products associated with underground storage tanks (USTs) and the site is

Alameda Aquatic Center 89 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
under DTSC oversight.65 To date, several investigations and remedial activities have been completed for the project site and are summarized further below.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessments
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) conducted by URS/Greiner Woodward Clyde (URSGWC) in 1999.

Recognized Environmental Concerns (RECs66) identified by the URSGWC Phase I ESA included: historical use of paint, gasoline and diesel, waste oil, solvents, and lubricating fluids, possible release of hazardous materials in maintenance pit at west end of the site, suspected petroleum stained surface soils in location of former rail spurs into maintenance building, petroleum stains in tenant spaces, stains in ballast rock areas in rail yard, potential hazardous materials in stockpiles of soil along northern portion of Site, possible lead-based paint on marine equipment within one tenant space, and a potential fuel release from a former UST. No other reference to this former UST was found in the report. Soil, ballast rock, stockpiled soil, and groundwater characterization were recommended, as was an asbestos survey of the Yard House building.

In 2010, the City of Alameda retained Belinda Blackie to perform a Phase I ESA of the Alameda Belt Line Parcels. The assessment included nine non-contiguous parcels, comprising approximately 39 acres of land. The assessment included a number of RECs, including the following relevant to the 22-acre approved project site:

• The possible presence of impacted soil near the former railroad tracks; • The possible presence of impacted soil where the historic ABL maintenance building burned; • The possible presence of elevated concentrations of lead and arsenic in dredge fill materials placed on site parcels;
• The possible presence of contaminants on the rail yard parcels, resulting from the import of potentially impacted soil from other vicinity properties.

Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
A 1999 Phase II report prepared by URSGWC summarized results of soil and groundwater characterization activities conducted to follow up on potential concerns identified by the earlier Phase I assessment. Phase II activities consisted of the advancement of 12 borings. At each boring location, soil samples were collected at the surface (zero to one feet below ground surface [bgs]) and subsurface (two to three feet bgs). The soil samples were generally spread across the site, however two soil samples were collected outside the concrete slab footprint associated with the Maintenance Pits and two were collected on the east and west side of the former AST.

65 The project site is included on the Cortese List pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. 66 An REC is defined as the presence of likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.

Alameda Aquatic Center 90 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Remedial Investigation Report
A 1999 remedial investigation report (URSGWC) summarized results of additional ballast rock and groundwater characterization activities conducted to evaluate the extent of impacted media detected in the previous Phase II ESA. The remedial investigation report recommended no further evaluation of ballast rock or petroleum hydrocarbons and chlorinated solvents in groundwater where previously detected. The report did recommend removal of the remaining rail ties and tenant materials and demolition of the two maintenance pits, followed by collection of soil and possibly groundwater samples from the vicinity of the pits. There is no documentation that any of the recommendations were implemented.

Targeted Site Investigation
In 2014, a Targeted Site Investigation conducted a targeted soil and groundwater investigation focusing on six Areas of Potential Concern. The investigation concluded that the only remaining constituents of concern at the site are total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel (TPHd), total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil (TPHmo), and lead in isolated Site soils and that previous groundwater contamination had attenuated. The report recommended either soil removal in the isolated areas of contaminant exceedance (specifically, portions of the former tenant area, maintenance building, AST area and yard area); or in-place management of contaminated soil via capping. The report recommended no further action relating to groundwater.

Remedial Investigation and Removal Activities
A Remedial Investigation work plan was approved by DTSC in April 2016 for further site characterization in advance of removal action activities. The 2.35-acre site proposed for development with the aquatics center evaluated in this IS/Addendum was identified as one of the Areas of Potential Concern as a result of the former maintenance yard area.

Based on the DTSC-approved workplan, remedial activities were conducted between March and June 2016. The Former Maintenance Area (2.35-acre modified project site proposed for the aquatics center) contained four excavation areas labeled as Area A, Area B, Area C, and Area D.

Railroad ties and other railroad-related wooden debris were removed from the Former Maintenance Area during excavation.

There are areas of capped soil on the portion of the site proposed for development with the aquatics center.

Groundwater
On December 6, 2023, two groundwater monitoring wells were installed at the project site at depths ranging between six and 26 feet. Sampling of the two groundwater monitoring wells was performed on January 15, 2024. The samples were analyzed for multi-range total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg); TPHd; and TPHmo. Concentrations of TPHg, TPHd, TPHmo and VOCs were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in either of the sampled wells.

Alameda Aquatic Center 91 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Potential Off-Site Sources of Contamination
Federal and state databases were searched to determine the potential for the project site to be affected by releases from off-site sources of contamination. The following potential off-site sources of contamination were identified:

• Stewart Court Property, 762 Stewart Court (Site Cleanup Case No. RO0002536, Geotracker ID T06019759396): According to Geotracker, the ACDEH issued a case closure in August 2021. According to the case closure, the site has residual subsurface contamination associated with total petroleum hydrocarbon compounds and volatile organic compounds from the site’s former land use as a machine shop. However, according to the case closure, the site has a low threat to human health and safety and the environment and in the vicinity of the site.

Asbestos-Containing Materials, Lead Based Paints, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls The 2.35-acre portion of the project site proposed for the aquatics center is vacant and there are no structures containing ACMs, lead-based paint (LBP) coated surfaces, or PCBs.

Other Hazards
Airport Operations
The project site is located approximately 3.8 miles northwest of the Oakland International Airport.

The project site is not located within the AIA.
67 The project site is also located outside the safety
and noise compatibility zones.68

Wildfire
The City of Alameda is not designated as being within high or very high fire hazard zones.69

4.10.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?

67 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft Environmental Impact Report. May 2021. Figure HM-1. 68 Ibid. Figure HM-2 and Figure HM-3.
69 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 92 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

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
Would the project:
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?

d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?

e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, result
in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the project
area?

f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?

g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would have less than significant hazards and hazardous material impacts with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 (refer to Section 4.1 of this Initial Study).

Alameda Aquatic Center 93 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

Construction of the project would involve the use of potentially hazardous materials, including vehicle fuels, oils, and fluids. All hazardous materials would be transported, contained, stored, used, and disposed of in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and would be handled in compliance with all applicable standards and regulations. Construction-related hazardous materials use would be temporary, and does not constitute routine transport, use, or disposal.

As discussed in Section 3.0 Project Description, operation of the aquatic center requires the use and transportation of chemicals to maintain the pools. Pool chemicals are typically delivered in bulk by specialized chemical suppliers. Transportation is regulated to ensure safety, especially since chemicals like chlorine and acid are classified as hazardous materials. Chemicals are shipped in proper containers with specific labels, and in compliance with federal regulations such as the HMTA in the U.S. The project would be required to implement a Hazardous Business Plan to ensure compliance, safety, and environmental protection.

Operation of the proposed project would likely include the use and storage on-site of cleaning supplies and maintenance chemicals in small quantities. The use, storage and transportation of these materials will be in accordance with local, State, and Federal laws and regulations. No other hazardous materials would be used or stored on-site. The small quantities of cleaning supplies and maintenance chemicals that would be used on-site would not pose a risk to adjacent land uses. The implementation of the proposed project in accordance with local, State, and federal laws and regulation will ensure that the on-site use of chemicals results in a less than significant hazardous materials impact. [New Less than Significant Impact]

b) Would the project 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?

As discussed in Section 4.9.1.2, the 22-acre site is under DTSC oversight due to residual contamination from past uses at the site as a railroad maintenance and railcar storage facility.

Remedial activities were conducted between March and June 2016. There are areas of capped soil on the portion of the 2.35-acre site proposed for the aquatics center. On December 6, 2023, two groundwater monitoring wells were installed at the project site at depths ranging between six and 26 feet. Concentrations of TPHg, TPHd, TPHmo and VOCs were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in either of the sampled wells. Groundwater was encountered during the December 2023 subsurface exploration at depths ranging between five feet and 14 feet bgs. The project proposes to excavate to a maximum depth of 10 feet bg. Based on the groundwater depths, temporary construction dewatering may be required. Any dewatering required for excavation and construction activities would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit, the NPDES, and the City’s requirements for the discharge of groundwater to the sanitary sewer (refer to Section 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality).

Alameda Aquatic Center 94 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Consistent with the approved project, the modified project shall implement Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. As part of the City’s coordination with ACEHD, the project shall prepare and submit a Site Management Plan (SMP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) to establish appropriate management practices for handling and management of impacted groundwater that may be encountered during construction activities.

[Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

The project site is not located within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. Therefore, the adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials within one quarter mile of a school. However, the project site is located within 0.25 miles of ViVi Family Daycare. At the time the adopted IS/MND was prepared, the daycare facility did not exist. As discussed above, the operation of the aquatic center requires the use and transportation of chemicals to maintain the pools, and transportation of the chemicals is regulated to ensure safety, and the project would be required to implement a Hazardous Business Plan to ensure compliance, safety, and environmental protection. Additionally, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 (which was required for the approved project) identified under checklist question b) the project would not emit significant hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials from construction. For these reasons, the modified project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. [New Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated]

d) Would the project 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?

As discussed in Section 4.9.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is under DTSC oversight due to residual contamination from past uses at the site and is on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. As discussed above, the modified project with the implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 identified under checklist question b), would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

e) If 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?

The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport. As discussed in Section 4.9.1.2, the project site is located approximately 3.8 miles northwest of the

Alameda Aquatic Center 95 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Oakland International Airport. The project site is not located within the AIA and is outside the safety and noise compatibility zones. Therefore, the modified project would not result in a safety hazard for people related to airport activities.[Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Development of the proposed project would not physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. During construction and operation of the proposed project, roadways would not be permanently blocked such that emergency vehicles would be unable to access the site or surrounding sites. Compliance with the California Building and Fire Code requirements would ensure that proposed project would not impair or interfere with the implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?

As discussed in Section 4.9.1.2, the project site is not within an area designated as a wildland fire hazard zone. In addition, the modified project would be in compliance with applicable building and fire codes. For these reasons, the modified project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to an increased significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 96 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Hydrology and Water Quality

4.11.1 Environmental Setting

4.11.1.1 Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
The federal Clean Water Act and California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act are the primary laws related to water quality in California. Regulations set forth by the EPA and the SWRCB have been developed to fulfill the requirements of this legislation. EPA regulations include the NPDES permit program, which controls sources that discharge pollutants into the waters of the United States (e.g., streams, lakes, bays, etc.). These regulations are implemented at the regional level by the RWQCBs. The project site is within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay RWQCB.

Under Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act, the SWRCB and RWQCBs are required to identify impaired surface water bodies that do not meet water quality standards and develop total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for contaminants of concern. The list of the state’s identified impaired surface water bodies, known as the “303(d) list” can be found on the on the SWRCB’s website.
70 National Flood Insurance Program
The FEMA established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to reduce impacts of flooding on private and public properties. The program provides subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations protecting development in floodplains. As part of the program, FEMA publishes Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that identify Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). An SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the one-percent annual chance flood, which is also referred to as the base flood or 100-year flood.

Statewide Construction General Permit
The SWRCB has implemented an NPDES General Construction Permit for the State of California (Construction General Permit). For projects disturbing one acre or more of soil, a Notice of Intent (NOI) must be filed with the RWQCB by the project sponsor, and a SWPPP must be prepared by a qualified professional prior to commencement of construction and filed with the RWQCB by the project sponsor. The Construction General Permit includes requirements for training, inspections, record keeping, and, for projects of certain risk levels, monitoring. The general purpose of the requirements is to minimize the discharge of pollutants and to protect beneficial uses and receiving waters from the adverse effects of construction-related storm water discharges.

70 California State Water Resources Control Board. “2020-2022 California Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Report).” May 11, 2022. Accessed February 20, 2024. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_assessment/2020_2022_integrated_rep ort.html.

Alameda Aquatic Center 97 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Regional and Local
San Francisco Bay Basin Plan
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB regulates water quality in accordance with the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan lists the beneficial uses that the San Francisco Bay RWQCB has identified for local aquifers, streams, marshes, rivers, and the San Francisco Bay, as well as the water quality objectives and criteria that must be met to protect these uses. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB implements the Basin Plan by issuing and enforcing waste discharge requirements, including permits for nonpoint sources such as the urban runoff discharged by a City’s stormwater drainage system. The Basin Plan also describes watershed management programs and water quality attainment strategies.

Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.3
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB re-issued the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) in May 2022 to regulate stormwater discharges from municipalities and local agencies (co-permittees) in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties, and the cities of Fairfield, Suisun City, and Vallejo.
71 Under Provision C.3 of the MRP, new and redevelopment projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area are required to implement site design, source control, and Low Impact Development (LID)-based stormwater treatment controls to treat post-construction stormwater runoff. LID-based treatment controls are intended to maintain or restore the site’s natural hydrologic functions, maximizing opportunities for infiltration and evapotranspiration, and using stormwater as a resource (e.g., rainwater harvesting for non-potable uses). The MRP also requires that stormwater treatment measures are properly installed, operated, and maintained.

In addition to water quality controls, the MRP requires new development and redevelopment projects that create or replace one acre or more of impervious surface to manage development- related increases in peak runoff flow, volume, and duration, where such hydromodification is likely to cause increased erosion, silt pollutant generation, or other impacts to local rivers, streams, and creeks. Projects may be deemed exempt from these requirements if: (1) the post-project impervious surface area is less than, or the same as, the pre-project impervious surface area; (2) the project is located in a catchment that drains to a hardened (e.g., continuously lined with concrete) engineered channel or channels or enclosed pipes, which extend continuously to the Bay, Delta, or flow controlled reservoir, or, in a catchment that drains to channels that are tidally influenced; or (3) the project is located in a catchment or subwatershed that is highly developed (i.e., that is 70 percent or more impervious).
72 71 California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Region. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. May 11, 2022. 72 The Hydromodification Applicability Maps developed the permittees under Order No. R2-2009-0074 were prepared using this standard, adjusted to 65 percent imperviousness to account for the presence of vegetation on the photographic references used to determine imperviousness. Thus, the maps for Order No. R2-2009-0074 are accepted as meeting the 70 percent requirement.

Alameda Aquatic Center 98 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 was the first State legislation enacted to regulate groundwater extraction in California. (Although AB 3030, passed in 1992, previously provided local public agencies increased management authority over their groundwater resources by enabling them to develop Groundwater Management Plans (GMPs), this legislation did not regulate groundwater extraction.) The Act, codified at Division 6, Part 2.74 of the California Water Code, requires governments and water agencies with jurisdiction over medium- and high- priority groundwater basins to prepare and adopt groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) by June 30, 2017. The priority of the basins is based on the degree to which they are currently overdrafted.

The SGMA authorizes local governments and water agencies to create Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to prepare the GSPs and sustainably manage their groundwater basins. The City of Alameda is located within the East Bay Plain Subbasin, which is designated as a medium-priority basin that ranges from the Carquinez Strait in the north to the City of Hayward area in the south.

The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) is the GSA for the majority of the East Bay Plain Subbasin, except for the southern portion, for which the City of Hayward is the designated GSA.

Because only the southern portion of East Bay Plain Subbasin has significant storage capacity and has seen significant municipal, industrial, and irrigation well production, the GMP focuses on the southern portion of the Basin. This plan encompasses Bay Farm Island, but does not include Alameda Island.

Construction Dewatering Waste Discharge Requirements
Each of the RWQCBs regulates construction dewatering discharges to storm drains or surface waters within its Region under the NPDES program and Waste Discharge Requirements.

Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to hydrology and water quality and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
CC-20 Land Development. Require new development to reduce the potential for injury, property damage, and loss of natural habitat resulting from groundwater and sea level rise.

CC-33 Green Infrastructure. Protect San Francisco Bay, San Leandro Bay, and the Alameda Oakland Estuary by promoting, requiring, and constructing green infrastructure that improves stormwater runoff quality, minimizes stormwater impacts on stormwater infrastructure, improves flood management, and increases groundwater recharge.

HS-19 Public Infrastructure. Protect and upgrade public infrastructure, including but not limited to streets, wastewater systems and pump stations, storm water systems and pump stations and electric systems and facilities to ensure capacity and resilience during storm events, high tides, and groundwater and sea level rise, to decrease the chance of flooding of nearby streets, utilities, and private property.

Alameda Aquatic Center 99 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Policy Description
HS-24 Groundwater Management. Require and enforce stringent groundwater management programs to prevent subsidence.

HS-25 Green Infrastructure. Require the use of “green infrastructure”, landscaping, pervious surfaces, green roofs, and on-site stormwater retention facilities to reduce surface runoff and storm drain flooding during storm events.

City of Alameda Green Infrastructure Plan
The City of Alameda Green Infrastructure Plan (September 2019) is intended to guide the identification, implementation, tracking, and reporting of green infrastructure projects within Alameda, in accordance with the MRP. It was developed in accordance with Provision C.3.j of the MRP, which requires Permittees to prepare a Green Infrastructure Plan (GIP) that guides, tracks, and reports on the inclusion of LID drainage design into storm drain infrastructure on public and private lands, including streets, roads, storm drains, parking lots, building roofs, and other storm drain infrastructure elements. A GIP must describe how the Permittee will shift their impervious surfaces and storm drain infrastructure from traditional storm drain infrastructure where runoff flows directly into the storm drain and then into the receiving water, to a more-resilient, sustainable system that slows runoff by dispersing it to vegetated areas, harvests and uses runoff, promotes infiltration and evapotranspiration, and uses bioretention and other green infrastructure practices to clean stormwater runoff.

City of Alameda Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance The City of Alameda Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance is set forth in Section 18-21 et seq. of the Alameda Municipal Code. The ordinance is intended to protect and enhance the water quality of the City’s watercourses, water bodies, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Clean Water Act. To accomplish this objective, it includes provisions for eliminating non-stormwater discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer; controlling the discharge to municipal separate storm sewers from spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than stormwater; and reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable. It reinforces the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit previously discussed and establishes penalties for non-compliance. In addition, AMC Section 18-31 et seq. establishes a Water Quality and Flood Protection Fee to assist the City in maintaining its aging storm drainage infrastructure, making improvements to meet future challenges such as climatic and land use changes, and maintaining a sustainable environment in accordance with the CWA, US EPA regulations, and the City's NPDES permits. The fee is a recurring annual fee assessed to both residential and non-residential uses based on parcel size.

4.11.1.2 Existing Conditions
Hydrology and Drainage
Alameda is divided by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (ACFCWCD) into three surface watersheds: North Alameda, Southwest Alameda, and Bay Farm

Alameda Aquatic Center 100 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Island. The project site is located in the North Almeda watershed, which encompasses an area of

3.4 square miles in the northern portion of Alameda Island.

Water Quality
A system of storm drains and underground culverts drains the northern side of Alameda Island into the Oakland Inner Harbor or estuary. Stormwater runoff in Alameda is ultimately discharged to San Francisco Bay, which is on the list of impaired water bodies compiled by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act.

Groundwater
Alameda is located in the western side of the East Bay Plain Subbasin (part of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin), a northwesterly-trending alluvial plain that is bounded on the north by San Pablo Bay, on the east by the contact with Franciscan Basement rock, and on the south by the Niles Cone Groundwater Subbasin. The East Bay Plain Subbasin aquifer system consists of unconsolidated sediments of Quaternary age that include the early Pleistocene Santa Clara Formation, the late Pleistocene Alameda Formation, the early Holocene Temescal Formation, and Artificial Fill. Historic water levels in the deep aquifer in the subbasin have varied between approximately 10 and 140 feet (below mean sea level) since the early 1950s.
73 Groundwater was encountered during the December 2023 subsurface exploration at depths ranging between five feet and 14 feet bgs.

Flooding and Other Hazards
The proposed project site is otherwise not currently located within a 100-year flood hazard zone according to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map.74

The project site is mapped in a Tsunami Hazard Area.
75 73 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. 74 City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014. SCH # 2015032026. Page 62.
75 Department of Conservation California Geological Survey. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. Accessed December 20, 2024. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/

Alameda Aquatic Center 101 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.11.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality?

b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:

- result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;

- substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
off-site;

- create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or

- impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?

e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that approved project’s construction and operation would have a less than significant impact on water quality with the implementation of stormwater management

Alameda Aquatic Center 102 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
measures as required by the City of Alameda (i.e., City of Alameda Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance) as well as compliance with the State’s General Construction Permit and C.3 Stormwater Standards. The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies, would not substantially alter existing drainage patterns, would not impede or redirect flood flows, and would not pose a substantial risk related to the release of pollutants due to project inundation due to flooding, tsunami, or seiche.

a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?

Construction
Construction activities (e.g. grading and excavation) on the site may result in temporary impacts to surface water quality. When disturbance to underlying soils occurs, the surface runoff that flows across the site may contain sediments that are ultimately discharged into the storm drainage system. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would comply with the stormwater runoff control measures required by City of Alameda Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance and the State’s General Construction Permit. Therefore, the modified project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or substantially degrade water quality during construction.

Groundwater was encountered during the December 2023 subsurface exploration at depths ranging between five feet and 14 feet bgs. The project proposes to excavate to a maximum depth of 10 feet bgs. Based on the groundwater depths, temporary construction dewatering may be required. Any dewatering required for excavation and construction activities would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit, the NPDES, and the City’s requirements for the discharge of groundwater to the sanitary sewer (Section 18-22.1 of the Municipal Code).

Additionally, due to the presence of contaminated groundwater (refer to Section 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials) the project would be required to comply with RWQCB procedures for disposal and transport of contaminated groundwater.

Post-Construction
Development of the modified project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces on-site.76 Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be subject to the requirements of the C.3 Stormwater Standards. Additionally, the modified project would also be required prepare and implement a SWPPP pursuant to the NPDES Construction General Permit because it would disturb more than once acre of soil. Therefore, the modified project would have a less than significant impact on post-construction water quality. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

76 The adopted IS/MND did not disclose the approved project’s increase in impervious surfaces compared to existing conditions at the time. The IS/MND noted that the approved project would create a limited amount of new impervious surfaces.

Alameda Aquatic Center 103 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?

The use of groundwater in Alameda is limited by the effects of saltwater intrusion and contamination in shallow aquifers on groundwater quality. However, the EBMUD has begun utilizing groundwater in its service area in recent years as a supplemental domestic water supply, injecting water into the South East Bay Plain Subbasin during wet years for storage for later recovery and use during a drought. However, consistent with the approved project, development of the modified project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge given any dewatering activities would be limited in extent and short duration. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or impede or redirect flood flows?

Development of the project would result in an increase in impervious surfaces on-site. As previously discussed, the modified project would include bioretention areas to treat stormwater and would comply with the requirements of the C.3 Stormwater Standards.

The modified project would also be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP pursuant to the NPDES Construction General Permit. For these reasons, the modified project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

d) Would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones?

As discussed in the adopted IS/MND and in Section 4.10.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is located in an area of minimal flood hazard. Most of Alameda is located in a Tsunami Hazara Area, including the project site. However, as noted in the adopted IS/MND, the project site is not located immediately adjacent to the Bay and is on the inner Harbor side of the Alameda island. Tsunami waves would have to travel from the Pacific Ocean through the Golden Gate and then through the Oakland Inner Harbor to finally reach the shoreline nearest the project site. Due to natural attenuation, the probability of significant tsunami waves impacting the project site is very low.

Further, geologic-induced seiche events have not been documented in the San Francisco Bay. The proposed project site is relatively flat and not subject to mudflows. Therefore, the potential impact

Alameda Aquatic Center 104 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
of seiche, tsunamis and mudflows is less than significant. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

Water Quality Control
As previously discussed under checklist question a), the modified project would implement stormwater management measures as required by the City’s Municipal Code as well as compliance with the State’s General Construction Permit. The modified project would also be subject to the requirements of the C.3 Stormwater Standards, which ensures new developments follow local and regional regulations regarding the reduction of pollutants in stormwater and implement BMPs, such as stormwater filters, to reduce such pollutants. Thus, the modified project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the San Francisco Bay Basin Plan.

Groundwater Management Plan
The project site is located in the western side of the East Bay Plain Subbasin (part of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin). The East Bay Plain Subbasin has prepared a Groundwater Sustainability Plan per the requirements of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. However, as discussed in Section 4.10.1.1 Regulatory Framework, the Plan does not cover the project site.

Therefore, the modified project would not conflict with a sustainable groundwater management plan. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 105 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Noise
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Noise and Vibration Assessment prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. A copy of this report, dated April 14, 2025, is attached to this IS/Addendum as Appendix E.

4.12.1 Environmental Setting

4.12.1.1 Regulatory Framework
Noise
Factors that influence sound as it is perceived by the human ear, include the actual level of sound, period of exposure, frequencies involved, and fluctuation in the noise level during exposure. Noise is measured on a decibel scale, which serves as an index of loudness. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness. Because the human ear cannot hear all pitches or frequencies, sound levels are frequently adjusted or weighted to correspond to human hearing. This adjusted unit is known as the A-weighted decibel, or dBA.

Since excessive noise levels can adversely affect human activities and human health, federal, state, and local governmental agencies have set forth criteria or planning goals to minimize or avoid these effects. Noise guidelines are generally expressed using one of several noise averaging methods, including Leq, DNL, or CNEL.77 These descriptors are used to measure a location’s overall noise exposure, given that there are times when noise levels are higher (e.g., when a jet is taking off from an airport or when a leaf blower is operating) and times when noise levels are lower (e.g., during lulls in traffic flows on freeways or in the middle of the night). Lmax is the maximum A-weighted noise level during a measurement period.

Vibration
Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero.

Vibration amplitude can be quantified using Peak Particle Velocity (PPV), which is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. PPV has been routinely used to measure and assess ground-borne construction vibration. Studies have shown that the threshold of perception for average persons is in the range of 0.008 to 0.012 inches/second (in/sec) PPV.

77 Leq is a measurement of average energy level intensity of noise over a given period of time. Day-Night Level (DNL) is a 24-hour average of noise levels, with a 10 dB penalty applied to noise occurring between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) includes an additional five dB applied to noise occurring between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Where traffic noise predominates, the CNEL and DNL are typically within two dBA of the peak-hour Leq.

Alameda Aquatic Center 106 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.12.1.2 Regulatory Framework
Federal
Federal Transit Administration Vibration Limits
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has developed vibration impact assessment criteria for evaluating vibration impacts associated with transit projects. The FTA has proposed vibration impact criteria based on maximum overall levels for a single event. The impact criteria for groundborne vibration are shown in Table 4.11-1 below. These criteria can be applied to development projects in jurisdictions that lack vibration impact standards.

Table 4.11-1: Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria
Land Use Category
Groundborne Vibration Impact Levels
(VdB inch/sec)
Frequent
Event
Occasional
Events
Infrequent
Events

Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations 65 65 65
Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep 72 75 80
Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily daytime use 75 78 83 Source: Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment Manual. September 2018.

State and Local
California Green Building Standards Code
For non-residential uses, CALGreen (Section 5.507.4.1 and 5.507.4.2) requires that wall and roof- ceiling assemblies exposed to the adjacent roadways have a composite sound transmission class (STC) rating of at least 50 or a composite outdoor/indoor transmission class (OITC) rating of no less than 40, with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 or OITC of 30 when the non-residential property falls within the 65 dBA Ldn or greater noise contour for a freeway or expressway, railroad, or industrial or stationary noise source. The state requires interior noise levels to be maintained at 50 dBA Leq(1-hr) or less during hours of operation at a proposed non-residential use.

California Department of Transportation
Caltrans recommends a vibration limit of 0.5 in/sec PPV for buildings structurally sound and designed to modern engineering standards, which typically consist of buildings constructed since the 1990s. Conservative vibration limits of 0.3 in/sec PPV has been used for buildings that are found to be structurally sound but where structural damage is a major concern. For historical buildings and some old buildings (i.e. pre-WWII), a vibration limit of 0.25 in/sec PPV would apply.

Alameda Aquatic Center 107 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
City of Alameda
Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to noise and vibration and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
HS-41: Support state and federal legislation to reduce transportation noise from cars, trucks, and aircraft.

HS-58 To the extent feasible, through the development entitlement process, require local businesses to reduce noise impacts on the community by avoiding or replacing excessively noisy equipment and machinery, applying noise-reduction technology, and following operating procedures that limit the potential for conflicts.

HS-59 Require a vibration impact assessment for proposed projects in which heavy-duty construction equipment would be used (e.g. pile driving, bulldozing) within 200 feet of an existing structure or sensitive receptor. If applicable, the City shall require all feasible mitigation measures to be implemented to ensure that no damage to structures will occur and disturbance to sensitive receptors will be minimized.

HS-60 In making a determination of impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), consider the following impacts to be “significant” if the proposed project causes: an increase in the day-night average sound level (Ldn) of 4 or more dBA if the resulting noise level would exceed that described as normally acceptable for the affected land use, as indicated by State guidelines, or any increase in Ldn of 6 dBA or more.

City of Alameda Municipal Code
Chapter IV of the City’s Municipal Code includes noise control regulations, and the following apply to the proposed project:

• Chapter 4-10.4 – Exterior noise levels when measured at any receiving single or multiple family residential, school, hospital, church, public library or commercial property situated in the City do not conform to the provisions of this subsection when they exceed the noise level standards set forth in Table I or Table II (Table 4.11-2 and Table 4.11-3, respectively, in this report) following:

Alameda Aquatic Center 108 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.11-2: Receiving Land Use Noise Level Standards, dB(A) – Single or Multiple Family Residential, School, Hospital, Church, or Public Library Properties Category
Cumulative Number of Minutes in Any
One (1) Hour Time Period
Daytime (7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime (10:00 p.m.
to 7:00 a.m.)
1 a 30 55 50
2 15 60 55
3 5 65 60
4 1 70 65
5 0 75 70
a For example, this means the measured noise level may not exceed fifty-five (55) dB(A) for more than thirty (30) minutes out of any one (1) hour time period.

Table 4.11-3: Receiving Land Use Noise Level Standards, dB(A) – Commercial Properties Category
Cumulative Number of Minutes in Any
One (1) Hour Time Period
Daytime (7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime (10:00 p.m.
to 7:00 a.m.)
1 a 30 65 60
2 15 70 65
3 5 75 70
4 1 80 75
5 0 85 80

In the event the measured ambient noise level exceeds the applicable noise level standard in any category above, the applicable standards shall be adjusted so as to equal said ambient noise level.

Each of the noise level standards specified above shall be reduced by five (5) dB(A) for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.

• Chapter 4-10.5 – Prohibited Acts: The following acts, and the causing or permitting thereof, are a violation of this section:
o Loading and Unloading. Loading, unloading, opening, closing or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or similar objects between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in such a manner as to cause a noise disturbance across a residential real property line. This action shall not apply to such activities where the items handled are still in interstate commerce. o Vibration. Operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates a vibration which is above the vibration perception threshold of an individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private property or at one

Alameda Aquatic Center 109 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
hundred fifty (150′) feet (forty-six [46] meters) from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way.
o Construction. Construction other than during the following hours: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays.

• Chapter 4-10.7 – Special Provisions (Exceptions)

• Construction. The provisions of this section shall not apply to noise sources associated with construction provided the activities take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays or 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays.

• City Parks. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to recreational programs or activities conducted within City parks between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m.

4.12.1.3 Existing Conditions
The Alameda Aquatic Center is proposed on the west side of Jean Sweeney Open Space Park, southeast of the Wilma Chan Way/Atlantic Avenue intersection, in the City of Alameda. The site is bound by Wilma Chan Way to the west; Atlantic Avenue to the north; single-family residences and small commercial uses to the south; and the park to the east. Other surrounding land uses include single-family residences and the Ismaili Cultural Center to the north, opposite Atlantic Avenue and multi-family residences and commercial uses to the west, opposite Wilma Chan Way.

The noise environment at the site and in the surrounding area results primarily from distant traffic along Webster Street and local traffic along Wilma Chan Way and Atlantic Avenue. Aircraft associated with Oakland International Airport also contributes to the noise environment.

A noise monitoring survey consisting of three long-term (LT-1 through LT-3) and three short-term (ST-1 through ST-3) noise measurements was made between Wednesday, January 15, 2025, and Friday, January 17, 2025. All measurement locations are shown in Figure 4.11-1.

Long-term noise measurement LT-1 was made in front of 1850 8th Street, approximately 20 feet east of the centerline of the roadway. Hourly average noise levels at LT-1 typically ranged from 51 to 65 dBA L
eq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and from 41 to 64 dBA Leq during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). The day-night average noise level on Thursday, January 16, 2025, was 57 dBA Ldn.

LT-2 was made along Wilma Chan Way, approximately 35 feet east of the centerline. Hourly average noise levels at LT-2 typically ranged from 68 to 72 dBA Leq during daytime hours and from 59 to 71 dBA Leq during nighttime hours. The day-night average noise level on Thursday, January 16, 2025, was 73 dBA Ldn.

LT-3 was made behind the residence at 2001 Bartlett Drive, approximately 60 feet north of the centerline of Atlantic Avenue. Hourly average noise levels at LT-3 typically ranged from 58 to 71 dBA

Alameda Aquatic Center 110 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Leq during daytime hours and from 47 to 61 dBA Leq during nighttime hours. The day-night average noise level on Thursday, January 16, 2025, was 65 dBA Ldn.

Short-term, 10-minute noise measurements ST-1 through ST-3 were made on Wednesday, January 15, 2025, between 1:00 p.m. and 1:50 p.m. Table 4.11-4 below summarizes the noise measurement results at each location.

ST-1 was made along the walking trail located on the project site, approximately 250 feet south of the Atlantic Avenue centerline and approximately 610 feet east of the Wilma Chan Way centerline.

Background traffic noise from Atlantic Avenue consisted of 48 passenger vehicles (46 to 52 dBA) and four heavy trucks (50 to 54 dBA). Additionally, a jet flying overhead generated noise levels of 59 dBA. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-1 was 50 dBA.

ST-2 was made along the northern boundary of the project site, approximately 35 feet south of the Atlantic Avenue centerline. During the ST-2 measurement, traffic along Atlantic Avenue included one bus (66 dBA) and 58 passenger cars (63 to 72 dBA). Nearby train horns (Oakland) were audible at ST-2, generating noise levels of 52 to 54 dBA. Additionally, a helicopter (64 dBA) and jet (53 dBA) contributed to the noise measurement during ST-2. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-2 was 63 dBA.

ST-3 was made in the food bank parking lot, approximately 60 feet east of the Wilma Chan Way centerline. Traffic along Wilma Chan Way included 189 passenger cars (58 to 78 dBA). Traffic noise from nearby Atlantic Avenue generated noise levels ranging from 60 to 62 dBA at ST-3. A nearby train horn generated noise levels of 57 dBA at ST-3. The 10-minute L eq measured at ST-3 was 64
dBA.

Table 4.11-4: Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurements (dBA) Noise Measurement
Location Date, Time
Measured Noise Level, dBA
Lmax L(1) L(10) L(50) L(90) Leq
ST-1: walking trail
roundabout at the park
1/15/2025,
13:00-13:10 60 55 52 50 49 50
ST-2: ~35 feet south of
the Atlantic Avenue
centerline
1/15/2025,
13:20-13:30 72 70 68 64 57 63
ST-3: ~60 feet east of the
Wilma Chan Way
centerline
1/15/2025,
13:40-13:50 78 71 69 64 61 64

AtlanƟc Avenue
Wilma Chan Way
Thau Way
Eagle Avenue
8th Street
9th Street Wood Street
Mason Street
Stewart Court
Rose
ﬁeld Loop
BartleƩ
Drive
AtlanƟc Avenue
Wilma Chan Way
Thau Way
Eagle Avenue
8th St
reet
9th Street Wood Street
Mason St
reet
Stewart Court
Rose
ﬁeld Loop
BartleƩ
Drive
LT-2LT-2
ST-1ST-1ST-3ST-3
ST-2ST-2
LT-1LT-1
LT-3LT-3
Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Dec. 20, 2024. Photo Date: Apr . 2022 Short-Term Noise Measurement Loca Ɵon
Long-Term Noise Measurement Loca Ɵon
Project Boundary
0 50 300200 500 Feet
NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS FIGURE 4.11-1
Alameda AquaƟc Center
City of Alameda
111IniƟal Study/Addendum
June 2025

Alameda Aquatic Center 112 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.12.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?

b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?

c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or 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?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The Jean Sweeney Open Space IS/MND concluded that adherence to the City’s Municipal Code would ensure that construction impacts associated with the approved project would be less than significant.

The adopted IS/MND concluded that because the project would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips, the approved project’s traffic noise increase would be less than significant.

The adopted IS/MND concluded that operational noise associated with the approved project would be less than significant since activities conducted within City parks are exempted from City noise standards between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m.

a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

Temporary Construction Noise
It is anticipated that construction would take a total of approximately 20 months. Construction activities are planned to occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction phases would include site preparation, grading, trenching, building construction, architectural coating, and paving. During each phase of

Alameda Aquatic Center 113 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
construction, there would be a different mix of equipment operating, and noise levels would vary by phase and vary within phases, based on the amount of equipment in operation and the location at which the equipment is operating.

Noise impacts resulting from construction depend upon the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise-generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise-sensitive areas. Construction noise impacts primarily result when construction activities occur during noise-sensitive times of the day (e.g., early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), the construction occurs in areas immediately adjoining noise-sensitive land uses, or when construction lasts over extended periods of time.

While the City of Alameda does not establish noise level thresholds for construction activities, this analysis uses the noise limits established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to identify the potential for impacts due to substantial temporary construction noise. The FTA identifies construction noise limits in the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. During daytime hours, an exterior threshold of 80 dBA L
eq shall be applied at residential land uses, 85 dBA
Leq shall be applied at commercial and office uses, and 90 dBA Leq shall be applied at industrial land uses.

Construction activities for individual projects are typically carried out in phases. During each phase of construction, there would be a different mix of equipment operating, and noise levels would vary by phase and vary within phases, based on the amount of equipment in operation and the location at which the equipment is operating. The typical range of maximum instantaneous noise levels for the proposed project would be 70 to 90 dBA L
max at a distance of 50 feet.

Hourly average noise levels generated by construction typically are about 71 to 89 dBA Leq for recreational facilities, measured at a distance of 50 feet from the center of a busy construction site.

Construction-generated noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of the distance between the source and receptor. Shielding by buildings or terrain often results in lower construction noise levels at distant receptors.

The typical hourly average noise levels for each phase of construction were calculated, assuming the two loudest pieces of equipment would operate simultaneously, as recommended by the FTA for construction noise evaluations (refer to Appendix E). Construction noise levels would intermittently range from 75 to 85 dBA L
eq at a distance of 50 feet from the operational equipment.

Construction noise levels would range from 61 to 77 dBA Leq at the nearest residential uses and the cultural center when activities are focused near the center of the proposed project site.

Construction noise levels would range from 52 to 63 Leq at the adjoining college building, from 52 to 71 dBA Leq at the surrounding commercial and office buildings, and from 43 to 54 dBA Leq at the park when activities are focused near the center of the proposed project site. Construction noise levels would not exceed the FTA noise thresholds.

To minimize annoyance and disruption to all surrounding receptors, the following construction best management practices shall be incorporated into the proposed project as a condition of approval.

Alameda Aquatic Center 114 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Construction Best Management Practices

• Construction best management practices shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
o Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. o Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines. o Locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise-generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses.
o Utilize “quiet” air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
o Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point where they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site. o Notify all adjacent business, residences, and other noise-sensitive land uses of the construction schedule, in writing, and provide a written schedule of “noisy” construction activities to the adjacent land uses and nearby residences. o Designate a “disturbance coordinator” who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule.

Implementation of the above best management practices would ensure that construction noise levels are reduced as much as possible at the surrounding receptors, thereby minimizing disruption and annoyance. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would adhere to Chapter 4-10.5 of the City’s Municipal Code, which limits construction work hours to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. For these reasons, temporary construction noise impacts associated with the modified project would be less than significant.

Permanent Operational Noise
According to Policy HS-60 of the City’s General Plan, a significant impact would occur if the proposed project causes: an increase of 4 dBA Ldn or more if the resulting noise level would exceed the normally acceptable limit for the affected land use; or any increase of 6 dBA Ldn or more.

Chapter 4-10.4 of the City’s Municipal Code provides exterior noise standards for noise-sensitive uses (i.e., residences, hospitals, churches, etc.) and commercial uses. For activities occurring for more than 30 minutes in a given hour, noise levels would be limited to 55 dBA L 50 during daytime
hours (7:00 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and 50 dBA L50 during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) for noise-sensitive uses and to 65 dBA L50 during daytime hours and 60 dBA L50 during nighttime hours for commercial uses. For activities occurring for more than five minutes in a given hour, noise levels

Alameda Aquatic Center 115 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
would be limited to 65 dBA L08 during daytime hours and 60 dBA L08 during nighttime hours for noise-sensitive uses and to 75 dBA L08 during daytime hours and 70 dBA L08 during nighttime hours for commercial uses. Maximum instantaneous noise levels would be limited to 75 dBA Lmax during daytime hours and 70 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours for noise-sensitive uses and to 85 dBA Lmax during daytime hours and 80 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours for commercial uses.

Where ambient conditions exceed these standards, ambient noise levels would be used as the daytime and nighttime standards. Additionally, a 5 dBA penalty shall be applied to the daytime and nighttime standards when the noise source consists of simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. Table 4.11-5 summarizes the applicable standards for the proposed project at each of the surrounding receptors, with the noted exception in Chapter 4-10.7 of the Municipal Code which includes exemptions for the standards in Table 4.11-5, which includes noise generated at recreational programs or activities conducted within City parks between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m. Therefore, the standards below are applicable for operation of the facility between the hours of 10:15 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.

Table 4.11-5: Standards Applied from 10:15 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.to Each of the Surrounding Receptors
Receptor Ambient
Meter
Daytime Standards (after 7:00 a.m. to
10:00 a.m.)
Nighttime Standards (10:00 p.m. to
7:00 a.m.)
More than
30 minutes,
dBA L
50 More than
5 minutes,
dBA L08
Max.

Level, dBA
Lmax
More than
30 minutes,
dBA L
50 More than
5 minutes,
dBA L08
Max.

Level, dBA
Lmax
South
Residences LT-1a 55 65 75 50 60 70
South
Commercial
Uses
LT-2
b 68 75 85 60 70 83
West
Alameda
Food Bank
LT-2
b 68 75 85 60 70 83
West
Commercial
Uses
LT-2b 68 75 85 60 70 83
North
Residences LT-3c 58 67 80 50 60 74
North Ismaili
Cultural
Center
LT-3c 58 67 80 50 60 74
East College LT-3c 58 67 80 50 60 74
East Offices LT-3c 65 75 85 60 70 80
a LT-1 represents the existing ambient noise environment at south residences. L50 noise levels at LT-1 typically range from 49 to 54 dBA L50 (average of 51 dBA L50) during daytime hours and from 39 to 52 dBA L50 (average of 47 dBA L50)

Alameda Aquatic Center 116 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
during the nighttime hours; L08 noise levels typically range from 53 to 63 dBA L08 (average of 56 dBA L08) during daytime hours and from 43 to 63 dBA L08 (average of 51 dBA L08) during the nighttime hours; and Lmax noise levels typically range from 65 to 92 dBA Lmax (average of 72 dBA Lmax) during daytime hours and from 53 to 91 dBA Lmax (average of 65 dBA Lmax) during the nighttime hours. Existing ambient Ldn at LT-1 is 57 dBA. b LT-2 represents the existing ambient noise environment at south residences. L50 noise levels at LT-2 typically range from 65 to 69 dBA L50 (average of 68 dBA L50) during daytime hours and from 47 to 66 dBA L50 (average of 55 dBA L50) during the nighttime hours; L08 noise levels typically range from 73 to 77 dBA L08 (average of 75 dBA L08) during daytime hours and from 61 to 76 dBA L08 (average of 69 dBA L08) during the nighttime hours; and Lmax noise levels typically range from 81 to 87 dBA Lmax (average of 84 dBA Lmax) during daytime hours and from 79 to 96 dBA Lmax (average of 83 dBA Lmax) during the nighttime hours. Existing ambient Ldn at LT-2 is 73 dBA. c LT-3 represents the existing ambient noise environment at south residences. L50 noise levels at LT-3 typically range from 55 to 62 dBA L50 (average of 58 dBA L50) during daytime hours and from 41 to 56 dBA L50 (average of 48 dBA L50) during the nighttime hours; L08 noise levels typically range from 62 to 73 dBA L08 (average of 67 dBA L08) during daytime hours and from 51 to 65 dBA L08 (average of 56 dBA L08) during the nighttime hours; and Lmax noise levels typically range from 73 to 91 dBA Lmax (average of 80 dBA Lmax) during daytime hours and from 67 to 84 dBA Lmax (average of 74 dBA Lmax) during the nighttime hours. Existing ambient Ldn at LT-1 is 65 dBA.

Project Traffic
The approved project would result in less than 110 daily trips. The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project’s traffic noise would not be noticeable. During non-summer periods, the modified project is estimated to generate about 710 vehicle trips on a typical weekday, with about 23 trips during the weekday AM peak hour, and 66 trips during the weekday PM peak hour. During the summer months, the modified project would generate about 1,670 daily trips with about 383 trips during the weekday AM peak hour and 149 trips during the weekday PM peak hour. The modified project would generate about 840 trips on typical weekend days during both summer and non-summer months. By comparing the existing plus modified project traffic scenario to the existing scenario, the aquatic center’s contribution to the modified project’s noise level increase was determined to be less than one dBA Ldn or less along each roadway segment in the project vicinity. Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not result in a measurable or detectable permanent noise increase at noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity.

Mechanical Equipment
The proposed aquatic center building would contain mechanical equipment associated with the pool operations. Additionally, an enclosure containing a transformer is shown at the north end of the pool deck. All equipment located within the building and the transformer enclosure would be adequately shielded from all surrounding receptors. The City’s daytime and nighttime standards, as well as the existing ambient noise level conditions, would not be exceeded. For all existing receptors in the project vicinity, the noise level increase due to fully enclosed mechanical equipment would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA Ldn increase).

Alameda Aquatic Center 117 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
estimated noise levels at all surrounding receptors, assuming all equipment on the rooftops of both buildings operates continuously during daytime and nighttime hours (10 dBA attenuation is applied to all noise levels in Table 4.11-6, as explained below).

Table 4.11-6: Operational Noise Levels Due to Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Location of Equipment
South Res.
& Comm.

Uses
West
Alameda
Food Bank
West
Comm. Uses
North Res.
& Ismaili
Cultural
Center
East College
& Offices
Mechanical
Equipment
Building

Distance from
Center of Roof,
feet
325 415 555 100 655
L50, dBA 25a 23a 21a 36a < 20a
Admin
Building
Distance from
Center of Roof,
feet
275 490
630 165 600
L50, dBA < 20a < 20a < 20a 23a < 20a
Combined
L50, dBA 26a 23a 21a 36a < 20a
Ldn, dBA 32a 30a 27a 42a 26a
Noise Level
Increase, dBA
L
dn
0 0 0 0 0
a A conservative 10 dBA attenuation is applied to all surrounding receptors due to the elevation of the equipment and the parapet walls surrounding the rooftops.

While the aquatic center’s noise affecting surrounding receptors would not be subject to the City’s standards between 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m., the City noise standards would apply during morning hours before 9:00 a.m. and nighttime hours after 10:15 p.m.

The City’s daytime and nighttime noise standards (see Table 4.11-5) would not be exceeded at the surrounding receptors. For all surrounding receptors, the noise level increase due to mechanical equipment operations would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA L dn increase).

Pool Activities
The proposed Aquatics Center is expected to have approximately 35 to 45 people per hour during typical operations. Proposed hours of operation are from 5:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. on Saturdays, and 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Sundays.

During large swim meet competition events, up to 185 people would be at the aquatic center at any given time between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. These large events would occur up to twice a year.

Smaller events would host up to 100 attendees six to eight times a year, with operating hours in the afternoon and evenings (i.e., between noon and 4:00 p.m. or between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m.).

Alameda Aquatic Center 118 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Typical Daily Activities
On typical days, the facility will support swim team practices, open lap swim, swim lessons, and open family swim. A typical day would include the following activities:
• Between 5:30 a.m. and 7:00 a.m., when all activities would be subject to the City’s nighttime thresholds summarized in Table 11 given activities between the hours of 10:15 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. are not exempt from the Muni Code noise standards, swim team practice or lap swimming would occur at the 30-meter pool;
• Between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., when all activities would be subject to the City’s daytime thresholds summarized in Table 11 given activities between the hours of 10:15 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. are not exempt from the Muni Code noise standards, swim team practice or lap swimming would occur at the 30-meter pool;
• Between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., when all activities would be exempt from City thresholds, in accordance with Chapter 4-10.7 of the City’s Municipal Code given activities between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m. are exempt from the Muni Code noise standards, swim team practice or lap swimming would occur at the 30-meter pool and swim lessons would occur at the recreational pool;
• Between 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., when all activities would be exempt from City thresholds, in accordance with Chapter 4-10.7 of the City’s Municipal Code given activities between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m. are exempt from the Muni Code noise standards, lap swimming would occur at the 30-meter pool and swim lessons and open swim would occur at the recreational pool.

Table 4.11-7 summarizes the expected L
50 and Lmax noise levels for each time period described above propagated to the nearest property lines of the surrounding receptors, as well as the total Ldn generated by the proposed aquatics center activities on typical days and the future Ldn expected at the surrounding receptors when the project is operational. The facility’s buildings would be located to the east of both pools and to the north of the recreational pool. The buildings would provide a minimum attenuation of 10 dBA for the east receptors during all activities at the pool deck and for the north receptors for activities occurring at the recreational pool. Additionally, the pool storage area on the north side of the pool would have a 10-foot-tall corrugated solid metal panel fence along the north side, which would be attached to the facility’s building by a gate. Assuming the fence and gates (when closed) to be solid from ground to top, the fence would provide a minimum attenuation of 9 dBA for lap pool activities at the north receptors. These attenuations are applied in Table 4.11-7.

Alameda Aquatic Center 119 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.11-7: Operational Noise Levels for the Aquatics Center on Typical Days Pool Activity
South Res.
& Comm.

Uses
West
Alameda
Food Bank
West
Comm. Uses
North Res.
& Ismaili
Cultural
Center
East College
& Offices
Lap Swim/
Swim Practice
(5:30 a.m. to
9:00 a.m.)

Distance from
Center of Pool,
feet

255a 300a 445a 175a 770a
Lmax, dBA 63 62 58 57b 44c
L50, dBA 50 49 45 44b 31c
Lap
Swim/Swim
Practice &
Swim Lessons
(9:00 a.m. to
10:00 a.m.)
Distance from
Center of Pool,
feet
255
a,d
300a
405d
445a
555d
175a
180d
770a
675d
Lmax, dBA 63 62 58 57b 44c
L50, dBA 53 51 47 47b,c 34c
Lap
Swim/Swim
Practice, Swim
Lessons &
Recreational
Swim (10:00
a.m. to 10:00
p.m.)
Distance from
Center of Pool,
feet
255
a,d
300a
405d
445a
555d
175a
180d
770a
675d
Lmax, dBA 72 68 65 65c 53c
L50, dBA 56 53 50 49b,c 37c
Combined
Operational Ldn,
dBAe 55 52 49 48 36
Future Ldn, dBAf 59 73 73 65 65
Noise Level
Increase, dBA
Ldn
2 0 0 0 0
a Distance measured from the center of lap pool, which represents the center of the combined noise source. b A conservative 9 dBA attenuation is applied for the north receptors due to the 10-foot solid corrugated fence along the north side of the pool storage area, which partially shields the lap pool. c A conservative 10 dBA attenuation is applied for the north and east receptors due to the intervening project buildings, which partially shields the recreational pool for the north receptors and both pools for the east receptors.
d Distance measured from the center of recreational pool, which represents the center of the combined noise source.
e Operational Ldn is generated by typical daily operations at the Alameda Aquatic Center. d Future Ldn is calculated by adding the Operational Ldn to the existing ambient Ldn at each of the receptors.

While the noise generated by the aquatic center affecting surrounding receptors would not be subject to the City’s noise standards between 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m., the City standards would apply during morning activities prior to 9:00 a.m.

Alameda Aquatic Center 120 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
The City’s nighttime noise standards (see Table 4.11-5) would not be exceeded by lap swimming occurring between 5:30 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. at the surrounding receptors. The City’s daytime noise standards (see Table 4.11-5) would not be exceeded by lap swimming and swim lessons occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. at the surrounding receptors. As explained above, all combined activities at the Alameda Aquatic Center on a typical day (i.e., lap swimming, swim lessons, and recreational swim) would be exempt per the Muni Code from the City’s noise standards between 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m.

Typical daily activities would result in a 2 dBA L
dn increase in noise levels at the south residences,
which would not exceed the City’s 4 dBA Ldn threshold per GP Policy HS-60. For all other receptors, the noise level increase due to the proposed aquatic center’s typical daily activities would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA L
dn increase).

Swim Meet Tournaments
The larger swim meet events would typically be one to two days long and would take place primarily on weekends between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The swim meet events would have approximately eight to 10 teams with six to 10 members per team. Not all teams would be present at the same time but rather staggered throughout the day, with a maximum of 185 attendees on site at any given time.

Table 4.11-8 summarizes the worst-case hourly average noise levels and total L dn generated at the
proposed swim meet tournaments propagated to the property lines of the surrounding receptors.

The facility’s building and pool storage fence provide a minimum attenuation of 10 dBA for the east receptors and a minimum attenuation of 9 dBA for the north receptors. This attenuation is applied in Table 4.11-8.

Since park activities are not subject to the City’s noise standards between 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m., swim meet tournaments at the facility would be exempt from the City Municipal Code standards.

Alameda Aquatic Center 121 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.11-8: Operational Noise Levels for the Aquatics Center during Swim Meet Tournaments Pool Activity
South Res.
& Comm.

Uses
West
Alameda
Food Bank
West
Comm. Uses
North Res.
& Ismaili
Cultural
Center
East College
& Offices
Swim Meet
Tournaments

Dist., feet 255a 300a 445a 175a 770a
Lmax, dBA 75 73 70 69b 55c
L50, dBA 65 63 60 59b 45c
Operational Ldn,
dBAd 60 59 56 55 41
Future Ldn, dBAe 62 73 73 65 65
Noise Level
Increase, dBA
Ldn
5 0 0 0 0
a A conservative 10 dBA attenuation is applied for the north and east receptors due to the intervening project buildings.

The noise level increase during days with large swim meet tournaments would result in a 5 dBA Ldn increase at the south residences, which would exceed the City’s 4 dBA Ldn threshold. As noted in Section 3.0 Project Description, the facility would host two large swim meet tournaments per year, and during these two days per year, the facility would result in a 5 dBA Ldn increase at the south residences, which would not represent a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the General Plan. For all other receptors, the noise level increase on days with swim meet tournaments would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA L
dn increase).

Small Events
The facility would host smaller community events six to eight times per year, with approximately 100 people in attendance. These community events would include movie in the pool events (occurring during operating hours in the evening) or holiday related, such as Halloween or Santa events (occurring on Saturdays or Sundays between noon and 4:00 p.m.).

Table 4.11-9 summarizes the worst-caseL
50 and Lmax noise levels, the operational Ldn, the future Ldn, and the estimated noise level increase at the proposed aquatics center during small events propagated to the property lines of the surrounding receptors, assuming a minimum attenuation of 10 dBA for the east receptors and 9 dBA at the north receptors.

Alameda Aquatic Center 122 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Table 4.11-9: Operational Noise Levels for the Aquatics Center during Small Events Pool Activity
South Res.
& Comm.

Uses
West
Alameda
Food Bank
West
Comm. Uses
North Res.
& Ismaili
Cultural
Center
East College
& Offices
Local Events
with up to 100
visitors

Dist., feet 270a 455a 600a 170a 630a
L50, dBA 45 40 38 40b 27c
Operational Ldn,
dBAd 37 32 30 32b < 20c
Future Ldn, dBAe 57 73 73 65 65
Amplified
Sound
Dist., feet 270
a 455a 600a 170a 630a
L50, dBA 57 53 50 52b 40c
Operational Ldn,
dBAd 50 45 43 45b 32c
Future Ldn, dBAe 58 73 73 65 65
a Distance measured from the center of pool deck, which represents the center of the combined noise source. b A conservative 9 dBA attenuation is applied for the north receptors due to the 10-foot solid corrugated fence along the north side of the pool storage area, which partially shields the lap pool. c A conservative 10 dBA attenuation is applied for the north and east receptors due to the intervening project buildings, which partially shields the recreational pool for the north receptors and both pools for the east receptors.
d Operational Ldn is generated by small event operations at the Alameda Aquatic Center. e Future Ldn is calculated by adding the Operational Ldn to the existing ambient Ldn at each of the receptors.

The L50 standards summarized in Table 4.11-5 would be exceeded at the south residences during the small events using amplified sound. Since all park activities are not subject to the City’s standards between 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m., small community events at the facility, which would not occur outside those hours, would be exempt from the City standards.

The noise level increase during small gatherings would not be measurable or detectable (i.e., 0 dBA L
dn increase). The use of amplified sound would result in a noise level increase of 1 dBA Ldn at the south residences, which would not exceed the City’s 4 dBA Ldn threshold. For all other receptors, the noise level increase due to amplified sound would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA Ldn increase).

Truck Loading and Unloading
While the site plan does not show loading zones, concessions at the Aquatics Center would require regular deliveries. It is assumed that loading and unloading activities would occur at the trash enclosures and along the curb of Atlantic Avenue.

Truck maneuvering noise would include a combination of engine, exhaust, and tire noise, as well as the intermittent sounds of back-up alarms and releases of compressed air associated with truck/trailer air brakes. For uses such as the Aquatics Center, medium-sized delivery and trash

Alameda Aquatic Center 123 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
trucks would be expected. Medium-sized delivery trucks typically generate maximum noise levels of 60 to 65 dBA at 50 feet. The noise level of backup alarms can vary depending on the type and directivity of the sound, but maximum noise levels are typically in the range of 65 to 75 dBA at a distance of 50 feet.

For all loading and unloading activities, including trash pickup, truck maneuvering would take up to five minutes per delivery. The proposed project would be operated in accordance with Chapter 4-

10.5 of the City’s Municipal Code, which prohibits loading and unloading activities between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Therefore, the daytime L 08 standards provided in Table 4.11-5 for
each receptor would apply to this noise source.

For all existing receptors, the noise level increase due to truck loading/unloading activities would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA L
dn increase).

Total Combined Project-Generated Noise
Operational L50 and Lmax noise levels due to project-generated activities (i.e., traffic, mechanical equipment, typical daily activities, swim meets, small events, and truck loading/unloading) would be exempt from City’s standards between 9:00 a.m. and 10:15 p.m., and activities occurring between 5:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. on typical days would not exceed the City’s noise standards identified in Table 4.11-5.

For all existing receptors in the project vicinity, the noise level increase due to project traffic, mechanical equipment, truck loading/unloading, typical daily activities, and small events, would result in a permanent noise level increase of 2 dBA L
dn or less.

During large swim meet tournaments held twice per year, the noise level increase would potentially be up to 5 dBA L
dn at the south residences. However, this increase would occur for a maximum of four days per year. While this would be a significant increase, it would not be considered a permanent noise increase since the overwhelming majority of the year (361/365 = 99%), surrounding receptors would not be subject to an increase more than 2 dBA Ldn over existing ambient conditions. Therefore, this would be a less-than-significant impact. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

The construction of the project may generate perceptible vibration when heavy equipment or impact tools (e.g., jackhammers, hoe rams) are used. Construction activities would include demolition, site preparation work, foundation work, and new building framing and finishing. Pile driving equipment, which can cause excessive vibration, is not expected to be required for the proposed project.

Alameda Aquatic Center 124 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
As discussed in Section 4.11.1.1, Caltrans recommends vibration limits for different building types.

No historical buildings, ancient monuments or ruins have been identified within 200 feet of the aquatic center construction. The nearest historic building is the Yard House, located on Sherman Street in the southeast corner of the 22-acre park parcel, 0.48 miles east from the aquatic center.

Conservatively, the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold would be applied for all structures in the project vicinity.

Project construction activities, such as drilling, the use of jackhammers, rock drills and other high- power or vibratory tools, and rolling stock equipment (tracked vehicles, compactors, etc.), may generate substantial vibration in the immediate vicinity. Jackhammers typically generate vibration levels of 0.035 in/sec PPV, and drilling typically generates vibration levels of 0.09 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet. Vibration levels would vary depending on soil conditions, construction methods, and equipment used.

The nearest off-site building would be the nearest residence to the north, which would be approximately 70 feet from the northern property line of the project site, across Atlantic Avenue.

When construction equipment is used along the northern property line, vibration levels would be below 0.07 in/sec PPV. All other buildings in the project vicinity would be 100 feet or more from the project site and would be exposed to construction vibration levels below 0.05 in/sec PPV.

Therefore, vibration due to construction activities at the project site would be well below the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold for conventional buildings. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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?

Oakland International Airport is a public-use airport located more than four miles southeast of the project site, and the Hayward Executive Airport is located more than 11 miles southeast of the project. According to the Alameda County ALUC, the project site lies well outside the 60 dBA CNEL/Ldn contour line. The modified project would be compatible with the City’s exterior noise standards for aircraft noise and aircraft would not produce excessive noise levels for persons at the site. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 125 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Public Services

4.13.1 Environmental Setting

4.13.1.1 Regulatory Framework
State
Government Code Section 66477
The Quimby Act (included within Government Code Section 66477) requires local governments to set aside parkland and open space for recreational purposes. It provides provisions for the dedication of parkland and/or payment of fees in lieu of parkland dedication to help mitigate the impacts from new residential developments. The Quimby Act authorizes local governments to establish ordinances requiring developers of new residential subdivisions to dedicate parks, pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication, or perform a combination of the two.

Government Code Section 65995 through 65998
California Government Code Section 65996 specifies that an acceptable method of offsetting a project’s effect on the adequacy of school facilities is the payment of a school impact fee prior to the issuance of a building permit. Government Code Sections 65995 through 65998 set forth provisions for the payment of school impact fees by new development by “mitigating impacts on school facilities that occur (as a result of the planning, use, or development of real property” (Section 65996[a]). The legislation states that the payment of school impact fees “are hereby deemed to provide full and complete school facilities mitigation” under CEQA (Section 65996[b]).

Developers are required to pay a school impact fee to the school district to offset the increased demands on school facilities caused by the proposed residential development project. The school district is responsible for implementing the specific methods for mitigating school impacts under the Government Code.

Local
Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to public services and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
OS-1 Secure adequate and reliable funding for the development, rehabilitation, programming and maintenance of parks, community and recreation facilities, trails, greenways, and open space areas.

OS-5 Continue to upgrade parks, trails, and community facilities to ensure accessibility and inclusivity for all residents.

Alameda Aquatic Center 126 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Policy Description
OS-13 Support the completion of the last two phases of the 25-acre Jean Sweeney Open Space Park to include a community garden, demonstration gardens, walking trails, a bicycle skills loop, an outdoor classroom, picnic areas, and large areas of open space and trees.

OS-15 Partner with the Alameda Unified School District to develop a City Aquatic Center to serve the community’s swimming needs and AUSD swim programs

Development Impact Fee Ordinance
The Alameda Development Impact Fee Ordinance, codified in Municipal Code Section 27-3, allows the City to assess development impact fees to mitigate the impacts of new residential development and new or intensified industrial and commercial development on transportation, parks and recreation, general public facilities, and public safety, including police and fire protection services.

The fees are adjusted each year to reflect the change in the appropriate Construction Cost Index.

Although the City’s development impact fees are generally for construction of new or expanded parks, recreation, and public safety (e.g., road improvements) facilities, the ordinance notes public facility improvements are necessary to maintain adequate levels of police and fire protection services.

4.13.1.2 Existing Conditions
Fire Protection Services
Fire protection and emergency medical response services are provided to the City of Alameda by the Alameda Fire Department (AFD), which has 110 sworn firefighters and 7 non-sworn personnel.

There are a minimum of 25 firefighters on duty daily.78 The AFD maintains automatic and mutual aid agreements with the City of Oakland as well as the California Office of Emergency Services and California Task Force 4–The Urban Search and Rescue.

The Department had an average first responder response time of 4 minutes 50 seconds to all fire calls in 2019. The average response time for all calls was 4 minutes 37seconds. 79 Police Protection Services
Police protection services in Alameda are provided by the Alameda Police Department (APD), which operates out of headquarters located at 1555 Oak Street. The APD budgeted positions for 88 sworn officers and 33 non-sworn personnel, though actual current staffing levels are lower. 80 Staffing
shortfalls are made up through overtime work by existing officers. The APD’s target staffing ratio is one officer per thousand population. The department-wide average response time for Priority calls is under three minutes.

78 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft Environmental Impact Report. May 2021. 79 Ibid.
80 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 127 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Schools
Public school services in Alameda are provided by the Alameda Unified School District (AUSD), which has nine elementary schools, four middle schools, and four high schools. The project would not generate any new students; therefore, schools are not discussed further.

Parks
The City of Alameda maintains nine community parks, representing approximately 98.1 acres of parkland; 17 neighborhood parks, encompassing 66.59 acres; and 7 regional parks, providing 344.93 acres of parkland. Citywide, there are 509.62 acres of parks and recreation facilities. 81 The city has not adopted a standard for the provision of parkland pursuant to the Quimby Act.

However, based on the City’s January 2020 population of 81,312 people and the 509.62 acres of existing parkland, the City currently has 6.26 acres of park land per 1,000 residents. 82 The project site is part of the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park.

Libraries
Library services in Alameda are provided by the Alameda Free Library, which has a main branch located at 1550 Oak Street, a West End Branch located at 788 Santa Clara Avenue, and a Bay Farm Island branch located at 3221 Mecartney Road.

81 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft Environmental Impact Report. May 2021. 82 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 128 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.13.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
a) Fire Protection?
b) Police Protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other Public Facilities?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that approved project would result in less than significant impacts to public services.

a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection services?

The Alameda General Plan 2040 EIR concluded that future population growth facilitated by the General Plan could require the AFD to acquire new equipment and add firefighting staff, and construction of new facilities to house this staff and equipment could be required. New residential, industrial, and commercial development would be required to pay the City’s development impact fees, which would provide the funding needed for increased staffing, equipment, and facilities.

When and if the City makes a decision to build new facilities, such a proposal will be subject to separate environmental review.

Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not be anticipated to lead to a substantial increase in calls for emergency medical services and fire suppression services. The Fire Department would review all project designs at the time building permits are issued to ensure that adequate fire and life safety measures are incorporated into the project in compliance with all applicable state and city fire safety requirements and to ensure that Fire Department personnel

Alameda Aquatic Center 129 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
would have adequate access to the site. Therefore, the project would not require the construction of new or expanded fire facilities. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection services?

The Alameda General Plan 2040 EIR concluded that increased population and development would generate increased calls for police protection services, which would require the Alameda Police Department to add additional police officers to the force in order to maintain an adequate staffing ratio. To accommodate this growth in staff, the General Plan 2040 EIR concluded it is likely that construction of new police facilities could be required in the future. However, there are currently no plans for construction of a new station, and any future project for this purpose would be subject to separate environmental review under CEQA. The General Plan 2040 EIR determined that payment of the City’s Development Impact Fees by future development would contribute to the improvements necessary to maintain adequate levels of police protection.

Consistent with the approved project, the modified project could result in an incremental increase in calls for police services but the increase would not be sufficient to require construction of new police stations in order to maintain adequate response times. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

c) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools?

The modified project consists of development and operation of an aquatic swim center. No residential units would be constructed and the project would not increase school-aged children in the area. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on school services and would not result in an adverse physical impact to new or physically altered governmental facilities or result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 130 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
d) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for parks?

The approved project consists of a new 22-acre community park and open space, which would primarily support passive recreation, with some active recreation uses. The modified project proposes to develop a 2.35-acre portion of the site with an aquatic swim center consistent with General Plan Policy OS-15. The environmental impacts associated with the construction of the proposed aquatic center and associated mitigation measures are evaluated in this IS/Addendum.

Implementation of this project would ensure that the City has adequate park and recreation facilities to service its residents and would not contribute to physical deterioration to other parks in the City. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

e) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for other public facilities?

The modified project would not create new demand for libraries or other public facilities.

Therefore, the modified project would not require the construction of new libraries or other public facilities. [Same Impact as Approved Project (No Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 131 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Recreation

4.14.1 Environmental Setting

4.14.1.1 Regulatory Framework
State
Government Code Section 66477
The Quimby Act (included within Government Code Section 66477) requires local governments to set aside parkland and open space for recreational purposes. It provides provisions for the dedication of parkland and/or payment of fees in lieu of parkland dedication to help mitigate the impacts from new residential developments. The Quimby Act authorizes local governments to establish ordinances requiring developers of new residential subdivisions to dedicate parks, pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication, or perform a combination of the two.

OS-5 Continue to upgrade parks, trails, and community facilities to ensure accessibility and inclusivity for all residents.

OS-13 Support the completion of the last two phases of the 25-acre Jean Sweeney Open Space Park to include a community garden, demonstration gardens, walking trails, a bicycle skills loop, an outdoor classroom, picnic areas, and large areas of open space and trees.

OS-15 Partner with the Alameda Unified School District to develop a City Aquatic Center to serve the community’s swimming needs and AUSD swim programs

The fees are adjusted each year to reflect the change in the appropriate Construction Cost Index.

Although the City’s development impact fees are generally for construction of new or expanded parks, recreation, and public safety (e.g., road improvements) facilities, the ordinance notes public

Alameda Aquatic Center 132 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
facility improvements are necessary to maintain adequate levels of police and fire protection services.

4.14.1.2 Existing Conditions
The City of Alameda maintains nine community parks, representing approximately 98.1 acres of parkland; 17 neighborhood parks, encompassing 66.59 acres; and 7 regional parks, providing 344.93 acres of parkland. Citywide, there are 509.62 acres of parks and recreation facilities. 83 The city has not adopted a standard for the provision of parkland pursuant to the Quimby Act.

However, based on the City’s January 2020 population of 81,312 people and the 509.62 acres of existing parkland, the City currently has 6.26 acres of park land per 1,000 residents. 84 The project site is part of the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park.

4.14.2 Impact Discussion

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
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?

b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that approved project would result in less than significant impacts to recreation.

83 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft Environmental Impact Report. May 2021. 84 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 133 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

The approved project consists of a new 22-acre community park and open space, which would primarily support passive recreation, with some active recreation uses. The modified project proposes to develop a 2.35-acre portion of the site with an aquatic swim center consistent with General Plan Policy OS-15. Implementation of this project would ensure that the City has adequate park and recreation facilities to service its residents and would not contribute to physical deterioration to other parks in the City. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Alameda Aquatic Center 134 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Transportation
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Fehr & Peers. A copy of this report, dated May 14, 2025, is attached to this IS/Addendum as Appendix F.

4.15.1 Environmental Setting

4.15.1.1 Regulatory Framework
State
Senate Bill 743
SB 743 establishes criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts using a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) metric intended to promote the reduction of GHG emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. Specifically, SB 743 requires analysis of VMT in determining the significance of transportation impacts. Local jurisdictions were required by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to implement a VMT policy by July 1, 2020.

SB 743 did not authorize OPR to set specific VMT impact thresholds, but it did direct OPR to develop guidelines for jurisdictions to utilize. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(1) describes factors that might indicate whether a development project’s VMT may be significant.

Regional and Local
Regional Transportation Plan
MTC is the transportation planning, coordinating, and financing agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area, including Alameda County. MTC is charged with regularly updating the Regional Transportation Plan, a comprehensive blueprint for the development of mass transit, highway, airport, seaport, railroad, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities in the region. MTC and ABAG adopted Plan Bay Area 2050 in October 2021, which includes a Regional Transportation Plan to guide regional transportation investment for revenues from federal, state, regional and local sources through 2050.

Congestion Management Program
The Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) oversees the Congestion Management Program (CMP), which is aimed at reducing regional traffic congestion. The relevant state legislation requires that urbanized counties in California prepare a CMP in order to obtain each county’s share of gas tax revenues. State legislation requires that each CMP define traffic LOS standards, transit service standards, a trip reduction and transportation demand management plan, a land use impact analysis program, and a capital improvement element. Alameda CTC has review

Alameda Aquatic Center 135 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
responsibility for proposed development projects that are expected to affect CMP-designated intersections.

Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to transportation and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
LU-3 Promote safe and walkable neighborhoods with inter-connected well-designed streets that serve the needs of all Alamedans and all modes of transportation.

CC-9 Support and encourage vehicle sharing to reduce the demand for vehicle parking and increase access to mobility.

CC-10 Reduce reliance on automobile use and reduce vehicle miles traveled by prioritizing walkable, transit-oriented, medium and high density mixed-use development in transit-oriented areas and commercial corridors.

ME-5 Maintain and implement Vision Zero as the guiding principle for transportation planning, design of streets and sidewalks, and the maintenance of the public rights-of-way.

ME-6 When designing, redesigning or resurfacing streets, provide safe and convenient access for vulnerable users including children, seniors, people with disabilities, and people walking and bicycling.

ME-7 Reduce collisions resulting in severe injuries and fatalities on Alameda streets by reducing automobile speeds and decreasing collisions between people driving, riding a motorcycle, biking, walking, or wheeling.

ME-9 Preserve access for emergency response vehicles to people and property and for evacuation.

ME-13 Manage and extend the Alameda street grid to maintain the character of Alameda, reduce traffic, and maximize mobility, access, and safety for all modes of transportation.

ME-14 Reduce traffic, improve public health, increase transportation equity, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, air and noise pollution, increase access to transit, enhance quality of life, and improve the efficiency of the transportation system by making Alameda a city where people of all ages and abilities can safely, conveniently, and comfortably walk, bike, and roll to their destinations.

ME-16 Improve mobility and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air and noise pollution by making Alameda a city where more people have access to safe, reliable, high quality transit.

ME-17 Promote shared mobility devices programs such as bicycle share, car share, and electric scooter share programs that reduce the need for an automobile trip. ( ME-20 Require that new development support citywide traffic reduction, greenhouse gas reduction, and sustainable transportation.

ME-21 Manage parking and allocate curb space to reduce congestion, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and increase safety.

ME-22 Reduce traffic, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions by reducing reliance on the single occupancy vehicle and reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT).

Alameda Aquatic Center 136 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Alameda Active Transportation Plan
The City Council adopted the Active Transportation Plan on December 20, 2022. The Active Transportation Plan establishes a vision and concrete actions to provide safe, comfortable, and accessible ways for people of all ages and all abilities to get around Alameda by walking, biking, or using wheelchairs and mobility scooters, pedal and electric scooters, electric bikes, skateboards, and the like.

City of Alameda Transportation Choices Plan
The 2018 City of Alameda Transportation Choices Plan establishes goals of increasing the morning peak-hour non-drive-alone trip share from 27 percent to 39 percent; and increasing the share of walking, bicycling, transit, and carpooling trips in Alameda by 5 percent, from 37 percent to 42 percent. It includes prioritized projects for the near-term, mid-term, and long-term in support of these goals.

Alameda Climate Action and Resiliency Plan
The 2025 Alameda CARP identifies mitigation and adaptation measures towards the vision of achieving net zero carbon emissions and community resiliency as soon as possible. The plan also contains a GHG reduction goal of 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The CARP identifies the following actions related to transportation:

• T-2: Active Transportation
• T-3: Transportation Demand Management
• T-4: Parking and Curb Management
• T-5 Public Transit Service
• T-6: Vehicle Electrification

4.15.1.2 Existing Conditions
Roadway Network
No freeways are located within the City of Alameda, but Interstate-880 (I-880) in neighboring Oakland provides connections to the City of Alameda. From the project site, I-880 can be accessed via the Webster and Posey Tubes. Primary access to the project site is provided via Atlantic Avenue and Wilma Chan Way.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The following bicycle facilities are currently provided in the vicinity of the project site:

• Bike lanes in both directions on Atlantic Avenue between Wilma Chan Way and Sherman Street
• Bike lanes in both directions on Challenger Drive between Atlantic Avenue and Marina Village Parkway

Alameda Aquatic Center 137 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
• Bike path directly south of the Project through the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park between the Atlantic Avenue/Wilma Chan Way intersection and the Atlantic Avenue/ • Sherman Street intersection (part of the Cross Alameda Trail, which is an approximately 4- mile low-stress bicycling and walking corridor that will extend between east and west sides of the Alameda island at buildout).
• Shared-use path on the east side of Wilma Chan Way extending between Atlantic Avenue in the south and Mariner Square Drive in the north and connecting to the Posey Tube path.

The Bikeway Vision network in City of Alameda Active Transportation Plan includes the following in the project vicinity:

• Convert the existing bike lanes on Atlantic Avenue to buffered bike lanes. • Convert the existing bike lanes on Challenger Drive to separated bike lanes. • Complete north-south shared-use paths through the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park connecting the Cross Alameda Trail to nearby streets including Challenger Drive to the east of the Project site and to Eighth Street just south of the Project site.

Pedestrian access to the project site would be provided via Atlantic Avenue and the Cross Alameda Trail on the south side of the project site. There are existing sidewalks in the project vicinity.

Transit Services
AC Transit is the primary bus service provider in the City of Alameda. Although there are no transit stops adjacent to the Project site, AC Transit operates lines at the following transit stops in the project vicinity:
• Both directions of Webster Street at Atlantic Avenue (approximately 0.2 miles, walking distance, west of the Project site):
o Line 20: 30-minute headways on weekdays and weekends. o Line 51A: 15-minute headways on weekdays and weekends. Line 96: 30-minute headways on weekdays and weekends.
o Line 851: 60-minute headways every day from approximately 12:00 AM to 5:00 AM. o Line O: 30-minute headways on weekdays and weekends.
o Line W: 30-minute headways on weekdays from approximately 4:30 PM to 7:00 PM. • Atlantic Avenue/Challenger Drive (approximately 0.2 miles, walking distance, east of the project site):
o Line 19: 60-minute headways on weekdays and weekends the Project would not modify access between the Project site and these bus stops.

Alameda Aquatic Center 138 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

4.15.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadways, bicycle lanes,
and pedestrian facilities?

b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)?

c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The Jean Sweeney Open Space IS/MND concluded that implementation of the approved project would result in less than significant transportation impacts with the implementation of Mitigatoin Measure TRAN-1a and 1B (refer to Section 4.1 of this Initial Study).

The approved project, involving the construction of a new 22-acre community park and open space, was evaluated against the level of service (LOS) standard as that was the applicable method of CEQA transportation analysis in 2014, prior to the adoption of SB 743, which required a move away from LOS to evaluate projects for transportation impacts under CEQA using VMT, refer to Section

4.14.3 Non-CEQA Effects.

The adopted IS/MND concluded that traffic generated by the approved project would be spread out throughout the day, and the increased traffic volume in any one hour on any one roadway is not expected to be high. In addition, trips to recreational facilities tend not to occur during peak commute periods when there is more traffic on roadways. Therefore, roadways in the project vicinity were determined to have sufficient capacity to carry the increase in vehicle trips to the park.

The adopted IS/MND concluded that the approved project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy regarding roadway, transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities and result in a less than significant impact to emergency access to and around the project site.

Alameda Aquatic Center 139 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle lanes, and pedestrian facilities?

Roadway Network
Construction of the project would take approximately 20 months. Construction activities would include daily vehicle trips generated by the arrival and departure of construction workers, as well as haul trucks carrying demolition debris, soil, and building materials. Construction of the proposed project would not require any lane closures. However, consistent with the approved project, construction of the modified project would impede pedestrian access near the site and block traffic, unless measures were taken. The modified project would implement Mitigation Measures TRAN-1a and TRAN-1b (listed in Section 4.1, above) to reduce this impact to less than significant.

Although transportation analysis under CEQA no longer recognizes vehicle delay as an environmental impact, intersection LOS was evaluated to help identify potential transportation system improvements that could be implemented as part of the modified project, to evaluate whether any transportation system improvements associated with the aquatics center would have the potential to themselves result in environmental impacts. Under all evaluated scenarios, the study intersections, including the project Driveway on Atlantic Avenue, would operate at LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours, and therefore not require physical improvements.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The Project does not propose any modifications to the existing or proposed bicycle facilities.

Considering the Project location on Atlantic Avenue and that Atlantic Avenue does not provide on- street parking, it is possible that the bike lanes may be used for passenger loading. As discussed in Section 3.3.5, the project would install “No Stopping Anytime” signs and paint red curb on both sides of Atlantic Avenue along Project frontage to prohibit vehicles from using the existing Class II bicycle facilities for pickups and drop-offs .

As discussed in section 3.2.2 Site Access and Parking, the project proposes to include two long-term bicycle parking spaces (south of the building) and 100 short-term bicycle spaces (west of the building). There would be space for the installation of long-term bike racks that can accommodate 10 bikes for long term/staff bike parking.

The project proposes a marked crosswalk across Atlantic Avenue just west of the project driveway and just east of the Marina Village Research Park driveway which is on the north side of the street.

The crosswalk would connect to the entry plaza through a diagonal path. The crosswalk would exceed the minimum stopping sight distance for drivers on both directions of Atlantic Avenue.

While the modified project would exceed the minimum stopping sight distance for drivers on both directions, to better accommodate pedestrians crossing Atlantic Avenue, the modified project would implement crosswalk improvements across Atlantic Avenue between the Marina Village Research Park and the project driveways (refer to Section 3.3.5).

Alameda Aquatic Center 140 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

Transit System
As discussed in Section 3.14.1.2 Existing Conditions, AC Transit provides bus service in the project vicinity. There are no stops adjacent to the project site and the project would not modify access between the project site and any of these bus stops.

Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy regarding roadway, transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)]

b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?

Since the City has not yet adopted a VMT policy or significance thresholds related to VMT, the VMT analysis is based on the guidance provided by the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) (formerly the Office of Planning and Research ). According to LCI’s guidance, screening criteria can be used to identify projects that can be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed analysis. Based on the guidance provided by the LCI, local-serving uses such as parks are considered to have less than significant VMT impacts. Local-serving uses can be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Local serving uses, such as grocery stores, local schools, and community centers, can be considered to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT because they would draw most of their users, customers, and/or visitors from a relatively small geographical area.

The approved project involved the construction of a new 22-acre community park and open space.

Based on the guidance provided by the LCI, local-serving uses such as parks are considered to have less than significant VMT impacts. The modified project proposes to develop an aquatic center that primarily serves the City of Alameda residents. Most of the trips generated by the modified project under typical conditions are expected to be local Alameda residents. In addition, the project site is easily accessible by non-automobile modes. Class II bicycle lanes on Atlantic Avenue and the Class I Cross Alameda Trail provide non-motorized access adjacent to the site, and Webster Street, about

0.2 miles walking distance west of the Project site, provides high-frequency transit service.

Considering the Project use and availability of non-automobile modes, the modified project can be considered a local-serving use and presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. [New Less than Significant Impact]

Alameda Aquatic Center 141 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

Geometric Design
Site Access and On-site Circulation
Automobile access would be provided via one main driveway on the south side of Atlantic Avenue, offset about 60 feet east of an existing driveway for the Marina Village Research Park, which is on the north side of Atlantic Avenue. The project driveway would be 20 feet wide and provide direct access to a 71-space surface parking lot. The driveway would accommodate all turns into and out of the Project. A second driveway on the east side of the parking lot would connect the proposed parking lot and the existing parking lot for the College of Alameda Science Annex.

The driveway on Atlantic Avenue would provide a clear line-of-sight between a motorist 10 feet back from the sidewalk exiting the driveway and pedestrians on the sidewalk 10 feet away on either side. Additionally, according to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the stopping sight distance for Atlantic Avenue (with a 25-mph posted speed limit) is 150 feet. The project driveway meets this sight distance for both motor vehicles and bicycles in both directions of Atlantic Avenue.

The project driveway on Atlantic Avenue would connect to two two-way drive aisles generally parallel to Atlantic Avenue, which would accommodate 71 parking spaces generally along both sides of the two drive aisles. All parking spaces would be perpendicular to the 24-foot-wide two- way drive aisles, which would meet the dimensional requirement in the City of Alameda Municipal Code (Section 30-7.8), such that passenger vehicles would be able to maneuver into and out of all parking spaces.

Currently, Atlantic Avenue provides a painted median (two double yellow lines) east of the Marina Village Research Park driveway. To better accommodate left-turns from westbound Atlantic Avenue into the project site, the modified project would stripe a 100-foot westbound left-turn lane with a 60-foot taper along Atlantic Avenue at the project driveway (refer to Section 3.3.5).

The project driveway would also provide access to an approximately 100-foot passenger loading area on the west side of the parking lot and adjacent to the project entry plaza. Thus, passengers can be dropped off or picked up without crossing any vehicles. The project would install R25(C) (CA) “Passenger Loading Only” signs and paint the curb white to discourage parking along the west side of the parking lot (refer to Section 3.3.5).

Incompatible Uses
As discussed under Section 4.1.2 Land Use and Planning, the modified project is consistent with the project site’s land use designation and, therefore, has been found programmatically compatible with the surrounding developments by the General Plan FEIR. Since the project’s land use is compatible with uses in the area, the project’s use of circulation systems also would be compatible

Alameda Aquatic Center 142 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
and would not create a hazard. The project does not propose a use that would bring unusual equipment on the roadways (e.g., farm equipment). Therefore, the project would not result in a significant impact due to incompatible uses.

Based on the above analysis, the project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Impacts would be less than significant. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?

The modified project would not result in changes to surrounding circulation systems or established evacuation routes. Emergency vehicles would access the project site through the same vehicular access points on Atlantic Avenue and use the surface parking lot to access the Project site. The modified project would not modify the existing roadway network, and the streets surrounding the project site would continue to accommodate fire apparatuses. According to the current California Fire Code, fire apparatus access roads need to be no less than 20-feet-wide and shall always be unobstructed, which the modified project meets. The project parking lot would provide two access points; thus, if one access point is blocked, emergency vehicles can use the other access points to access the site. The modified project would not interfere with the emergency response to the project area; therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact to emergency access to and around the project site. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 143 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Utilities and Service Systems

4.16.1 Environmental Setting

4.16.1.1 Regulatory Framework
State
State Water Code
Pursuant to the State Water Code, water suppliers providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet (approximately 980 million gallons) of water annually must prepare and adopt an urban water management plan (UWMP) and update it every five years. As part of a UWMP, water agencies are required to evaluate and describe their water resource supplies and projected needs over a 20-year planning horizon, water conservation, water service reliability, water recycling, opportunities for water transfers, and contingency plans for drought events. The EBMUD adopted its most recent UWMP on June 22, 2021.

Assembly Bill 939
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, or AB 939, established the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB), required the implementation of integrated waste management plans, and mandated that local jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of solid waste generated (from 1990 levels) by 2000 and thereafter. Projects that would have an adverse effect on waste diversion goals are required to include waste diversion mitigation measures.

Assembly Bill 341
AB 341 sets forth the requirements of the statewide mandatory commercial recycling program.

Businesses that generate four or more cubic yards of garbage per week and multi-family dwellings with five or more units in California are required to recycle.

Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The bill grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target that at least 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. CalRecycle released an analysis titled “Analysis of the Progress Toward the SB 1383 Organic Wase Reduction Goals” in August of 2020 (revised November 2020), which recommended maintaining the disposal reduction targets set forth in SB 1383. 85 85 CalRecycle. “Analysis of the Progress Toward the SB 1383 Organic Wase Reduction Goals (DRRR-2020-1693).” Accessed March 5, 2025. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1693.

Alameda Aquatic Center 144 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
California Green Building Standards Code
CALGreen establishes mandatory green building standards for all buildings in California. The code is updated every three years.86 CALGreen covers five categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material conservation and resources efficiency, and indoor environmental quality. These standards include the following mandatory set of measures, as well as more rigorous voluntary guidelines, for new construction projects to achieve specific green building performance levels:

• Reducing indoor water use by 20 percent;
• Reducing wastewater by 20 percent;
• Recycling and/or salvaging 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition debris; and
• Providing readily accessible areas for recycling by occupants.

Regional and Local
EBMUD Wastewater Control Ordinance
EBMUD adopted its Wastewater Control Ordinance in August 2013 to regulate the interception of wastewater and industrial wastes and to control wastewater to provide the maximum public benefit of its wastewater disposal facilities. The regulations include provisions for source control in order to monitor and control quantity, quality, and flow of wastewater and industrial waste. The Wastewater Control Ordinance establishes fees for use of EBMUD’s wastewater treatment facilities and includes provisions for enforcement and penalties for violations.

The ordinance only allows community sewers to connect to EBMUD interceptors, and prohibits the discharge of stormwater or groundwater without authorization. Discharge of garbage or wastewater that creates a fire or explosion hazard is prohibited. The ordinance also establishes discharge limits on pH, temperature, heavy metals, oil and grease, chlorinated hydrocarbons, and cyanide.

EBMUD Private Sewer Lateral Ordinance
In 2011 EBMUD established a Regional Private Sewer Lateral Program, intended to help fix old, cracked sanitary sewer pipes that need repair to prevent the infiltration of rainwater, which can overwhelm wastewater treatment facilities and lead to the release of partially treated wastewater into the Bay. EBMUD adopted a Regional Private Sewer Lateral (PSL) Ordinance that year that requires affected property owners to obtain a certificate from EBMUD certifying that all of their PSLs are leak-free. To obtain certification, a contractor has to conduct a closed-circuit television (CCTV) inspection of the PSL that must be witnessed by an EBMUD inspector and must pass an EBMUD verification test.

86 California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed March 5, 2025. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo.

Alameda Aquatic Center 145 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
The PSL Ordinance applies to Alameda property transfers, building permits, remodeling permits (for projects over $100,000), or changes to meter size occurring on or after January 1, 2015. Owners are exempt from the ordinance if their PSL is less than 10 years old, verified by the permitting agency, at the date of final permit sign-off. EBMUD also encourages property owners to voluntarily seek certification of their PSLs without meeting any of the mandatory triggers. Other cities in the EBMUD service area were subject to the ordinance on earlier dates, with August 22, 2011 being the earliest effective date. The City of Berkeley has its own PSL ordinance, and is not subject to the EBMUD ordinance.

Alameda County Mandatory Recycling Ordinance
The Waste Reduction and Recycling Act of 1990 (Measure D), a charter amendment passed by the voters of Alameda County, established the Alameda County Source Reduction and Recycling Board and adopted the goal of reducing the total tonnage of landfilled materials generated in Alameda County by 75 percent by a date to be chosen by the Recycling Board. In 2003, the Recycling Board and Authority approved 2010 as the date by which 75-percent diversion was to be achieved, and in July 2010 the Recycling Board established the target year 2020 for reducing the amount of readily recyclable and compostable materials originating in Alameda County and deposited in landfills to no more than 10 percent of total materials originating in Alameda County and disposed of in landfills.

Alameda General Plan 2040
The following policies in the City’s General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of reducing or avoiding impacts related to utilities and service systems and are applicable to the project.

Policy Description
CC-4 Take actions to make Alameda a net zero GHG community.

CC-16 Minimize water use in new construction and landscaped areas to make Alameda more resilient to drought and generate less wastewater.

CC-17 Create a zero waste culture by implementing the City of Alameda’s 2018 Zero Waste Implementation Plan.

Alameda Water Reuse Ordinance
The Alameda Water Reuse Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter XXX, Article IIIA, Section 30.57 et seq.) requires new industrial, commercial, and residential subdivisions requiring a tentative map or parcel map, and that are located within a City-Designated Water Reuse Area, to provide a separate plumbing system to serve recycled water uses in the common landscape areas of the subdivision, such as golf courses, parks, greenbelts, and landscaped medians. This system must be independent of the plumbing system serving the domestic, residential, and other potable uses in the subdivision.

City-Designated Water Reuse Areas are generally designated by EBMUD, though they can be modified by the City Council.

Alameda Aquatic Center 146 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Alameda Bay-Friendly and Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance The Alameda Bay-Friendly and Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter XXX, Article IV, Section 30-58.1 et seq.) is intended to achieve the following:

a) Promote quality, water-efficient landscaping, while recognizing Alameda's unique climate, soil conditions, and development patterns;
b) Support EBMUD in its efforts to promote and implement water conservation measures;
c) Implement the most recently adopted State Model Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO);
d) Establish standards for sustainable landscape practices in accord with the current version of the StopWaste.Org Bay Friendly Landscape protocols; e) Divert plant debris from landfills;
f) Promote the use of greywater systems; and
g) Discourage the planting of invasive plants.

The ordinance adopts and codifies the requirements of the MWELO.

Alameda Climate Action and Resiliency Plan
In addition to providing a roadmap for the City of Alameda to follow in reducing the City’s GHG emissions and assist the State in meeting the GHG reduction goals established by AB 32 and SB 32 and also help the City address the growing threats posed by climate change, such as sea level rise, the Alameda CARP, adopted in September 2019, includes GHG reduction measures that will contribute to water conservation and reduce the City’s overall water demand. The CARP also includes measures to reduce solid waste generation, thereby reducing demand for landfill disposal capacity. For example, the application of compost to Alameda parks and open spaces is projected to divert 13,238 tons of organic waste from landfill disposal by 2030.

Alameda Municipal Code – Solid Waste and Recycling
Chapter XXI of the Alameda Municipal Code requires the occupant or owner of any premises in the City where solid waste is generated to contract with and pay the City’s franchised waste hauler for weekly collection of solid waste and separate weekly collection, respectively, of recyclable materials and organic materials, unless exempted due to negligible waste generation. The City’s franchise agreements require the franchisee to recycle recyclable waste, compost compostable waste, and provide quarterly and annual reports to the Public Works Director on the tonnage and quantities, by type, of materials diverted from landfill disposal.

Article VI of Chapter XXI of the Alameda Municipal Code (Section 21-24 et seq.) requires sponsors of all construction projects in the City that will cost $100,000 or more to prepare and implement a Waste Management Plan (WMP) that details provisions for the diversion of at least 50 percent of the project-generated construction and demolition debris from landfill disposal. It also encourages

Alameda Aquatic Center 147 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
voluntary compliance by projects that will cost less than $100,000 to construct. The requirements of Article VI apply to City-sponsored projects as well as private projects.

Alameda Sewer Master Plan
The City adopted a Sewer Master Plan SMP in November 2015 that is intended to confirm that the wastewater collection system has adequate capacity to handle peak wet-weather flows, as required for the System Evaluation and Capacity Assurance Plan element of the Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). It is also intended to satisfy the Rehabilitation and Replacement Plan requirements of the SSMP and CD and establish a firm basis for project priorities and budgets in the City’s 20-year Capital Improvement Program.

4.16.1.2 Existing Conditions
Water
Potable water is provided to the City of Alameda by EBMUD, which serves incorporated and unincorporated areas in much of Contra Costa and Alameda counties, encompassing 332 square miles of land area. EBMUD serves 20 cities and 15 unincorporated communities, with a service population of about 1.4 million people. EBMUD’s water system infrastructure includes a network of storage reservoirs, pumping plants, aqueducts, and 4,200 miles of delivery pipes. 87 In addition to
five major storage reservoirs with a total capacity of 151,670 acre-feet (AF) of water, the distribution network includes 165 neighborhood reservoirs storing treated potable water, with a combined total capacity of 830 million gallons.
88 The EBMUD obtains about 90 percent of its water supply from the Mokelumne River watershed in the Sierra Nevada, with the remainder collected from protected watershed lands in the East Bay area. The District has water rights to a maximum of 325 mgd of Mokelumne River water, subject to availability of Mokelumne River runoff, senior water rights of other users, and downstream fishery flow requirements.
89 Local runoff provides 15 to 25 mgd of EBMUD’s water supply during normal rainfall years, but it provides a negligible amount during drought years. Although the water supply is currently adequate to meet demand within the EBMUD, in the long term, the Mokelumne River supply cannot meet projected customer demand, even with mandatory water use restrictions.

EBMUD operates six treatment facilities with a combined daily capacity of 375 million gallons per day (mgd).
90 Two plants—the Walnut Creek Water Treatment Plant (WTP) and the Orinda WTP— operate year-round, while the Lafayette WTP, Sobrante WTP, and Upper San Leandro WTP are seasonal WTPs. Water delivered to the City of Alameda is treated at both the Orinda and Upper San Leandro WTPs.

87 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. 88 Ibid.
89 Ibid.
90 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 148 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
As of December 2020, the Orinda, Lafayette, and Walnut Creek WTPs were all operating at less than half their capacity, while the Upper San Leandro WTP was operating at about 65 percent capacity.91

Although EBMUD does not currently have any recycled water service in Alameda, the City is located within EBMUD's East Bayshore Recycled Water Project service boundaries.

Sanitary Sewer/Wastewater Treatment
Wastewater in Alameda is collected in a network of sewer pipes and conveyed to EBMUD’s South Interceptor in Oakland via inverted siphon pipelines underneath the Oakland Estuary; from there the flow is conveyed north to EBMUD’s Main Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) located near the eastern terminus of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. The EBMUD plant treats wastewater from the cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Kensington, Oakland, Piedmont, and part of Richmond, serving approximately 685,000 people in an 88-square-mile service area.

The WWTP provides secondary treatment for a maximum flow of 168 MGD. 92 Primary treatment is
provided for up to 320 MGD. Storage basins provide plant capacity for a short-term hydraulic peak of 415 MGD. On average, about 63 million gallons of wastewater is treated every day.

There are approximately 140 miles of City-owned sanitary sewers and 42 sewage pump stations in Alameda, including 14 miles of pipes and 9 pump stations located in Alameda Point. In addition, there are over 10 miles of pipelines and 7 pump stations located in Alameda that are part of the EBMUD wastewater system, which serves as the “backbone” of Alameda’s sewer network.

Wastewater collected in the system is conveyed to EBMUD’s WWTP via the South Interceptor, as described above.

Storm Drainage
The City operates and maintains a complex stormwater drainage system comprised of integrated storm drainage pipes, inlets, outfalls, culverts, pump stations, lagoons, sea walls, and perimeter levees, all intended to prevent flooding. Alameda is divided into eight major drainage areas, the project site is located in the Northside drainage area.

Due to Alameda’s relatively flat geography, pump stations are a critical component to managing storm runoff and preventing flooding. The City operates ten pump stations distributed throughout the two islands that convey storm runoff to San Francisco Bay.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service has classified all soils within the City of Alameda as group D, which have very slow infiltration rates.
93 This factor increases the volume and rate of
runoff during peak storm events, amplifying the magnitude of flood risk experienced throughout the City.

91 Ibid.
92 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. 93 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 149 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Solid Waste
Commercial and residential solid waste generated in Alameda is collected by Alameda County Industries (ACI). Garbage collected throughout Alameda is hauled to the Davis Street Transfer Station in San Leandro, where it is loaded into higher-capacity trailer trucks and hauled to Altamont Landfill in eastern Alameda County. Recyclable materials, which are collected from residential and commercial customers in separate bins, are hauled to ACI’s Aladdin Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and Transfer Facility in the City of San Leandro, which sorts, separates, and bundles the recyclables for sale to secondary markets. The Aladdin MRF processes 11,572 tons of materials annually.
94 The capacity of the facility was expanded in 2019 from a permitted capacity of 412 tons per day (TPD) to 620 TPD, with an allowance for temporary exceedances up to 10 percent for a maximum of 20 days per year.
95 Organics are transferred to Newby Island Landfill.

As noted above, garbage in Alameda is hauled to the Davis Street Transfer Station, then transferred to Altamont Landfill, operated by Waste Management, Inc. (WMI). Altamont Landfill occupies 2,170 acres of hilly land outside of Livermore. This Class II/III landfill accepts mixed municipal waste as well as tires (shredded and whole), other designated waste, industrial waste, green waste, contaminated soil, construction and demolition debris, asbestos-containing waste, and ash. It has a daily permitted capacity of 11,150 TPD and remaining capacity of 65,400,000 tons.96

4.16.2 Impact Discussion

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
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or relocation
of which could cause significant
environmental effects?

b) Have insufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?

94 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. 95 Ibid.
96 Ibid.

Alameda Aquatic Center 150 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

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
Would the project:
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
does not have adequate capacity to
serve the project’s projected demand
in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?

d) Generate solid waste in excess of state
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?

e) Be noncompliant with federal, state, or
local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?

Jean Sweeney Open Space Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The adopted IS/MND concluded that approved project would result in less than significant impacts to utilities and service systems. The adopted IS/MND also concluded that the approved project would not exceed existing capacities for water, wastewater, or solid waste utilities given the abundant capacities of the existing utility infrastructures/providers.

a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Water
The modified project would install a new six-inch water line connection from the project site that would connect to an existing eight-inch water line in Atlantic Avenue. The project would not require the construction or expansion of water delivery systems or the expansion of the boundaries of the EBMUD service area. Therefore, the project would not result in significant environmental effects related to the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities.

Alameda Aquatic Center 151 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Wastewater
Sewer collection for the modified project would be provided by a new eight-inch sanitary sewer line connecting to the existing eight-inch sanitary sewer line in Stewart Court. Wastewater would then be treated at the WWTP which has adequate capacity to accommodate the increased demand created by the project (refer to discussion under checklist question c). No relocation or construction of new or expanded treatment facilities would be required to serve the proposed project. The proposed project does not include the construction of any additional sewer mains or sewer lines, aside from lateral connections to existing mains. Installation of sanitary sewer laterals for the new building would occur during grading of the site and would result in minimal impacts.

Stormwater Drainage
As discussed in Section 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality, following completion of the project, stormwater would be treated via an onsite bioretention area. The modified project would connect to an existing 48-inch storm main in Stewart Court. Consistent with the approved project, the modified project would be subject to the requirements of the C.3 Stormwater Standards. With the project’s adherence to these requirements, the existing storm drainage system would have sufficient capacity to support the proposed project. For these reasons, no new storm water treatment or disposal facilities would need to be constructed to accommodate the proposed project.

Electricity, Natural Gas and Telecommunication Facilities Existing utility lines would be utilized by the project for electric power and telecommunications services. No natural gas connections would be required since the building would be 100 percent electric. Although the project would increase the demand on existing facilities in the City, relocation of existing or construction of new facilities would not be needed to serve the modified project. The City, in designing and implementing the project, would coordinate with the appropriate electric power and telecommunication providers on providing service to the site. Therefore, the modified project would not result in significant impacts from construction or relocation of new or expanded electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications utilities.

For the reasons above, the project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

b) Would the project have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?

Total water demand for the approved project was not quantified in the 2014 IS/MND. The proposed aquatic center would consume approximately 2.85 million gallons per year (mgy) or 7,800 gallons

Alameda Aquatic Center 152 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
per day (gpd).97 EBMUD can meet customer demand out to 2050 during normal years and single dry years; however, during multi-year droughts, even with customer demand reduction measures in place, EBMUD would need to obtain supplemental supplies to meet customer demands. As part of EBMUD’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan, EBMUD would implement water use reduction strategies to achieve a 15 percent reduction in water use during an extreme drought. The 2040 General Plan EIR concluded that water demand in the City would be reduced through General Plan Policy CC-16. As discussed above, EBMUD’s water planning factors in projected growth in Alameda and the other cities it serves, and continues to adjust its water demand forecasts in response to changing conditions. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

Total wastewater generation for the approved project was not quantified in the 2014 IS/MND. The proposed aquatic center would generate approximately 7,410 gpd of wastewater98. As discussed in Section 4.15.1.2, the WWTP has secondary treatment capacity of 168 MGD and primary treatment capacity of 320 MGD. The WWTP currently has excess secondary treatment capacity of 105 MGD and excess primary treatment capacity of 257 MGD.
99 The General Plan 2040 EIR concluded that
there was adequate treatment capacity given that that the WWTP operates at well under half of its permitted capacity and EBMUD would continue to make improvements to the WWTP.100 The modified project would represent an incremental portion of the available capacity. Therefore, consistent with the approved project, there would be adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected wastewater demand. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?

Total solid waste generation was not quantified for the approved project in the 2014 IS/MND. The proposed aquatic center would generate approximately 18.42 tons of solid waste per year, or 101 pounds per day. As noted in Section 4.15.1.2, garbage in Alameda is hauled to the Davis Street Transfer Station, then transferred to Altamont Landfill, which has a remaining capacity of 65,400,000 tons. Therefore, the modified project’s incremental increase in solid waste would be accommodated by existing facilities. In addition, the project would be required to conform to City plans and policies to reduce solid waste generation and increase waste diversion, such as the Zero Waste Implementation Plan and General Plan policy CC-17. The project would be required to meet

97 Gordon, William. Principal Director of Interior Architecture, els architecture + urban design. Personal Communication. February 26, 2025.
98 Wastewater is assumed to be 95 percent of the total on-site water use (7,800 gpd of water*0.95 = 7,410 gpd of wastewater).
99 City of Alameda. Alameda General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021. 100 EBMUD approved a $2.5 billion Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for fiscal years 2020 through 2024, including $184 million in improvements to its wastewater system.

Alameda Aquatic Center 153 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
the City’s current diversion goal of 65 percent for construction debris and 75 percent from landfills.

The 2040 General Plan EIR concluded that there was adequate waste disposal to accommodate future growth proposed by the General Plan and compliance with applicable statutes and regulations related to solid waste, including the City’s construction and demolition debris recycling ordinance and relevant CALGreen requirements, would further ensure adequate solid waste disposal capacity. For these reasons, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

e) Would the project be noncompliant with federal, state, or local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

The modified project would comply with all applicable statutes and regulations related to solid waste, including the City’s construction and demolition debris recycling ordinance and relevant CALGreen requirements. Therefore, consistent with the approved project, the modified project would not be noncompliant with federal, state, or local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. [Same Impact as Approved Project (Less than Significant Impact)]

Alameda Aquatic Center 154 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025

Section 5.0 References
The analysis in this IS/Addendum is based on the professional judgement and expertise of the environmental specialists preparing this document, based upon review of the site, surrounding conditions, site plans, and the following references:

Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Plan Bay Area 2050. October 21, 2021.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19, 2017.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District. “Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status.” Last Updated January 5, 2017.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. April 2023.

California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo.

California Legislative Information. “Chapter 2.7. Modernization of Transportation Analysis for Transit-Oriented Infill Projects [21099- 21099.].” Accessed December 19, 2024. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PRC&division=13 .&part=&chapter=2.7.&article=.

California Air Resources Board. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health.

California Air Resources Board. “Advanced Clean Cars II.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program/advanced-clean- cars-ii

California Air Resources Board. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. December 2022

California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed March 5, 2025. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo.

California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. “Net Taxable Gasoline Gallons.” Accessed February 7, 2025.
https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/dataportal/dataset.htm?url=VehicleTaxableFuelDist.

Alameda Aquatic Center 155 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
California Energy Commission (CEC). “2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building- energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency.

California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Accessed February 20, 2025. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.

California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2024 California Gas Report. Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2024-08/2024-California-Gas-Report-Final.pdf

California Geological Survey. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed February 19, 2025. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/

California Office of Historic Preservation. “CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6.” Accessed October 4, 2024. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/technical%20assistance%20bulletin%206%20201 1%20update.pdf.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board. San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. November 2015.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Region. Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-2022-0018, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. May 11, 2022.

CalRecycle. “Analysis of the Progress Toward the SB 1383 Organic Wase Reduction Goals (DRRR- 2020-1693).” Accessed March 5, 2025.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1693.

California State Water Resources Control Board. “2020-2022 California Integrated Report (Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List and 305(b) Report).” May 11, 2022. Accessed February 20, 2024.
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_quality_assessment/2020 _2022_integrated_report.html.

City of Alameda. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. June 2014.

City of Alameda. General Plan 2040 Draft EIR. May 2021.

Department of Conservation California Geological Survey. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. Accessed December 20, 2024.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/

Alameda Aquatic Center 156 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
ESA. Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Wetland Delineation Results. April 2015.

Gordon, William. Principal Director of Interior Architecture, els architecture + urban design.

Personal Communication. February 26, 2025.

United States Department of Energy. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed February 7, 2025. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/eisa.

United States Department of Transportation. USDOT Announces New Vehicle Fuel Economy Standards for Model Year 2024-2026.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/usdot-announces-new-vehicle-fuel-economy- standards-model-year-2024-2026.

United States Energy Information Administration. “California State Energy Profile.” Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=CA.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. “Petroleum & Other Liquids, California Field Production of Crude Oil.” February 28, 2023.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpca1&f=a

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “The 2024 EPA Automotive Trends Report:

Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Fuel Economy, and Technology since 1975.” November 2024.

Accessed February 7, 2025. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P101CUZD.pdf.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Superfund: CERCLA Overview.” Accessed May 11, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cercla-overview.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.” Accessed February 20, 2025. https://www.epa.gov/laws- regulations/summary-resource-conservation-and-recovery-act.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. “EPA Actions to Protect the Public from Exposure to Asbestos.” Accessed April 19, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/epa-actions-protect- public-exposure-asbestos

Alameda Aquatic Center 157 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Section 6.0 Lead Agency and Consultants
Lead Agency
City of Alameda
Allen Tai, Director
Steven Buckley, Planning Services Manager
Justin Long, Recreation and Parks Director
Henry Dong, Planner III

Consultants
David J. Powers & Associates, Inc.

Environmental Consultants and Planners
Akoni Danielsen, President/Principal Project Manager
Natalie Noyes, Senior Project Manager
Ryan Osako, Graphic Artist

Fehr & Peers
Transportation Consultants
Sam Tabibnia, Traffic Engineer
Henry Helmuth, Traffic Engineer

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.

Acoustical & Air Quality Consultants
James Reyff, Principal
Michael Thill, Principal
Carrie Janello, Senior Acoustical Consultant
Zachary Palm, Air Quality Consultant

Alameda Aquatic Center 158 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
Section 7.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ABL Alameda Belt Line
ACDEH Alameda County Department of Environmental Health ACFWCD Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ACI Alameda County Industries
ACM asbestos-containing material
AF acre-feet
AFD Alameda Fire Department
AIA Airport Influence Area
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
AMP Alameda Municipal Power
APD Alameda Police Department
ARPD City of Alameda Recreation and Parks Department
AST aboveground storage tank
AUSD Alameda Unified School District
Bgs below ground surface
BMPs best management practices
Btu British thermal units
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalARP California Accidental Release Prevention
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CARE Community Air Risk Evaluation
CARP Climate Action and Resiliency Plan
CBC California Building Code
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife

Alameda Aquatic Center 159 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFC chlorofluorocarbons
CH4 methane
CGS California Geological Survey
CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
cy cubic yards
DPM diesel particulate matter
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EO Executive Order
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EV Electric vehicle
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
GHG greenhouse gas
GIP Green Infrastructure Plan
GMP Groundwater Management Plan
gpd gallons per day
GSP groundwater sustainability plan
GWh gigawatt hours
GWP global warming potential
HI Hazard Index
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
HMTA Hazardous Materials Transportation Act

Alameda Aquatic Center 160 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
HSP Health and Safety Plan
HSWA Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
IS Initial Study
LBP lead-based paint
LED light-emitting diode
LHMP City of Alameda Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
LID Low Impact Development
LOS Level of service
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MEI maximally exposed individuals
mgd million gallons per day
mgy million gallons per year
MMTCO2e million metric tons of CO2e
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
mpg miles per gallon
MRF Materials Recovery Facility
MRP Municipal Regional Permit
MSL mean sea level
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
MWELO Model Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCP National Contingency Plan
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NO nitric oxide
NOx nitrogen oxides
N2O nitrous oxide
NOD Notice of Determination

Alameda Aquatic Center 161 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
NOI Notice of Intent
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NWIC Northwest Information Center
O3 ozone
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PDA priority development area
PFC perfluorocarbon
PM particulate matter
PPE Personal protective equipment
PSL Private Sewer Lateral
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
REC Recognized Environmental Concerns
ROG reactive organic gases
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SHMA Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
SMP Site Management Plan
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOx sulfur oxide
SSMP
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC Toxic air contaminants
TMDL total maximum daily loads
TPD tons per day
TPHd total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel
Sewer System Management Plan

Alameda Aquatic Center 162 Initial Study/Addendum
City of Alameda June 2025
TPHg total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline
TPHmo total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UST underground storage tank
UWMP urban water management plan
VMT Vehicle miles travelled
VOC Volatile organic compound
WMP Waste Management Plan
WTP Water Treatment Plant
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

Appendix A:

Resolution No. 14955

Appendix B:

Construction Air
Quality Assessment

ALAMEDA AQUATICS CENTER

CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS

AND HEALTH RISK

ASSESSMENT

Alameda, California

January 15, 2025

Prepared for:

Natalie Noyes, AICP
Senior Project Manager
David J. Powers & Associates, Inc.
1736 Franklin, Suite 400
Oakland, CA 94612

Prepared by:

Zachary Palm

429 East Cotati Avenue
Cotati, CA 94931
(707) 794-0400

I&R Project#: 24-179

1 Introduction

The purpose of this report is to address construction air quality and health risk impacts associated with the proposed aquatic center located at the western end of the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park in Alameda, California. Air quality impacts from this project would be associated with the construction of the new buildings and infrastructure. Air pollutants associated with construction of the project were estimated using appropriate computer models. In addition, the potential project health risks and the impacts of existing toxic air contaminant (TAC) sources affecting nearby sensitive receptors were evaluated. The analysis was conducted following guidance provided by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).1

Project Description

The 2.25-acre project site is currently undeveloped park land at the western end of the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park. The project proposes constructing an aquatic center consisting of two pools, a 9,800 square foot (sf) building to support operation of the pools, and a parking lot that will provide 100 parking spaces. One pool will be approximately 7,500 square feet (sf) in size while the other will be approximately 4,500-sf. Construction is expected to begin as early as November 2025 and be completed by May 2027.

Setting

Ambient Air Quality Standards

The Federal and California Clean Air Acts have established ambient air quality standards for different pollutants. National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) were established by the Federal Clean Air Act of 1970 (amended in 1977 and 1990) for six "criteria" pollutants. These criteria pollutants now include carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O 3), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2), respirable particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns (PM 10), sulfur dioxide (SO 2), and lead (Pb). In 1997, The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) added fine particulate matter (PM2.5) as a criteria pollutant. The air pollutants for which standards have been established are considered the most prevalent air pollutants known to be hazardous to human health. California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS) include the NAAQS pollutants and also hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. These additional CAAQS pollutants tend to have unique sources and are not typically included in environmental air quality assessments. In addition, lead concentrations have decreased dramatically since it was removed from motor vehicle fuels. The Bay Area has attained the CO standard and monitoring data from the last 30 years show relatively low concentrations throughout the Bay Area. Therefore, CO is not an air quality issue for land use type projects such as this one.

Air Pollutants of Concern

High ozone concentrations in the air basin are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NO X). These precursor pollutants react under certain

1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2022 CEQA Guidelines, April 2023

2 meteorological conditions to form ozone concentrations. Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area’s attempts to reduce ambient ozone concentrations. The highest ozone concentrations in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys that are downwind of air pollutant sources. High ozone concentrations aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduced lung function, and increase coughing and chest discomfort.

Particulate matter is another problematic air pollutant in the air basin. Particulate matter is assessed and measured in terms of respirable particulate matter or particles that have a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM 10) and fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM 2.5). Elevated concentrations of PM 10 and PM 2.5 are the result of both region-wide (or cumulative) emissions and localized emissions. High particulate matter concentrations aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, increase mortality (e.g., lung cancer), and result in reduced lung function growth in children.

Toxic Air Contaminants

TACs are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality, often because they cause cancer. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter [DPM] near a freeway). Because chronic exposure of TACs can result in adverse health effects, they are regulated at the regional, State, and federal level.

Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about three- quarters of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the Bay Area average). According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects from diesel exhaust exposure a complex scientific issue. Some of the chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by the CARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under the State's Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. Health risks from TACs are estimated using the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) risk assessment guidelines, which were published in February of 2015 and incorporated in BAAQMD’s current CEQA guidance.2

Sensitive Receptors

There are groups of people more affected by air pollution than others. CARB has identified the following persons who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 16, people over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, and elementary schools. For cancer risk assessments, infants and small children are the

2 OEHHA, 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments . Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

February.

3 most sensitive receptors, since they are more susceptible to cancer causing TACs. Residential locations are assumed to include infants and small children. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site are the single-family homes to the north across Atlantic Avenue and the single and multi-family homes to the south. There are also young adults at the College of Alameda’s Science Annex to the northeast as well as infants present at the ViVi Family Daycare to the south. There are additional sensitive receptors at further distances. This project would not introduce new sensitive receptors (i.e., residents) to the area.

Project Air Quality Conditions

The project is located in Alameda County, which is in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin.

Ambient air quality standards have been established at both the State and federal level. The Bay Area meets all ambient air quality standards with the exception of ground-level ozone, respirable particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).

Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)

BAAQMD has jurisdiction over an approximately 5,600-square mile area, commonly referred to as the San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area). The District’s boundary encompasses the nine San Francisco Bay Area counties, including Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Marin County, San Francisco County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Napa County, southwestern Solano County, and southern Sonoma County.

BAAQMD is the lead agency in developing plans to address attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and California Ambient Air Quality Standards. The District also has permit authority over most types of stationary equipment utilized for the proposed project. The BAAQMD is responsible for permitting and inspection of stationary sources; enforcement of regulations, including setting fees, levying fines, and enforcement actions; and ensuring that public nuisances are minimized.

BAAQMD’s Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) program was initiated in 2004 to evaluate and reduce health risks associated with exposures to outdoor TACs in the Bay Area.3 The program examines TAC emissions from point sources, area sources, and on-road and off-road mobile sources with an emphasis on diesel exhaust, which is a major contributor to airborne health risk in California. The CARE program is an on-going program that encourages community involvement and input. The technical analysis portion of the CARE program has been implemented in three phases that includes an assessment of the sources of TAC emissions, modeling and measurement programs to estimate concentrations of TAC, and an assessment of exposures and health risks.

Throughout the program, information derived from the technical analyses has been used to develop emission reduction activities in areas with high TAC exposures and high density of sensitive populations. Risk reduction activities associated with the CARE program are focused on the most at-risk communities in the Bay Area. Seven areas have been identified by BAAQMD as impacted communities. They include Eastern San Francisco, Richmond/San Pablo, Western Alameda, San José, Vallejo, Concord, and Pittsburgh/Antioch. The project site is not within any CARE areas.

3 See BAAQMD: https://www.baaqmd.gov/community-health/community-health-protection-program/community- air-risk-evaluation-care-program.

4 Overburdened communities are areas located (i) within a census tract identified by the California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen), Version 4.0 implemented by OEHHA, as having an overall score at or above the 70 th percentile, or (ii) within 1,000 feet of any such census tract. 4 The BAAQMD has identified several overburdened areas within its boundaries. The project site is not within an overburdened area as the Project site is scored at the 67th percentile on CalEnviroScreen.5

BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines

In June 2010, BAAQMD adopted thresholds of significance to assist in the review of projects under CEQA. In 2023, the BAAQMD revised the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Guidelines that include significance thresholds to assist in the evaluation of air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed within the Bay Area. The current BAAQMD guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential air impacts during the environmental review process consistent with CEQA requirements including thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information. They include assessment methodologies for criteria air pollutants and air toxics emissions as shown in Table 1.6 Air quality impacts and health risks are considered potentially significant if they exceed these thresholds.

The BAAQMD recommends all projects include a “basic” set of best management practices (BMPs) to manage fugitive dust and consider impacts from dust (i.e., fugitive PM 10 and PM2.5) to be less than significant if BMPs are implemented (listed below). BAAQMD strongly encourages enhanced BMPs for construction sites near schools, residential areas, other sensitive land uses, or if air quality impacts were found to be significant.

4 See BAAQMD: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/dotgov/files/rules/reg-2-permits/2021- amendments/documents/20210722_01_appendixd_mapsofoverburdenedcommunities-pdf.pdf?la=en . 5 OEHAA, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Maps
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/11d2f52282a54ceebcac7428e6184203/page/CalEnviroScreen-4_0/ 6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2023. 2022 CEQA Guidelines. April.

5 Table 1. BAAQMD CEQA Significance Thresholds
Criteria Air Pollutant Construction Thresholds
Average Daily Emissions (lbs./day)
ROG 54
NOx 54
PM10 82 (Exhaust)
PM2.5 54 (Exhaust)
CO Not Applicable
Fugitive Dust (PM10/PM2.5) Best Management Practices (BMPs)* Health Risks and
Hazards
Single Sources/
Individual Project
Combined Sources (Cumulative
from all sources within 1000-foot
zone of influence)
Excess Cancer Risk >10 in a million OR
Compliance with
Qualified
Community
Risk Reduction
Plan
>100 in a million OR
Compliance with
Qualified
Community
Risk Reduction
Plan
Hazard Index >1.0 >10.0
Incremental annual PM2.5 >0.3 µg/m 3 >0.8 µg/m3
Note: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, PM 10 = course particulate matter or particulates with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers (µm) or less, PM 2.5 = fine particulate matter or particulates with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5µm or less.
* BAAQMD strongly recommends implementing all feasible fugitive dust management practices especially when construction projects are located near sensitive communities, including schools, residential areas, or other sensitive land uses.

Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2022

Alameda General Plan 2040

The Alameda General Plan 2040 was adopted by the City Council on November 30, 2021 7. It includes objectives, policies, and actions designed to guide and manage change to the physical, environmental, economic, and social conditions in the City of Alameda. The following objectives, goals, and actions are applicable to the proposed project:

Objective 7: Protect Alamedans from the harmful effects of air pollutants.

 Policy HS-65 : Construction Air Pollution. Protect public health by requiring best management practices at construction sites and carefully evaluating the potential health risks of projects that generate substantial toxic air contaminants or projects that propose to place a sensitive user in proximity to an existing source of contaminants.

7 City of Alameda, URL: https://www.alameda2040.org/, General Plan URL: https://irp.cdn- website.com/f1731050/files/uploaded/AGP_Book_June2022_Amend-1.pdf

6  Actions:
a. Construction Dust . Reduce dust and harmful air pollutants resulting from construction activities by requiring compliance with best management practices (BMPs) as recommended by the BAAQMD.

b. Health Risk Assessment. Require preparation of a Health Risk Assessment in accordance with policies and procedures of the State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the BAAQMD. Adopt recommended health risk mitigations for projects that generate substantial TAC emissions within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors or for sensitive receptor uses proposed to be located within 1,000 feet of an existing major source of toxic air contaminants.

 Policy HS-68: Toxic Air Contaminants. Minimize and avoid exposure to toxic air contaminants.

 Actions:
a. New Sources. As a condition of approval, future discretionary projects that generate substantial TAC emissions (that are not regulated by the BAAQMD, such as construction activities lasting greater than two months or facilities that include more than 100 truck trips per day, 40 trucks with transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week)) that are located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall submit a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the BAAQMD prior to discretionary project approval. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk, PM2.5 concentrations, or the appropriate non- cancer hazard index exceeds BAAQMD’s project-level thresholds, then the applicant shall be required to identify and demonstrate that mitigation measures are capable of reducing potential PM2.5 concentrations, cancer risks, and non- cancer risks to below BAAQMD’s project-level significance thresholds.

b. New Sensitive Receptors. As a condition of approval, proposed new sensitive receptor uses proposed within 1,000 feet of existing major sources of TACs (e.g., permitted stationary sources, highways, freeways and roadways with over 10,000 annual average daily traffic (AADT)) shall submit a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) to the City prior to future discretionary project approval. If the HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk, PM2.5 concentrations, or the appropriate non-cancer hazard index exceeds BAAQMD’s cumulative-level thresholds, then the applicant shall be required to identify and demonstrate that mitigation measures (e.g., electrostatic filtering systems) are capable of reducing potential cancer and non-cancer risks to below BAAQMD’s significance thresholds.

 Policy HS-69: Construction Period Air Quality Impacts. Minimize air quality impacts as the result of construction activities.

7  Actions:
a. Construction Mitigations. As a condition of approval, future discretionary projects shall implement the following measures or equivalent, expanded, or modified measures based on project- and site-specific conditions: all exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered at least two times per day; all haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered; all visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping shall be prohibited; all vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph; all roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible; idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing maximum idling time to 5 minutes; 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; a publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours; and the Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Construction Period Emissions

The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022 was used to estimate emissions from on-site construction activity, construction vehicle trips, and evaporative emissions.

The project land use types and size, and anticipated construction schedule were input to CalEEMod.

The CalEEMod model output along with construction inputs are included in Attachment 1.

CalEEMod Modeling

Land Use Inputs

The proposed project land uses were entered into CalEEMod as described in Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of Project Land Use Inputs
Project Land Uses Size Units Square Feet (sf) Acreage
Recreational Swimming Pool 1 14.3 1,000-sf 14,300 2.25 Parking Lot 100 Parking Spaces - 1Includes 9,800-sf building input under the Recreational Building Area portion of the CalEEMod input for this land use. See Attachment 1.

8 Construction Inputs

CalEEMod computes annual emissions for construction that are based on the project type, size, and acreage. The model provides emission estimates for both on-site and off-site construction activities. On-site activities are primarily made up of construction equipment emissions, while off- site activity includes worker, hauling, and vendor traffic. The construction build-out scenario, including the equipment quantities, average hours per day, total number of workdays, and schedule, were based on information provided by the project applicant (included in Attachment 1).

The project applicant estimates the earliest possible start date to be November 2025 and the project would be built out over a period of approximately 19 months, or 412 construction workdays. The earliest year of full operation was assumed to be 2028.

Construction Truck Traffic Emissions

Construction would produce traffic in the form of worker trips and truck traffic. The traffic-related emissions are based on worker and vendor trip estimates produced by CalEEMod and haul trips that were computed based on the amount of demolition material to be exported, soil imported and/or exported to the site, and the amount of concrete and asphalt truck trips to and from the site.

CalEEMod provides daily estimates of worker and vendor trips for each applicable phase. Daily haul trips for demolition and grading were developed by CalEEMod using the estimated demolition and soil import/export volumes. The number of total concrete/asphalt round haul trips were estimated for the project and converted to daily one-way trips, assuming two trips per delivery. These values are shown in the project construction equipment worksheet included in Attachment 1.

Summary of Computed Construction Period Emissions

Average daily emissions were annualized for each year of construction by dividing the annual construction emissions by the number of active workdays during that year. Table 3 shows the average daily construction emissions of ROG, NO X, PM 10 exhaust, and PM 2.5 exhaust during construction of the project. As indicated in Table 3, predicted daily project construction emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds during construction.

Table 3. Construction Period Emissions
Year ROG NOx PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5
Exhaust
Construction Emissions Per Year (Tons)
2025 + 2026 0.12 1.05 0.04 0.04
2027 0.06 0.18 <0.01 <0.01
Average Daily Construction Emissions Per Year (pounds/day) 2025 + 2026 (305 construction workdays) 0.81 6.86 0.25 0.23 2027 (107 construction workdays) 1.10 3.30 0.06 0.05
BAAQMD Thresholds (pounds per day) 54 lbs./day 54 lbs./day 82 lbs./day 54 lbs./day Exceed Threshold? No No No No

Construction activities, particularly during site preparation and grading, would temporarily generate fugitive dust in the form of PM 10 and PM 2.5. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site and trucks carrying uncovered loads of soils. Unless properly

9 controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. The BAAQMD recommends all projects include a “basic” set of BMPs to manage fugitive dust and considers impacts from dust (i.e., fugitive PM 10 and PM 2.5) to be less-than-significant if BMPs are implemented to reduce these emissions. The City of Alameda’s General Plan Health and Safety Policy 65 Action A would implement the following BAAQMD basic BMPs during construction:

HS-65 Action A: Include measures to control dust and exhaust during construction.

During any construction period ground disturbance, the applicant shall ensure that the project contractor implement measures to control dust and exhaust. Implementation of the measures listed below would reduce the air quality impacts associated with grading and new construction to a less- than-significant level. The contractor shall implement the following BMPs that are required of all projects under General Plan Policy HS-65:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.

Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.

7. All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.

8. Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.

9. Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

10 Effectiveness of HS-65 Action A

The measures above are consistent with BAAQMD-recommended basic BMPs for reducing fugitive dust contained in the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. For this analysis, only the basic set of BMPs are required as the Project emissions and PM 2.5 impacts were below the BAAQMD thresholds. Enhanced BMPs would be required as mitigation if air quality impacts were found to be significant.

Construction Health Risk Impacts

Project impacts related to increased health risk can occur by generating emissions of TACs and air pollutants. Temporary project construction activity would generate emissions of DPM from equipment and trucks and generate dust on a temporary basis that could affect nearby sensitive receptors.

Additionally, there are existing sources of TACs and localized air pollutants in the vicinity of the project. The cumulative impact of the Project and existing TAC sources was assessed.

Health risk impacts are addressed by predicting increased lifetime cancer risk, the increase in annual PM2.5 concentrations, and computing the Hazard Index (HI) for non-cancer health risks. Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a known TAC.

These exhaust emissions pose health risks for sensitive receptors such as surrounding residents, school students, and daycare infants/children. The primary health risk impact issues associated with construction emissions are cancer risk and exposure to PM2.5. A health risk assessment of the project construction activities was conducted that evaluated potential health effects to nearby sensitive receptors from construction emissions of DPM and PM 2.5.8 This assessment included dispersion modeling to predict the offsite and onsite concentrations resulting from project construction, so that lifetime cancer risks and non-cancer health effects could be evaluated.

Modeled Sensitive Receptors

Receptors for this assessment included locations where sensitive populations would be present for extended periods of time (i.e., chronic exposures). This includes the nearby existing residences, College of Alameda Science Annex, and ViVi Family Daycare as shown in Figure 1. Residential receptors are assumed to include all receptor groups (i.e., third trimester, infants, children, and adults) with almost continuous exposure to project emissions. Adult exposures were assumed to occur at the College of Alameda Science Annex and infant exposures at the ViVi Family Daycare.

While there are additional sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of the project site, the receptors chosen are adequate to identify maximum impacts from the project.

Construction Emissions

The CalEEMod model provided total annual PM 10 exhaust emissions (assumed to be DPM) for the off-road construction equipment and for exhaust emissions from on-road vehicles, with total emissions from all construction stages being 0.04 tons (75 pounds). The on-road vehicle emissions are a result of haul truck travel on-site during demolition and grading activities, worker travel on-

8 DPM is identified by California as a toxic air contaminant due to the potential to cause cancer.

11 site, and vendor travel on-site during construction. A trip length of one mile was used to represent vehicle travel while at or near the construction site. Fugitive PM2.5 dust emissions were calculated by CalEEMod as less than 0.03 tons (58 pounds) for the overall construction period.

Dispersion Modeling

The U.S. EPA AERMOD dispersion model was used to predict DPM and PM2.5 concentrations at sensitive receptors (i.e., residences) in the vicinity of the project construction area. The AERMOD dispersion model is a BAAQMD-recommended model for use in modeling analysis of these types of emission activities for CEQA projects.9 Emission sources for the construction site were grouped into two categories: exhaust emissions of DPM and fugitive PM2.5 dust emissions.

Construction Emission Sources

To represent the construction equipment exhaust emissions, an area source was used with an emission release height of 20 feet (6 meters). 10 The release height incorporates both the physical release height from the construction equipment (i.e., the height of the exhaust pipe) and plume rise after it leaves the exhaust pipe. Plume rise is due to both the high temperature of the exhaust and the high velocity of the exhaust gas. It should be noted that when modeling an area source, plume rise is not calculated by the AERMOD dispersion model as it would do for a point source (exhaust stack). Therefore, the release height from an area source used to represent emissions from sources with plume rise, such as construction equipment, was based on the height the exhaust plume is expected to achieve, not just the height of the top of the exhaust pipe.

For modeling fugitive PM 2.5 emissions, an area source with a near-ground level release height of 7 feet (2 meters) was used. Fugitive dust emissions at construction sites come from a variety of sources, including truck and equipment travel, grading activities, truck loading (with loaders) and unloading (rear or bottom dumping), loaders and excavators moving and transferring soil and other materials, etc. All of these activities result in fugitive dust emissions at various heights at the point(s) of generation. Once generated, the dust plume will tend to rise as it moves downwind across the site and exit the site at a higher elevation than when it was generated. For all these reasons, a 7-foot release height was used as the average release height across the construction site.

Emissions from the construction equipment and on-road vehicle travel were distributed throughout the modeled area sources.

AERMOD Inputs and Meteorological Data

The modeling used a five-year data set (2013 - 2017) of hourly meteorological data from the Oakland International Airport prepared for use with the AERMOD model by BAAQMD.

Construction emissions were modeled as occurring Monday through Friday between 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., as stated by the project applicant. Annual DPM and PM 2.5 concentrations from construction activities during the 2025 – 2027 period were calculated at nearby sensitive receptors using the model. Receptor heights of 5 feet (1.5 meters), 15 feet (4.5 meters), and 25 feet (7.6

9 BAAQMD, 2023, Appendix E of the 2022 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. April. 10 California Air Resource Board, 2007. Proposed Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicles, Appendix D:

Health Risk Methodology. April. Web: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ordiesl07/ordiesl07.htm

12 meters) were used to represent the breathing heights of receptors on the first through third floors of nearby single and multi-family residences and college. 11 A receptor height of 3 feet (1 meter) was used to represent the breathing height of infants at the nearby daycare.

Summary of Construction Health Risk Impacts

The maximum increased cancer risks were calculated using the modeled TAC concentrations combined with the BAAQMD CEQA guidance for age sensitivity factors and exposure parameters. Age-sensitivity factors reflect the greater sensitivity of infants and small children to cancer causing TACs. Third trimester, infant, child, and adult exposures were assumed to occur at all residences during the entire construction period, while infant exposures were assumed at the nearby daycare and adults only exposures at the college annex.

Non-cancer health hazards and maximum PM 2.5 concentrations were also calculated. The maximum modeled annual PM 2.5 concentration was calculated based on combined exhaust and fugitive concentrations. The maximum computed HI value was based on the ratio of the maximum DPM concentration modeled and the chronic inhalation refence exposure level of 5 µg/m3.

The modeled maximum annual DPM and PM2.5 concentrations were identified at nearby sensitive receptors (as shown in Figure 1) to find the maximally exposed individuals (MEI). Results of this assessment indicated that the construction MEI was located on the first floor (5 feet above the ground) of a single-family home north of the construction site. Table 4 summarizes the maximum cancer risks, PM 2.5 concentrations, and HI for project related construction activities affecting the construction MEI. Attachment 2 to this report includes the emission calculations used for the construction modeling and the cancer risk calculations.

Construction health risk impacts are shown in Table 4. The uncontrolled maximum cancer risks from construction activities at the construction MEI would not exceed the BAAQMD single- source significance threshold.

Additionally, modeling was conducted to predict the cancer risks, non-cancer health hazards, and maximum PM2.5 concentrations associated with construction activities at the nearby college annex and daycare. The maximum increased cancer risks were adjusted using infant exposure parameters at the daycare and adult exposure parameters at the college annex. As shown in Table 4, the uncontrolled risk values at these locations do not exceed the BAAQMD single-source significance thresholds.

11 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2012, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 3.0. May. Web: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/risk-modeling-approach-may-2012.pdf?la=en

13 Table 4. Construction Risk Impacts at the Off-Site MEI Source Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Construction Unmitigated 7.93 (infant) 0.09 0.01 BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No Maximum School/Daycare Impact – ViVi Family Daycare
Project Construction Unmitigated 2.39 (infant) 0.01 <0.01 BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold 10 0.3 1.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No

Figure 1. Locations of Project Construction Site, Off-Site Sensitive Receptors, and Maximum TAC Impacts (MEI)

Cumulative Health Risks of all TAC Sources at the Off-Site MEI

A review of the project area using BAAQMD’s geographic information systems (GIS) screening tools indicated that the nearby roadways and stationary sources within the 1,000-foot influence area could have cumulative health risk impacts at the MEI. The local roadways and four existing

14 stationary sources of TACs were identified with the potential to affect the project MEI. Figure 2 shows the locations of the sources affecting the MEI within the influence area. Health risk impacts from these sources upon the MEI are reported in Table 5. Details of the cumulative screening and health risk calculations are included in Attachment 3.

Figure 2. Project Site and Nearby TAC and PM 2.5 Sources

Nearby Local Roadways

The project site is located near multiple intersecting streets. Cancer risk, PM2.5 concentrations, and HI associated with traffic on the nearby roadways were estimated using BAAQMD screening values provided via GIS data files (i.e., raster files). 12 BAAQMD raster files provide screening- level cancer risk, PM 2.5 concentrations, and HI for roadways within the Bay Area and were produced using AERMOD and 20x20-meter emissions grid. The raster file uses EMFAC2021 data for vehicle emissions and fleet mix for roadways and includes Appendix E of the Air District’s CEQA Air Quality Guidance for risk assessment assumptions. These estimates represent conservative risks reflective of 2022 conditions and are meant to provide a conservative estimate of future conditions, which do not reflect the increased proportion of zero emission motor vehicles that will result in lower future emissions. 13 These screening values are considered higher than

12 https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/ceqa-tools/health-risk- screening-and-modeling
13 BAAQMD, 2022. BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines Appendix E, Section 9. April 2023

15 values that would be obtained with refined modeling methods. These raster data are based on region-wide emissions rather than just those that occur within 1,000 feet of the project. More information regarding the assumptions used to develop the screening layers can be found in Sections 6 and 7 in Appendix E of BAAQMD’s 2022 CEQA guidance. 14 Screening-level cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, and HI for the roadway impacts at the MEI are listed in Table 5.

BAAQMD Permitted Stationary Sources

Permitted stationary sources of air pollution near the project site were identified using BAAQMD’s Permitted Stationary Sources 2022 GIS map website. 15 This mapping tool identifies the location of nearby stationary sources and their estimated risk and hazard impacts, including emissions and adjustments to account for OEHHA guidance. Four sources were identified using this tool, two diesel generators, one generic source, and one gasoline dispensing facility. A stationary source information request was submitted to BAAQMD in order to estimate health risk impacts from the gasoline dispensing facility.16 The screening risk and hazard levels provided by BAAQMD for the stationary sources were adjusted for distance using BAAQMD’s Distance Adjustment Multiplier Tool for Diesel Internal Combustion Engines and Generic Sources and CARB’s Gasoline Station Risk Screening Tool. Health risk impacts from the stationary sources upon the MEI are reported in Table 5.

Summary of Cumulative Health Risk Impacts

Table 5 reports both the project and cumulative health risk impacts. As shown in Table 5, none of the BAAQMD single-source or cumulative-source thresholds are exceeded by the project.

14 BAAQMD, 2022. BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines Appendix E. April 2023. 15 BAAQMD, Web:
https://baaqmd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=845658c19eae4594b9f4b805fb9d89a3 16 Email from BAAQMD, December 17, 2024. Subject: “RE_ Public Records Request No_ 2024-11-0190 CRM_0249335”.

16 Table 5. Impacts from Combined Sources at Off-Site MEI Source Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Impacts
Project Construction Unmitigated 7.93 (infant) 0.09 0.01 BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No Cumulative Impacts
Nearby Roadways – BAAQMD GIS Screening Tool 13.39 0.31 0.04 G&I IX Marina Village Research (Facility ID #22128,
Generator), MEI at 835 feet. 0.12 0.00 0.00
Heliotrope Technologies (Facility ID #23657, Generic Source), MEI at 600 feet. 0.00 0.00 0.00
Ology Bioservices, Inc. (Facility ID #201808, Generator), MEI at 470 feet. 0.16 0.00 0.00
Chevron Station #90290 (Facility ID #107722, Gas Dispensing Facility), MEI at 960 feet. 0.53 0.00 0.02
Cumulative Total Unmitigated 22.13 0.40 0.07 BAAQMD Cumulative Source Threshold >100 >0.8 >10.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No

Supporting Documentation

Attachment 1 includes the CalEEMod output for project construction emissions. Also included are any modeling assumptions.

Attachment 2 is the construction health risk assessment. This includes the summary of the dispersion modeling and the cancer risk calculations for construction. AERMOD dispersion modeling files for this assessment, which are quite voluminous, are available upon request and would be provided in digital format.

Attachment 3 includes the cumulative health screening and modeling results from sources affecting the construction MEI.

Attachment 1: CalEEMod Modeling Inputs and Outputs

Air Quality/Noise Construction Information Data Request Project Name: Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda DEFAULTS See Equipment Type TAB for type, horsepower and load factor Project Size Dwelling Units 2.25 total project acres disturbed s.f. residential Pile Driving? Y/N? Yes
s.f. retail
s.f. office/commercial
Project include on-site GENERATOR OR FIRE PUMP during project OPERATION (not construction)? Y/N? No
14,300 s.f. other, specify: Aquatic Center and Pool Deck IF YES (if BOTH separate values) --> s.f. parking garage spaces Kilowatts/Horsepower: __________ s.f. parking lot 100 spaces Fuel Type: _____________
Construction Days (i.e, M-F) Nov-25 to Jul-27 Location in project (Plans Desired if Available):

Construction Hours 7 am to 4 pm

DO NOT MULTIPLY EQUIPMENT HOURS/DAY BY THE QUANTITY OF EQUIPMENT Quantity Description HP Load Factor Hours/day
Total
Work
Days
Avg.

Hours per
day
HP
Annual
Hours Comments
Demolition Start Date: 11/1/2025 Total phase: 20 Overall Import/Export Volumes End Date: 11/15/2025
1 Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 0.73 8 20 8 9461 Demolition Volume 1 Excavators 158 0.38 8 20 8 9606 Square footage of buildings to be demolished : No building demolition 1 Rubber-Tired Dozers 247 0.4 8 20 8 15808 (or total tons to be hauled) 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 20 8 5742 0 square feet or Other Equipment? 0 Hauling volume (tons)
Any pavement demolished and hauled? 0 tons
Site Preparation Start Date: 11/16/2025 Total phase: 10 End Date: 11/30/2026
1 Graders 187 0.41 8 10 8 6134
1 Rubber Tired Dozers 247 0.4 8 10 8 7904
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 10 8 2871
Other Equipment?
Grading / Excavation Start Date: 12/1/2025 Total phase: 30 End Date: 1/15/2026 Soil Hauling Volume
2 Excavators 158 0.38 8 30 8 28819 Export volume = 0 cubic yards 1 Graders 187 0.41 8 30 8 18401 Import volume = 4,481 cubic yards 1 Rubber Tired Dozers 247 0.4 8 30 8 23712
Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 0.73 0 0 0
0 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 0 0 0
Other Equipment?
Trenching/Foundation Start Date: 1/16/2026 Total phase: 20 End Date: 2/15/2026
1 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 97 0.37 8 20 8 5742
2 Excavators 158 0.38 8 20 8 19213
Other Equipment?
Building - Exterior Start Date: 2/15/2026 Total phase: 180 Cement Trucks? _Est. 220_ Total Round-Trips End Date: 11/30/2026
0 Cranes 231 0.29 8 180 8 0 Electric? (Y/N) N Otherwise assumed diesel 3 Forklifts 89 0.2 8 180 8 76896 Liquid Propane (LPG)? (Y/N) Y Otherwise Assumed diesel 0 Generator Sets 84 0.74 8 180 8 0 Or temporary line power? (Y/N) Y 1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 180 8 51682
2 Welders 46 0.45 8 180 8 59616
Other Equipment?
Building - Interior/Architectural Coating Start Date: 12/1/2026 Total phase: 100 End Date: 5/30/2027
1 Air Compressors 78 0.48 8 100 8 29952
2 Aerial Lift 62 0.31 8 100 8 30752
Other Equipment?
Paving Start Date: 4/1/2027 Total phase: 20
Start Date: 4/30/2027
0 Cement and Mortar Mixers 9 0.56 8 20 8 0
0 Pavers 130 0.42 8 20 8 0
1 Paving Equipment 132 0.36 8 20 8 7603
1 Rollers 80 0.38 8 20 8 4864
1 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 0.37 8 20 8 5742
Other Equipment?
Additional Phases Start Date: Total phase:

Start Date:
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
#DIV/0! 0
Equipment types listed in "Equipment Types" worksheet tab.

Equipment listed in this sheet is to provide an example of inputs Complete one sheet for each project component It is assumed that water trucks would be used during grading Add or subtract phases and equipment, as appropriate
Modify horsepower or load factor, as appropriate
Complete ALL Portions in Yellow
Asphalt? 582 cubic yards
Unmitigated ROG NOX PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive CO2e Year MT
2025-2026 0.12 1.05 0.04 0.04 0.03 219.40
2027 0.06 0.18 0.003 0.003 0.001 36.38
Tons 0.18 1.22 0.04 0.04 255.79
Pounds/Workdays
2025-2026 0.81 6.86 0.25 0.23 305
2027 1.10 3.30 0.06 0.05 107
Threshold - lbs/day 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0
Pounds 365.47 2443.83 83.10 76.23 0.00
Average 0.89 5.93 0.20 0.19 0.00 412.00
Threshold - lbs/day 54.0 54.0 82.0 54.0
Construction Equipment
Construction Criteria Air Pollutants
Average Daily Emissions Workdays
Total Construction Emissions
Tons
Total Construction Emissions
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 1 / 75
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 2 / 75

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated

3.7. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated

3.8. Grading (2026) - Mitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated

3.11. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated

3.12. Paving (2027) - Mitigated

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated

3.15. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated

3.16. Architectural Coating (2027) - Mitigated

3.17. Trenching (2026) - Unmitigated

3.18. Trenching (2026) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 3 / 75

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 4 / 75

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.9.2. Mitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 5 / 75

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 6 / 75

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 7 / 75

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.15.2. Mitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 8 / 75

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 9 / 75

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Construction Start Date 11/1/2025
Operational Y ear 2028
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 3.90
Precipitation (days) 1.20
Location Wilma Chan Wy, Alameda, CA 94501, USA
County Alameda
City Alameda
Air District Bay Area AQMD
Air Basin San Francisco Bay Area
TAZ 1463
EDFZ 1
Electric Utility Alameda Power & Telecom
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq
ft)
Population Description
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

14.3 1000sqft 2.25 14,300 0.00 — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 10 / 75
Parking Lot 100 Space 0.00 0.00 0.00 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-5 Use Advanced Engine Tiers

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.38 6.12 0.21 0.20 0.35 0.19 0.05 0.22 1,777
Mit. 0.98 3.77 0.03 0.20 0.23 0.03 0.05 0.08 1,777
% Reduced 29% 38% 85% — 34% 85% — 63% —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.57 15.3 0.64 3.16 3.80 0.59 1.44 2.03 3,534
Mit. 0.87 4.17 0.06 3.16 3.22 0.06 1.44 1.50 3,534
% Reduced 45% 73% 90% — 15% 89% — 26% —
Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.51 4.09 0.14 0.27 0.34 0.13 0.12 0.19 989
Mit. 0.26 1.84 0.02 0.27 0.28 0.02 0.12 0.13 989
% Reduced 48% 55% 88% — 19% 87% — 31% —
Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.09 0.75 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.03 164
Mit. 0.05 0.34 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 164
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 11 / 75
% Reduced 48% 55% 88% — 19% 87% — 31% —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily - Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
2026 0.68 5.96 0.21 0.11 0.32 0.19 0.03 0.22 1,456
2027 1.38 6.12 0.15 0.20 0.35 0.14 0.05 0.19 1,777
Daily - Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
2025 1.57 15.3 0.64 3.16 3.80 0.59 1.44 2.03 3,534
2026 1.49 14.2 0.59 3.16 3.74 0.53 1.44 1.97 3,509
2027 1.02 2.56 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 0.04 484
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.17 1.63 0.07 0.27 0.34 0.06 0.12 0.19 336
2026 0.51 4.09 0.14 0.16 0.30 0.13 0.06 0.19 989
2027 0.32 0.97 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 0.02 220
Annual — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.03 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.03 55.7
2026 0.09 0.75 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.03 164
2027 0.06 0.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 36.4

2.3. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily - Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
2026 0.16 2.66 0.03 0.11 0.14 0.02 0.03 0.05 1,456
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 12 / 75
2027 0.98 3.77 0.03 0.20 0.23 0.03 0.05 0.08 1,777
Daily - Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
2025 0.28 3.79 0.06 3.16 3.22 0.06 1.44 1.50 3,534
2026 0.87 4.17 0.06 3.16 3.22 0.06 1.44 1.50 3,509
2027 0.87 2.25 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 484
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.03 0.33 0.01 0.27 0.28 0.01 0.12 0.13 336
2026 0.16 1.84 0.02 0.16 0.18 0.02 0.06 0.08 989
2027 0.26 0.75 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 220 Annual — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.01 0.06 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 55.7 2026 0.03 0.34 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 164
2027 0.05 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 36.4

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.58 1.05 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,197
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.47 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,022
Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.28 0.95 0.02 2.28 2.30 0.01 0.58 0.59 2,541
Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.23 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 421 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 13 / 75

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.28 1.04 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,039
Area 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 1.76 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 3.14
Waste — — — — — — — — 154
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.07
Total 1.58 1.05 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,197
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.23 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 2,866
Area 0.24 — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 3.14
Waste — — — — — — — — 154
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.07
Total 1.47 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,022
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.00 0.95 0.01 2.28 2.30 0.01 0.58 0.59 2,383
Area 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.87 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 3.14
Waste — — — — — — — — 154
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.07
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 14 / 75
Total 1.28 0.95 0.02 2.28 2.30 0.01 0.58 0.59 2,541
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.18 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 395 Area 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.14 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 0.52
Waste — — — — — — — — 25.4
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.01
Total 0.23 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 421

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.28 1.04 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,039
Area 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 1.76 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 3.14
Waste — — — — — — — — 154
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.07
Total 1.58 1.05 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,197
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.23 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 2,866
Area 0.24 — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 3.14
Waste — — — — — — — — 154
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 15 / 75
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.07
Total 1.47 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,022
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.00 0.95 0.01 2.28 2.30 0.01 0.58 0.59 2,383
Area 0.27 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.87 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 3.14
Waste — — — — — — — — 154
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.07
Total 1.28 0.95 0.02 2.28 2.30 0.01 0.58 0.59 2,541
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.18 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 395 Area 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.14 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Water — — — — — — — — 0.52
Waste — — — — — — — — 25.4
Refrig. — — — — — — — — 0.01
Total 0.23 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 421

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 16 / 75
Off-Road
Equipment

1.35 12.6 0.51 — 0.51 0.47 — 0.47 2,061
Demolition — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.34 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 56.5
Demolition — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.06 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 9.35
Demolition — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 81.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.25 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.37 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 17 / 75

3.2. Demolition (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.22 2.65 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 2,061
Demolition — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.07 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 56.5
Demolition — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 9.35
Demolition — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 81.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 18 / 75
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.25 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.37 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.43 13.2 0.61 — 0.61 0.56 — 0.56 2,244
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.36 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 61.5
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 19 / 75
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.07 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 10.2
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 61.1
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.69 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.4. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 20 / 75
Off-Road
Equipment

0.21 1.09 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 2,244
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 2.76 2.76 — 1.34 1.34 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.03 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 61.5
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 10.2
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 61.1
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.69 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 21 / 75
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.28 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.52 13.8 0.62 — 0.62 0.57 — 0.57 2,237
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 2.77 2.77 — 1.34 1.34 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.09 0.84 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 136
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.17 0.17 — 0.08 0.08 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.15 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 22.5
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 22 / 75
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 81.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.02 1.48 0.02 0.31 0.33 0.02 0.08 0.11 1,215
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.98 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 73.8 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.82 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 12.2

3.6. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 2.28 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 2,237
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 2.77 2.77 — 1.34 1.34 —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 23 / 75
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.14 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 136
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.17 0.17 — 0.08 0.08 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 22.5
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 81.4
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.02 1.48 0.02 0.31 0.33 0.02 0.08 0.11 1,215
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.98 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 73.8 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.82 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 12.2 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 24 / 75

3.7. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.44 12.7 0.57 — 0.57 0.52 — 0.52 2,238
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 2.77 2.77 — 1.34 1.34 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.37 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 65.7
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.08 0.08 — 0.04 0.04 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.07 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 10.9
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 25 / 75
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 79.9
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.02 1.43 0.02 0.31 0.33 0.01 0.08 0.10 1,191
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.36 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 35.0 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.39 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.79

3.8. Grading (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 2.28 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 2,238
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 2.77 2.77 — 1.34 1.34 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.07 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 65.7
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 26 / 75
—0.040.04—0.080.08———Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 10.9
Dust From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 79.9
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.02 1.43 0.02 0.31 0.33 0.01 0.08 0.10 1,191
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.36 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 35.0 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.39 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 5.79

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 27 / 75
Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.65 5.67 0.20 — 0.20 0.19 — 0.19 1,167
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.65 5.67 0.20 — 0.20 0.19 — 0.19 1,167
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.37 3.20 0.11 — 0.11 0.10 — 0.10 658
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 0.58 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 109
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 51.8
Vendor < 0.005 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 64.3 Hauling < 0.005 0.20 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 173 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 48.0
Vendor < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 64.2 Hauling < 0.005 0.21 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 173 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 28 / 75
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 27.3
Vendor < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 36.3 Hauling < 0.005 0.12 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 97.8 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.52 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.2

3.10. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 2.38 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 1,167
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 2.38 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 1,167
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.08 1.34 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 658
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.24 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 109
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 29 / 75
Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 51.8
Vendor < 0.005 0.07 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 64.3 Hauling < 0.005 0.20 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 173 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 48.0
Vendor < 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 64.2 Hauling < 0.005 0.21 < 0.005 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 173 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 27.3
Vendor < 0.005 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 36.3 Hauling < 0.005 0.12 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 97.8 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.52 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.2

3.11. Paving (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.33 2.99 0.11 — 0.11 0.10 — 0.10 733
Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 30 / 75
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.18 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 44.2
Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 7.31
Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 63.5
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.01 0.56 0.01 0.13 0.14 0.01 0.04 0.04 496
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.57 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 29.8 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.59 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.94 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 31 / 75

3.12. Paving (2027) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.08 0.95 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 733
Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.06 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 44.2
Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 7.31
Paving 0.00 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 63.5
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.01 0.56 0.01 0.13 0.14 0.01 0.04 0.04 496
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 32 / 75
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.57 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 29.8 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.59 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.94

3.13. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.24 2.59 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 475
Architectural
Coatings

0.79 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.16 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 28.8
Architectural
Coatings

0.05 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 4.77
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 33 / 75
Architectural
Coatings

0.01 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.60 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.59 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.14. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 2.24 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 475
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 34 / 75
Architectural
Coatings

0.79 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.14 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 28.8
Architectural
Coatings

0.05 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 4.77
Architectural
Coatings

3.15. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 2.55 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 475
Architectural
Coatings

0.79 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.23 2.55 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 475
Architectural
Coatings

0.79 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 0.75 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 139
Architectural
Coatings

0.23 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.14 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 23.1
Architectural
Coatings

0.04 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 36 / 75
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.42 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.79 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.16. Architectural Coating (2027) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 2.24 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 475
Architectural
Coatings

0.79 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 37 / 75
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 2.24 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 475
Architectural
Coatings

0.79 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.66 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 139
Architectural
Coatings

0.23 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.12 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 23.1
Architectural
Coatings

0.04 — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 9.42 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.79 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 38 / 75
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.17. Trenching (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.29 2.68 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 576
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.15 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 33.1
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 5.48
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 39 / 75
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 59.9
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.47 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.58 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.18. Trenching (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 1.47 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 576
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.08 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 33.1
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 5.48
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 40 / 75
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 59.9
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Average Daily — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.47 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.58 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

1.28 1.04 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,039
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 41 / 75
Total 1.28 1.04 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,039
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

1.23 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 2,866
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.23 1.22 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 2,866
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.18 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 395
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.18 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 395

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

1.28 1.04 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,039
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.28 1.04 0.02 2.76 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 3,039
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.18 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 395
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 42 / 75
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.18 0.17 < 0.005 0.42 0.42 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 395

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.00
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.00
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.00
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.00

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 43 / 75
—————————Daily, Summer
(Max)
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.00
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.00
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.00
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.00

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 44 / 75
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool

0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00

4.3. Area Emissions by Source
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 45 / 75

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products

0.21 — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.03 — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment

0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 1.76
Total 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 1.76 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products

0.21 — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.03 — — — — — — — —
Total 0.24 — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products

0.04 — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.01 — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment

0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.14
Total 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.14

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 46 / 75
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products

0.21 — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.03 — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment

0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 1.76
Total 0.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 1.76 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products

0.21 — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.03 — — — — — — — —
Total 0.24 — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products

0.04 — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings

0.01 — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment

0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.14
Total 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.14

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 47 / 75
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 3.14
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 3.14
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 3.14
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 3.14
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.52
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.52

4.4.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 3.14
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 3.14
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 3.14
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 3.14
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 48 / 75
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.52
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 0.52

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 154
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 154
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 154
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 154
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 25.4
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 25.4

4.5.2. Mitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 49 / 75
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 154
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 154
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 154
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 154
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 25.4
Parking Lot — — — — — — — — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — 25.4

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.07
Total — — — — — — — — 0.07
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 50 / 75
—————————Daily, Winter
(Max)
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.07
Total — — — — — — — — 0.07
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — 0.01

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.07
Total — — — — — — — — 0.07
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.07
Total — — — — — — — — 0.07
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
— — — — — — — — 0.01
Total — — — — — — — — 0.01

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 51 / 75
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 52 / 75
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 53 / 75
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment Type ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 54 / 75

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 55 / 75
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —

4.10.4. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.10.5. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 56 / 75
—————————Daily, Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — —

4.10.6. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Mitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 57 / 75
Annual — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Sequestered — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
Removed — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 11/1/2025 11/15/2025 5.00 10.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 11/16/2025 11/30/2025 5.00 10.0 — Grading Grading 12/1/2025 1/15/2026 5.00 34.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 2/15/2026 11/30/2026 5.00 206 — Paving Paving 4/1/2027 4/30/2027 5.00 22.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/1/2026 5/30/2027 5.00 129 — Trenching Trenching 1/16/2026 2/15/2026 5.00 21.0 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel A verage 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 58 / 75
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37 Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 37.0 0.48 Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 46.0 0.31 Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Trenching Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38

5.2.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Tier
4 Final 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 59 / 75
Demolition Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Site Preparation Graders Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 148 0.41 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Graders Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Final 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Tier 4 Final 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Tier 4 Final 2.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 37.0 0.48 Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts Diesel Tier 4 Final 2.00 8.00 46.0 0.31 Trenching Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Tier 4 Final 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Trenching Excavators Diesel Tier 4 Final 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 60 / 75
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 16.5 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 6.01 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 2.34 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 2.40 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 7.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 1.20 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
Trenching — — — —
Trenching Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 61 / 75
Trenching Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.3.2. Mitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 10.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 16.5 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 6.01 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 2.34 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 2.40 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 62 / 75
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 7.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 1.20 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
Trenching — — — —
Trenching Worker 7.50 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Trenching Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water unpaved roads twice daily 55% 55%
Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 25 mph 44% 44%

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 14,700 4,900 —

5.6. Dust Mitigation
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 63 / 75

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Site Preparation — — 10.0 0.00 —
Grading 4,481 0.00 34.0 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 0%
Parking Lot 0.00 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2026 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 64 / 75
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Recreational
Swimming P
ool
412 130 194 124,373 3,915 1,236 1,847 1,181,463
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Recreational
Swimming P
ool
412 130 194 124,373 3,915 1,236 1,847 1,181,463
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq
ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 14,700 4,900 —

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 65 / 75

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 453 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 453 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Recreational Swimming Pool 0.00 453 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 453 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Recreational Swimming Pool 266,144 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.12.2. Mitigated
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 66 / 75
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Recreational Swimming Pool 266,144 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Recreational Swimming Pool 81.5 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Recreational Swimming Pool 81.5 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 67 / 75
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Other commercial A/C
and heat
pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Recreational
Swimming P
ool
Stand-alone retail
refriger
ators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.15.2. Mitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 68 / 75

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG
emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100. 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 69 / 75
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 5.62 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 6.50 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 7.25 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observ
ed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received
over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider in
undation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate
, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the
greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 70 / 75

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire N/A N/A N/A N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest
exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 3.12
AQ-PM 44.5
AQ-DPM 73.7
Drinking Water 4.21
Lead Risk Housing 59.3
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 71 / 75
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 48.5
Traffic 35.1
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 91.2
Groundwater 98.5
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 95.9
Impaired Water Bodies 94.6
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 74.0
Cardio-vascular 51.8
Low Birth Weights 71.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 28.1
Housing 29.2
Linguistic 64.4
Poverty 34.9
Unemployment 40.6

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 56.94854356
Employed 84.28076479
Median HI 66.44424484
Education —
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 72 / 75
Bachelor's or higher 73.80982933
High school enrollment 2.566405749
Preschool enrollment 95.7141024
Transportation —
Auto Access 16.15552419
Active commuting 91.77466958
Social —
2-parent households 16.24534839
Voting 66.99602207
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 14.14089568
Park access 81.35506224
Retail density 90.96625176
Supermarket access 58.46272296
Tree canopy 71.3845759
Housing —
Homeownership 38.02130117
Housing habitability 47.41434621
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 64.71192095 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 58.66803542
Uncrowded housing 50.16040036
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 45.81034262
Arthritis 8.9
Asthma ER Admissions 29.3
High Blood Pressure 26.8
Cancer (excluding skin) 18.5
Asthma 43.1
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 73 / 75
Coronary Heart Disease 15.5
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 20.5
Diagnosed Diabetes 28.6
Life Expectancy at Birth 46.8
Cognitively Disabled 60.3
Physically Disabled 38.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 38.2
Mental Health Not Good 52.8
Chronic Kidney Disease 35.4
Obesity 68.0
Pedestrian Injuries 73.0
Physical Health Not Good 40.7
Stroke 19.7
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 93.1
Current Smoker 52.6
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 42.3
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 15.6
Children 61.0
Elderly 34.5
English Speaking 18.2
Foreign-born 67.3
Outdoor Workers 65.1
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 22.3
Traffic Density 48.1
24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 74 / 75
Traffic Access 87.4
Other Indices —
Hardship 43.3
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 63.2

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 62.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 62.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Information from provided project description and construction worksheet.

Construction: Construction Phases Information from filled out construction worksheet.

Construction: Off-Road Equipment Information from filled out construction worksheet. 24-179 Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda BMPS T4F Detailed Report, 1/15/2025 75 / 75
Construction: Trips and VMT Building Construction = Est. 220 concrete truck rounds trips (2.4 trips/day), Paving = 582cy (140 asphalt
truck trips (7 trips/day).

Construction: On-Road Fugitive Dust Air District recommended BMPs 15 mph. Required by Alameda General Plan Health & Safety policy 65
Action A.

Operations: Water and Waste Water Wastewater treatment 100% aerobic - no septic tanks or lagoons.

2. Emissions Summary - HRA

2.2 Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Year ROG NOx PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T CO₂e Daily - Summer (Max)
2026 0.67311521489967215.74744095286620.201809340255075550.0084342505862409140.210243590841316440.185632648941668420.0021469400557424030.187779588997410821194.8080801267824 2027 1.375660878321435.672162007778540.143283227672763020.012636719266172090.155919946938935130.131703283672392730.00321758908823730270.134920872760630061251.8498768706788 Daily - Winter (Max)
2025 1.556400669513508414.1199912304783160.62164489110083522.7894002863543083.41104517745514270.57200060207719841.34222252458504391.91422312666224252335.7197084228424 2026 1.475414835353567213.0082203304000770.56672725545773452.7894002863543083.3561275418120420.52111261650194881.34222252458504391.86333514108699272334.4161961373056 2027 1.02263526460796132.5531176306367970.035584738570237280.00084869260303194130.0364334311732692140.032737959627379070.000198932187302265330.03293689181468133475.8849587313865 Average Daily
2025 0.172007957747604161.56312309786914480.068422736574231620.245234543735730530.313657280309962150.062954213807059070.118098609814193150.1810528236212522260.07508985924903 2026 0.5032166953423493.9381714440183580.137777217676491620.08699314745323120.224770365129722760.126728896340620840.040694106380821440.16742300272144228805.0708807321895 2027 0.32137370294758940.93767081767053950.016937033757129910.00095897034345128940.01789600410058120.0155750018095758940.000240174450293863460.015815176259869758186.44346822261096 Annual
2025 0.031391452288937760.28526996536111890.0124871494247972710.044755304231770820.05724245365656810.0114891440197882820.021552996291090250.0330421403108785243.058399088562155 2026 0.091837046899978710.71871628853335050.025144342225959720.0158762494102146940.04102059163617440.0231280235821633050.0074266744144999120.030554697996663216133.28867172902775 2027 0.0586507007879350640.171124924224873460.00309100866067620870.000175012087679860330.0032660207483560690.0028424378302476010.0000438318371786300840.00288626966742623130.86784384667335

5.3. Construction Vehicles - HRA

5.3.1 Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition
Demolition Worker 10 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck HHDT
Site Preparation
Site Preparation Worker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck HHDT
Grading
Grading Worker 10 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 16.5 1 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck HHDT
Building Construction
Building Construction Worker 6.006 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 2.34377 1 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 2.4 1 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck HHDT
Paving
Paving Worker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 7 1 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck HHDT
Architectural Coating
Architectural Coating Worker 1.2012 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck HHDT
Trenching
Trenching Worker 7.5 1 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Trenching Vendor 1 HHDT,MHDT
Trenching Hauling 0 1 HHDT
Trenching Onsite truck HHDT

Attachment 2: Project Construction Emissions and Health Risk Calculations

Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA
Construction Health Impact Summary
Maximum Impacts at MEI Location - Without Mitigation
Maximum Concentrations Maximum
Exhaust Fugitive Hazard Annual PM2.5
Emissions PM10/DPM PM2.5 Index Concentration
Year (μg/m3) (μg/m 3) Infant/Child (-) (μg/m3)
2025 + 2026 0.0414 0.0446 7.37 0.01 0.09
2027 0.0034 0.0000 0.56 0.00 0.00
Total - - 7.93 -
Maximum 0.0414 0.0446 - 0.01 0.09
Maximum Impacts at ViVi Family Daycare
Unmitigated Emissions
Maximum Concentrations Maximum
Exhaust Fugitive Child Annual PM2.5
Construction PM10/DPM PM2.5 Cancer Risk Concentration
Year (μg/m3) (μg/m 3) (per million) (μg/m3)
2025 + 2026 0.0041 0.0032 2.21 0.007
2027 0.0003 0.0008 0.18 0.001
Total - - 2.39 -
Maximum 0.0041 0.0032 - 0.007
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA DPM Emissions and Modeling Emission Rates - Unmitigated PM2.5 Fugitive Dust Emissions for Modeling - Unmitigated DPM PM2.5
Modeled Emission Modeled Emission
Construction DPM Area DPM Emissions Area Rate Construction Area PM2.5 Emissions Area Rate Year Activity (ton/year) Source (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) (g/s/m2) Year Activity Source (ton/year) (lb/yr) (lb/hr) (g/s) (m2) g/s/m2 2025 Construction 0.0125 CON_DPM 25.0 0.01067 1.34E-03 10,926 1.23E-07 2025 Construction CON_FUG 0.0216 43.1 0.01842 2.32E-03 10,926 2.12E-07 2026 Construction 0.0251 CON_DPM 50.3 0.02148 2.71E-03 10,926 2.48E-07 2026 Construction CON_FUG 0.0074 14.9 0.00635 8.00E-04 10,926 7.32E-08 2027 Construction 0.0031 CON_DPM 6.2 0.00264 3.33E-04 10,926 3.04E-08 2027 Construction CON_FUG 0.0000 0.1 0.00002 2.94E-06 10,926 2.69E-10 Total 0.0407 81.4 0.0348 0.0044 Total 0.0290 58.0 0.0248 0.0031 Construction Hours Construction Hours
hr/day = 9 (7am - 4pm) hr/day = 9 (7am - 4pm)
days/yr = 260 days/yr = 260
hours/year = 2340 hours/year = 2340
Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 7.6 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 + 2026 0.0043 10 0.06 2025 + 2026 0.0043 - - 1 1 0 - 1 2025 + 2026 0.0043 10 0.70 2025 + 2026 0.0043 1 0.01 0.00 0.004 0.01 2 1 1 - 2 2027 0.0004 10 0.06 2027 0.0004 1 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 0.82 0.01
* Third trimester of pregnancy
Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 4.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 + 2026 0.0094 10 0.13 2025 + 2026 0.0094 - - 1 1 0 - 1 2025 + 2026 0.0094 10 1.55 2025 + 2026 0.0094 1 0.03 0.00 0.009 0.02 2 1 1 - 2 2027 0.0008 10 0.13 2027 0.0008 1 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.00 3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 1.80 0.03
* Third trimester of pregnancy
Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at Off-Site MEI Location - 1.5 meter receptor height Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant/Child Adult
Age --> 3rd Trimester 0 - 2 2 - 16 16 - 30
Parameter
ASF = 10 10 3 1
CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
DBR* = 361 1090 572 261
A = 1 1 1 1
EF = 350 350 350 350
AT = 70 70 70 70
FAH = 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.73
* 95th percentile breathing rates for infants and 80th percentile for children and adults Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Impact Receptor Location Infant/Child - Exposure Information Infant/Child Adult - Exposure Information Adult Exposure Age Cancer Modeled Age Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 0 0.25 -0.25 - 0* 2025 + 2026 0.0414 10 0.56 2025 + 2026 0.0414 - - 1 1 0 - 1 2025 + 2026 0.0414 10 6.81 2025 + 2026 0.0414 1 0.12 0.01 0.045 0.09 2 1 1 - 2 2027 0.0034 10 0.56 2027 0.0034 1 0.01 0.00 0.000 0.00 3 1 2 - 3 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
4 1 3 - 4 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
5 1 4 - 5 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
6 1 5 - 6 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
7 1 6 - 7 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
8 1 7 - 8 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
9 1 8 - 9 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
10 1 9 - 10 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
11 1 10 - 11 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
12 1 11 - 12 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
13 1 12 - 13 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
14 1 13 - 14 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
15 1 14 - 15 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
16 1 15 - 16 0.0000 3 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
17 1 16-17 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
18 1 17-18 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
19 1 18-19 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
20 1 19-20 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
21 1 20-21 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
22 1 21-22 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
23 1 22-23 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
24 1 23-24 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
25 1 24-25 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
26 1 25-26 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
27 1 26-27 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
28 1 27-28 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
29 1 28-29 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
30 1 29-30 0.0000 1 0.00 0.0000 1 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 7.93 0.13
* Third trimester of pregnancy
Alameda Aquatics Center, Alameda, CA - Construction Impacts - Without Mitigation Maximum DPM Cancer Risk and PM2.5 Calculations From Construction Impacts at ViVi Family Daycare - 1 meter - Infant Exposure Student Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x 1.0E6 Where: CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x SCAF x 8-Hr BR x A x (EF/365) x 10 -6
Where: Cair = concentration in air (μg/m 3)
SCAF = School Child Adjustment Factor (unitless) for source operation and exposures different than 8 hours/day
= (24/SHR) x (7days/SDay) x (SCHR/8 hrs)
SHR = Hours/day of emission source operation
SDay = Number of days per week of source operation
SCHR = School operation hours while emission source in operation 8-Hr BR = Eight-hour breathing rate (L/kg body weight-per 8 hrs) A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10 -6 = Conversion factor
Values
Infant Child
Age --> 0 - <2 2 - <16
Parameter
ASF = 10 3
DPM CPF = 1.10E+00 1.10E+00
8-Hr BR* = 1200 520
SCHR = 9 9
SHR = 9 9
SDay = 5 5
A = 1 1
EF = 250 250
AT = 70 70
SCAF = 4.20 4.20
* 95th percentile 8-hr breathing rates for moderate intensity activities Construction Cancer Risk by Year - Maximum Preschool Impact Receptor Location Child - Exposure Information Child
Exposure Age* Cancer Maximum
Exposure Duration DPM Conc (ug/m3) Sensitivity Risk Hazard Fugitive Total Year (years) Age Year Annual Factor (per million) Index PM2.5 PM2.5 1 1 0 - 1 2025 + 2026 0.0041 10 2.21 0.0008 0.003 0.01
2 1 1 - 2 2027 0.0003 10 0.18 0.0001 0.001 0.00
Total Increased Cancer Risk 2.39
* Children assumed to be 2 months of age with 2 years of exposure to construction emissions

Attachment 3: Cumulative Screening Information and Calculations

BAAQMD Roadway Raster Cancer Risk at MEI

BAAQMD Roadway Raster Annual PM2.5 Concentration at MEI

BAAQMD Roadway Raster Hazard Index at MEI

Date of Request 11/21/2024
Contact Name Jordyn Bauer
Affiliation Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.

Phone 707-794-0400 x103
Email [email protected]
Project Name Alameda Aquatics Center
Address 1900 Thau Way
City Alameda
County Alameda
Type (residential,
commercial, mixed
use, industrial, etc.) Recreational
Project Size (# of
units or building
square feet) 9.8ksf
Table A: Requester Contact Information
Comments:

Risk & Hazard Stationary Source Inquiry Form
This form is required when users request stationary source data from BAAQMD This form is to be used with the BAAQMD's Google Earth stationary source screening tables.

Click here for guidance on coducting risk & hazard screening, including roadways & freeways, refer to the District's Risk & Hazard Analysis flow chart.

Click here for District's Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards document.

For Air District assistance, the following steps must be completed:

1. Complete all the contact and project information requested in . Incomplete forms will not be processed. Please include a project site map.

2. Download and install the free program Google Earth, http://www.google.com/earth/download/ge/, and then download the county specific Google Earth stationary source application files from the District's website, http://www.baaqmd.gov/Divisions/Planning-and-Research/CEQA-GUIDELINES/Tools-and-Methodology.aspx. The small points on the map represent stationary sources permitted by the District (Map A on right). These permitted sources include diesel back-up generators, gas stations, dry cleaners, boilers, printers, auto spray booths, etc. Click on a point to view the source's Information Table, including the name, location, and preliminary estimated cancer risk, hazard index, and PM2.5 concentration.

3. Find the project site in Google Earth by inputting the site's address in the Google Earth search box.

4. Identify stationary sources within at least a 1000ft radius of project site. Verify that the location of the source on the map matches with the source's address in the Information Table, by using the Google Earth address search box to confirm the source's address location. Please report any mapping errors to the District.

5. List the stationary source information in blue section only.

6. Note that a small percentage of the stationary sources have Health Risk Screening Assessment (HRSA) data INSTEAD of screening level data. These sources will be noted by an asterisk next to the Plant Name (Map B on right). If HRSA values are presented, these values have already been modeled and cannot be adjusted further.

7. Email this completed form to District staff. District staff will provide the most recent risk, hazard, and PM2.5 data that are available for the source(s). If this information or data are not available, source emissions data will be provided. Staff will respond to inquiries within three weeks.

Note that a public records request received for the same stationary source information will cancel the processing of your SSIF request.

Submit forms, maps, and questions to Matthew Hanson at 415-749-8733, or [email protected] Table A: Requester Contact Information
Table B
Table A
Project MEI
Distance from Receptor
(feet) or MEI1 Plant No. Facility Name Address Cancer Risk 2 Hazard Risk2 PM2.5
2 Source No.3 Type of Source4 Fuel Code5 Status/Comments Distance
Adjustment
Multiplier
Adjusted
Cancer Risk
Estimate
Adjusted
Hazard
Risk
Adjusted
PM2.5
1000+ 22128 G&I IX Marina Village Research 965 Atlantic Avenue 2.88 0 0 Generator 2022 Dataset 0.04 0.12 0.00000 0.0000 500 23657 Heliotrope Technologies 850 Marina Village Pkwy 0 0 0 Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control2022 Dataset 0.35 0.00 0.00000 0.0000 400 201808 Ology Bioservices Inc. 2061 CHALLENGER DR 0.99 0 0 Generator 2022 Dataset 0.16 0.16 0.00000 0.0000 1000+ 107722-1 Chevron Station #90290 1802 Webster St 16.24 0.07 0 Gas Dispensing Facility 2022 Dataset CARB TOOL 0.53 0.02000 0.0000 Footnotes:

1. Maximally exposed individual
c. BAAQMD Reg 11 Rule 16 required that all co-residential (sharing a wall, floor, ceiling or is in the same building as a residential unit) dry cleaners cease use of perc on July 1, 2010.

Date last updated:
03/13/2018

2. These Cancer Risk, Hazard Index, and PM2.5 columns represent the values in the Google Earth Plant Information Table.

3. Each plant may have multiple permits and sources.
f. Unless otherwise noted, exempt sources are considered insignificant. See BAAQMD Reg 2 Rule 1 for a list of exempt sources. g. This spray booth is considered to be insignificant.

4. Permitted sources include diesel back-up generators, gas stations, dry cleaners, boilers, printers, auto spray booths, etc.

11. Further information about common sources:
a. Sources that only include diesel internal combustion engines can be adjusted using the BAAQMD's Diesel Multiplier worksheet. b. The risk from natural gas boilers used for space heating when <25 MM BTU/hr would have an estimated cancer risk of one in a million or less, and a chronic hazard index of 0.003 or less.

Therefore, there is no cancer risk, hazard or PM2.5 concentrations from co-residential dry cleaning businesses in the BAAQMD. d. Non co-residential dry cleaners must phase out use of perc by Jan. 1, 2023. Therefore, the risk from these dry cleaners does not need to be factored in over a 70-year period, but instead should reflect the e. Gas stations can be adjusted using BAAQMD's Gas Station Distance Mulitplier worksheet.

6. If a Health Risk Screening Assessment (HRSA) was completed for the source, the application number will be listed here.

8. Engineer who completed the HRSA. For District purposes only.

9. All HRSA completed before 1/5/2010 need to be multiplied by an age sensitivity factor of 1.7.

10. The HRSA "Chronic Health" number represents the Hazard Index.

5. Fuel codes: 98 = diesel, 189 = Natural Gas.

Table B: Google Earth data
Required Value User Defined Input
Annual Throughput
(gallons/year)
6000000
Hourly Dispensing Throughput
(gallons/hour)
2000
Hourly Loading Throughput
(gallons/hour)
8800
Meteorological Data San Jose
Distance to Nearest Resident
(meters)
304
Distance to Nearest Business
(meters)
304
Distance to Acute Receptor
(meters)
304
Control Scenario EVR Phase I & EVR Phase II
Include Building Downwash
Adjustments
yes
Risk Value Results
Max Residential Cancer Risk
(chances/million) 0.53
Max Worker Cancer Risk
(chances/million) 0.04
Chronic HI 0.00
Acute HI 0.02
Enter the distance where acute impacts are expected in meters as measured from the edge of the station canopy. This can be the distance to the property boundary, nearest resident, nearest worker, or any other user defined location. Please note that the value must be between 10 and 1000 meters. The distance you input will round down to the nearest receptor distance used in the Technical Guidance (e.g., 19m will return value at 10m distance).

Select the appropriate control scenario for your gas station. Please refer to technical Guidance for an explanation of the different control scenarios. Almost all gas stations in California are equipped with EVR Phase I and EVR Phase II controls.

Building downwash may over estimate risk results. High results should be investigated further through site-specific health risk assessment.
2022 CARB & CAPCOA Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Look-up Tool Version 1.0 - February 18, 2022
The tool will calculate the maximum hourly vehicle fueling throughput based on annual throughput as defined by Table 10 of the 2020 Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Technical Guidance Document (Technical Guidance). If a different value is desired please enter it into cell L4.

The tool will calculate the maximum hourly loading throughput based on annual throughput as defined by Table 10 of the Technical Guidance. If a different value is desired please enter it into cell L5.

Instructions
Enter your gas station's annual throughput in gallons of gasoline dispensed per year.

Select appropriate meteorological data. Met sets provided include 2 rural (Redding and Lancaster) and 4 urban (Fresno, Ontario, San Diego, and San Jose) locations. Use whichever best correlates to your location. If you would like to use site-specific meteorological data please refer to the Variable Met Tool.

Enter the distance to the nearest residential receptor in meters as measured from the edge of the station canopy. Please note that the value must be between 10 and 1000 meters.

The distance you input will round down to the nearest receptor distance used in the Technical Guidance (e.g., 19m will return value at 10m distance).

Enter the distance to the nearest worker receptor in meters as measured from the edge of the station canopy. Please note that the value must be between 10 and 1000 meters. The distance you input will round down to the nearest receptor distance used in the Technical Guidance (e.g., 19m will return value at 10m distance).

Screening Report
Area of Interest (AOI) Information
Area : 4,465,892.78 ft²
Nov 21 2024 12:09:50 Pacific Standard Time
11/21/24, 12:10 PM about:blank
about:blank 1/2
Summary
Name Count Area(ft²) Length(ft)
Permitted Stationary Sources 3 N/A N/A
Permitted Stationary Sources
# Address Cancer_Ris Chronic_Ha City County
1 965 Atlantic Avenue 2.88 0.00 Alameda Alameda
2 850 Marina Village Pkwy 0.00 0.00 Alameda Alameda
3 2061 CHALLENGER DR 0.99 0.00 Alameda Alameda
# Details Facility_I Facility_N Latitude Longitude
1 Generator 22128 G&I IX Marina Village
Research 37.78 -122.27
2 No Data 23657 Heliotrope Technologies 37.78 -122.27
3 Generator 201808 Ology Bioservices Inc. 37.78 -122.27 # NAICS NAICS_Indu NAICS_Sect NAICS_Subs PM25
1 621511 Medical Laboratories Health Care and Social
Assistance
Ambulatory Health Care
Services 0.00
2 221121
Electric Bulk Power
Transmission and
Control
Utilities Utilities 0.00
3 334118
Computer Terminal and
Other Computer
Peripheral Equipment
Manufacturing
Manufacturing Computer and Electronic
Product Manufacturing 0.00
# State Zip Count
1 CA 94501 1
2 CA 94501 1
3 CA 94501 1
NOTE: A larger buffer than 1,000 may be warranted depending on proximity to significant sources. 11/21/24, 12:10 PM about:blank
about:blank 2/2

Appendix C:

Hydrogeological
Evaluation

Hydrogeological Evaluatio n
City of Alameda New Aquatic Center
Jean Sweeney Open Space Park
1100 Atlantic Avenue
Alameda , California 94501
City of Alameda
950 West Mall Square | Alameda, California 94501
May 1 3, 2024 | Project No. 403773006

Geotechnical | Environmental | Construction Inspection & Testing | Forensic Engineering & Expert Witness

1301 Marina Village Parkway, Suite 110 | Alameda, California 94501 | p. 510.343.3000 | www.ninyoandmoore.com

Hydrogeological Evaluation
City of Alameda New Aquatic Center
Jean Sweeney Open Space Park
1100 Atlantic Avenue
Alameda , California
Mr. Jack Dybas
City of Alameda
950 West Mall Square | Alameda , California 94501

May 13, 2024 | Project No. 403773006
Brian Busch
Principal Environmental Scientist
Ryan Bast, PG
Project Geologist
Court Brooks, PG, CEM
Principal Hydrogeologist

BEB/CJB/RDB/gvr

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 i

CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY 1
3 GEOLOGIC AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2

3.1 Regional Geologic Setting 2

3.2 Site Geology 2

3.3 Subsurface Conditions 3

3.3.1 Artificial Fill 3

3.3.2 Bay Mud 3

3.3.3 Dune Sand 3

3.3.4 CPT Summary 3

3.4 Groundwater 4
4 GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION
AND SAMPLING 4
5 SITE HYDROGEOLOGY 5
6 HYDROGEOLOGIC AQUIFER TESTING 6
7 GROUNDWATER MODEL DESIGN AND OUTPUT 7
8 REFERENCES 9
TABLE
1 – Dewatering Target Elevation Data 6

FIGURES
1 – Site Location
2 – Exploration Locations

APPENDICES
A – Boring Logs
B – Laboratory Analytical Results - Groundwater Samples C – Groundwater Modelling Data

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 1 1 INTRODUCTION
As specified in our November 17, 2023 Proposal for Hydrogeological Study, Dewatering Design & Discharge Permitting Support, and Monitoring Well Destructions, Ninyo & Moore is pleased to present the results of a hydrogeological study performed for the proposed City of Alameda New Aquatic Center project at Jean Sweeney Open Space Park in Alameda, California (the Site, Figure 1). The hydrogeological study was performed in February 2024 from two groundwater monitoring wells installed at the Site in December 2023 (Figure 2). Presented in the following sections are the Site background and his tory, Site geologic and subsurface conditions, details on the installation and sampling of groundwater monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-2, a description of Site hydrogeology and hydrogeologic aquifer study performed from wells MW-1 and MW-2, and the groundwater model design and output. Information from the hydrogeological study is intended to be used for the design and construction of a temporary dewatering system necessary for the installation of swimming pools at the Aquatic Center.
2 SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
The Site is situated on the northwest portion of the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park located at 1100 Atlantic Avenue in Alameda, California. The Site is bounded by residential homes to the north and south, commercial businesses to the northeast, food stores and parking lots to the west, and Putter’s Goat Track Miniature Golf, associated parking lot and Bay backwaters to the east.

Preliminary plans for the new Aquatic Center include two swimming pools, turf fields, bleachers, and on-Site parking lots.

During the subsurface exploration performed by Ninyo & Moore in December 2023, the Site was an open space park with grass fields and pedestrian asphalt concrete paved walking trails. The Site is characterized by a low degree of topographic relief with a ground surface elevation that ranges between approximately 12 and 22 feet above mean sea level (MSL) with an average gradient across the site of approximately 2.3 percent to the east (Google, 2023).

Based on our correspondence with the City of Alameda and review of the provided conceptual Site improvements plan , we understand that the new Aquatic Center will include support, administration, and service buildings as well as two swimming pools. The final swimming pool designs are still under development; for the purpose of this study, we have assumed that the pools will be constructed to a depth of no greater than 12 feet. Other associated improvements include turf fields, bleachers and on-S ite parking lots. The total building and Site area will be approximately 15,000 square feet (SF) and 123,000 square feet (SF) , respectively. We

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 2

understand that the type(s) and depth(s) of pools and details of other aspects of the Site improvements are not yet finalized.
3 GEOLOGIC AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

3.1 Regional Geologic Setting
The Site is on the eastern margin of San Francisco Bay in the Coast Ranges geomorphic province of California. The Coast Ranges are comprised of several mountain ranges and structural valleys formed by tectonic processes commonly found around the Circum -Pacific belt. Basement rocks have been sheared, faulted, metamorphosed, and uplifted, and are separated by thick blankets of Cretaceous and Cenozoic sediments that fill structural valleys and line continental margins.

The San Francisco Bay Area has several ranges that trend northwest, parallel to major strike-slip faults such as the San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras. Major tectonic activity associated with these and other faults within the region consists primarily of right-lateral, strike-slip movement.

3.2 Site Geology
Regional geologic mapping indicates that the project Site is underlain by artificial fill (Graymer, 2000). Originally wetlands, the western portion of Alameda Island was filled in the late 1920s in part to form the Alameda Airport. The material used as fill varies in composition depending upon the source of the material. Per Graymer (2000), some fills are compacted and quite firm, but fills placed before about 1965 are typically loose and poorly compacted consisting of dumped materials.

Graymer (2000) maps the natural portions of Alameda Island as Dune Sand from the Holocene and Pleistocene, with deposition likely ending around 6,000 years ago. Radbruch (1957) classifies it as Merritt sand. The material is described as fine-grained, very well sorted (poorly graded), well drained eolian deposits, mainly occurring in large sheets or small hills. Graymer distinguishes the two sand units based on morphology, stating that the Merritt sand displays yardang morphology.

In both cases, the sand interfingers with Holocene Bay Mud deposits.

As described by Graymer (2000), Bay Mud consists of water saturated estuar ine mud, predominantly gray, green, and blue clay and silty clay. The mud interfingers with and grades into fine-grained deposits at the distal edges of Holocene fans.

The findings of our December 2023 subsurface exploration, described below, indicate that the Site is underlain by fill, and interfingered Dune Sand and Bay Mud.

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 3

3.3 Subsurface Conditions
The following sections provide a generalized description of the geologic units encountered during Ninyo & Moore’s December 2023 subsurface evaluation performed at the Site.

3.3.1 Artificial Fill
Artificial fill was encountered in the borings advanced at the Site at ground surface and extended to depths varying from approximately 5 to 9 feet below existing grade. As encountered, the artificial fill generally consisted of brown and gray, moist to wet, loose to dense, silty sand and clayey sand; and very stiff, sandy lean clay.

3.3.2 Bay Mud
Bay Mud was encountered below the artificial fill in Borings B -1/MW-1, B-2, and B-3/MW-2, and was interlayered with Dune Sand in Borings B-1/MW-1 and B-2. In general, the Bay Mud consisted of black, gray, and bluish-gray, moist to wet, clay, clayey sand, and silty sand. The shallow sandy layers encountered within the upper 19 feet were loose to medium dense, and sandy layers encountered below this depth in Borings B-1/MW-1 and B-3/MW-2 were dense to very dense.

3.3.3 Dune Sand
As mentioned above, Dune Sand was interlayered with the Bay Mud. Dune Sand, of Holocene & Pleistocene age was encountered in Borings B -1/MW-1 and B -2. The Dune Sand, as encountered, generally consisted of olive brown and brown, wet, loose to very dense, silty sand and clayey sand. The Dune Sand encountered below depths of about 19 feet was typically dense to very dense.

3.3.4 CPT Summary
The CPT data recorded in boring CPT-1 is generally consistent with the subsurface materials encountered in Boring B-1/MW-1, which is located near CPT-1.

In general, the CPT data indicates materials of low tip resistance and/or low friction, consistent with low strength clayey or organic and loose sandy materials, extending to depths varying from about 16 to 18 feet below grade. The subsurface materials below this upper weaker zone generally consist of interbedded fine- grained and sandy layers in which the CPTs encountered refusal at depths varying from about 49 to 53 feet below grade suggesting the presence of dense zones or inclusions which are restrictive to penetration.

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 4

3.4 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered during the December 2023 subsurface exploration at depths ranging between 5 feet and 7.75 feet below the ground surface in the CPT soundings, and approximately between 13 feet and 14 feet below the ground surface in the borings. In January 2024, groundwater was observed in wells MW-1 and MW-2 at 3.91 and 3.57 feet below ground surface, respectively. Regional groundwater records compiled by the California Geological Survey (CGS, 2003a), indicate that the historic high groundwater level at the Site is about 5 feet below the ground surface.

Variations or fluctuations in the groundwater levels across the Site and over time may occur due to seasonal precipitation, spatial variations in topography or subsurface hydrogeologic conditions, or as a result of tidal variations or other factors. In addition, seeps may be encountered at elevations above the groundwater levels encountered due to perched groundwater conditions, leaking pipes, preferential drainage, or other factors not evident at the time of our exploration. 4 GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION AND

SAMPLING
On December 6, 2023, Ninyo & Moore personnel oversaw the installation of groundwater monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-2
at the Site in geotechnical borings B -1 and B-3, respectively.

Following soil sampling and lithologic logging, the wells were constructed with 2- inch diameter schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) blank casing and 0.010- inch slotted PVC well screen. The screened intervals for the wells are 20 feet in length, extending from approximately 6 to 26 feet bgs. Well filter packs consist of #2/12 sand placed within the annulus of each boring from the bottom of each boring to approximately 1 foot above the top of each well screen, followed by an approximate 2 foot well transition seal consisting of bentonite. The remaining open borehole annulus in each well was sealed with neat cement to near ground surface. Boring logs are presented in Appendix A. Upon well completion, each wellhead was finished at the ground surface with a locking well cap and traffic-rated bolt-down well vault. The vaults were installed and finished with a concrete apron.

Well development activities were performed on wells MW-1 and MW-2 on January 11, 2024. Prior to development, Ninyo & Moore measured the total well depth and depth to water in each well using a water level indicator calibrated to within 0.01 foot. The wells were developed by alternately swabbing and surging the well casing using a hand-held surge block, then purged by pumping Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 5 using an electric submersible pump until approximately 10 casing volumes of water were removed and groundwater parameters (pH, conductivity, and temperature) stabilized.

Sampling of the two groundwater monitoring wells was performed on January 15, 2024 . The collected groundwater samples were submitted to McCampbell Analytical, Inc. of Pittsburg, California for laboratory analysis under chain- of-custody protocols. The samples were analyzed for multi-range total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg); total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel (TPHd); and total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil (TPHmo) by United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Method 8015, a full scan for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260B, and CAM 17 metals by EPA Method 6020/7470A. Concentrations of TPHg, TPHd, TPHmo and VOCs were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in either of the sampled wells. Laboratory analytical reports for the groundwater samples are included in Appendix B.
5 SITE HYDROGEOLOGY
Based on the borehole lithologic logs and results of the December 2023 geotechnical investigation, the shallow saturated material beneath the Site includes a thin layer (approximately 5 to 9 feet thick) of imported silty and clayey sand over the Bay Mud Complex interlayered with dune sands. To obtain detailed information which will be used to calculate the anticipated volume and flow rates of groundwater to be extracted and discharged to the sanitary sewer under permit during installation of the Aquatic Center pools , Ninyo & Moore performed aquifer testing of the two monitoring wells, the output of which was analyzed by Ninyo & Moore using the hydrogeologic platform AQTESOLV. The estimated hydraulic conductivity values ranged from 1.3 feet per day (ft/d) to 2.8 ft/d. For this study, Ninyo & Moore used the higher, more conservative, hydraulic conductivity estimate in the groundwater model. Table 1 below presents the model design data derived from field measurements and review of the available Aquatic Center conceptual test fit drawing:

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 6 Table 1 – Dewatering Target Elevation Data
Parameter Description Model Input
MW-1 and MW-2 Elevation* 15' AMSL
MW-1/MW-2 Depth to Groundwater 2' / 3’
MW-1/MW-2 Groundwater Elevation 13' / 12’ AMSL
Presumed Swimming Pool Invert Elevation** 0' AMSL
Target Dewatering Elevation*** -2' AMSL
Target Dewatering Drawdown 14' to 15’
Hydraulic Conductivity Estimate Low 1.3 ft/day
Hydraulic Conductivity Estimate High 2.8 ft/day
Notes:
* = Extrapolated from geotechnical borings B-1 and B-2 (N inyo & Moore, 2023). ** = Estimated, presently unknown.
*** = Includes 2' safety factor.

AMSL = above mean sea level (NAVD 88); all elevations are approximate. 6 HYDROGEOLOGIC AQUIFER TESTING
On February 13 and 14, 2024, Ninyo & Moore performed a constant rate aquifer pumping test from monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-2 to estimate aquifer characteristics to provide information to aid with preparation of a design for a dewatering system which will be required during construction of the Aquatic Center. The test ing was performed using a 12-volt DC electric submersible pump and controller to pump groundwater, Solinst 3001 Levellogger 5, and Solinst Barologger 5 transducers to record changes in water levels and atmospheric pressure, respectively, and a Solinst Model 101 water level meter used to measure groundwater depth in the wells during testing. The water level displacement during testing and subsequent rate of recovery following cessation of pumping were recorded and later analyzed to estimate the hydraulic conditions of the aquifer in the vicinity of the location of the Jean Sweeney Park Aquatic Center.

During testing performed from well MW-1 (Test 1), an initial water level reading of 2.75 feet was measured in the well, and the depth to the bottom of the well casing was recorded at 25.25 feet.

The submersible pump was lowered into the well to a point approximately 6 inches from the bottom of the well to
ensure sediment would not clog the pump intake. The Solinst 3001 Levellogger 5 was then set up and lowered into the well until it was sitting just above the top of the pump. The Levelloger 5, along with the water meter was used to track how much drawdown occurred during pumping. The Barologger 5 was placed at the top of the well casing. Groundwater was pumped at flow rates between 1 and 2 gallons per minute, and the depth to wate r was recorded by the Levelloger 5 every two minutes. The groundwater pumping period lasted Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 7 approximately 20 minutes until an equilibrium was created w here there was no change in water depth. Once the water depth equilibrated, the well was allowed to recharge for approximately 10 minutes before pumping was resumed.

During testing performed from well MW-2 (Test 2), an initial water level reading of 1.56 feet was measured and the depth to the bottom of the well casing was recorded at 24.70 feet. The submersible pump, Levelloger 5, and Barlogger 5 were set up in th e well in a similar manner to what was done in MW -1. Groundwater was pumped at flow rates between 1 and 2 gallons per minute and the depth to water was recorded by the Levelloger 5 every two minutes. The groundwater pumping period lasted approximately 20 minutes until an equilibrium was created where there was no change in water dept h. As with testing from well MW -1, well MW-2 was allowed to recharge for approximately 10 minutes before pumping was resumed. 7 GROUNDWATER MODEL DESIGN AND OUTPUT
For the purpose of this study, a target dewatering elevation of approximately -2 feet above mean sea level (AMSL; all elevations are based on NAVD 88) was assumed to be two feet below the maximum projected excavation elevation, assuming the pools are 12 feet deep, plus a 3-foot over- excavated portion to account for sub-drain piping.

The groundwater model processing platform, Groundwater Vistas, was utilized to create groundwater simulations utilizing the Modflow method (2007). A computerized finite difference groundwater model was set out on a grid with uniform 20-foot row and column spacing over an area of 5,280 feet wide and 5,280 feet long centered on the project Site. The model assumes that homogeneous and isotropic aquifer conditions exist horizontally across the grid. The model was designed to estimate the approximate number and configuration of wells expected to dewater an approximately 120-foot wide by 400-foot long excavation to the target dewatering elevation of approximately -2 feet AMSL. The model was run until steady-state groundwater conditions were achieved. Modelling data included in Appendix C presents a screen image of the formatted test data and plotted graphs, aquifer testing data analysis output, and model output static and pumping contours and profiles. The model simulates the effect of four dewatering wells pumping at a combined flow rate of 20 gallons per minute (gpm), i.e., 5 gpm/dewatering well. Based on this information, it appears that the Site can be adequately dewatered by a network of four dewatering wells to achieve the target dewatering elevation of approximately -2 feet AMSL. However, more dewatering wells may be needed, depending on the actual size, depth, and configuration of the planned improvements.

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 8

Note that the inter-layering of Dune Sand and Bay Mud may introduce isolated areas of higher or lower hydraulic conductivity, which could reduce the effectiveness of the dewatering system.

Ninyo & Moore recommends that the construction contractor factor this possibility into its dewatering plans by including additional wells as a contingency. Additionally, the relatively low permeability of the saturated media may require a longer than usual time to achieve steady-state conditions. However, the target dewatering elevation between dewatering wells should be achieved within 7 to 10 days of continuous pumping. The dewatering contractor should plan accordingly to avoid unnecessary delays.

During development of the dewatering system design for the project, consideration should be given to the installation of a cut -off shoring wall in the excavation to reduce the amount of groundwater inflow, as this option may result in lower dewatering well installation, water treatment, and water disposal costs. Based on previous experience, i nstallation of cut-off shoring walls in excavations similar to the anticipated excavation size planned for the Aquatic Center has resulted in lower groundwater flow rates into excavations by up to 90 percent.

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024 9 8 REFERENCES
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2003a, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Oakland West

7.5-minute Quadrangle, Alameda County, California: California Geological Survey, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 078, scale 1:24,000.

Driscoll, 1986, Groundwater and Wells, A Comprehensive Study of Groundwater and the Technologies Used to Locate, Extract, Treat, and Protect this Resource. Johnson Screens Inc.

Graymer, R.W., 2000, Geologic Map and Map Database of the Oakland Metropolitan Area, Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey, Miscellaneous Field Studies MF-2342, Scale 1:50,000.

Google, 2023, Google Earth Pro 7.3.6.9345, http://earth.google.com/.

Groundwater Vistas with Modflow, Version 7.

HydroSOLV, 2007, Aquifer Test SOLVer (AQTESOLV), Version 4.50, August 2007.

Radbruch, D.H., 1957, Areal and Engineering Geology of the Oakland West Quadrangle, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map I -239, Scale 1:24,000.

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024

FIGURES

Appendix A

Photographic Documentation

FIGURES

SITE
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
0 SCALE (FEET)
2,000 4,000
N
403773004 I 01/24
403773004.dwg 01/12/2024 AEK

CITY OF ALAMEDA NEW AQUATICS CENTER
1100 ATLANTIC AVENUE

ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA

SITE LOCATION
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE I REFERENCE: USGS, 2018 FIGURE 1

ATLANTIC AVE

WILMA CHAN WAY

BARTLETT DR
CPT-1
(100')
B-4
(6.5')
CPT-3
(100')
CPT-2
(100')
CPT-4
(100')
B-2
(21.4')
B-1/MW-1
(50.5'/26')
B-3/MW-2
(26.5'/26')
I-2
(3')
I-1
(3')

THAU WAY
CPT-5
(100')
B-1
(20')
R-1
(5')
R-3
(5') B-2
(20')

EXPLORATION LOCATIONS
Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants
0 SCALE (FEET)
100 200
N
403773004.dwg 01/12/2024 AEK
NOTE: DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS, AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE l REFERENCE: GOOGLE EARTH, 2024 FIGURE 2
403773004 I 01/24

CITY OF ALAMEDA NEW AQUATICS CENTER
1100 ATLANTIC AVENUE

ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
LEGEND
CPT-1
(100')
B-1/MW-1
(50.5'/26')

SITE BOUNDARY

BORING LOCATION

TOTAL DEPTH (FEET)

CPT LOCATION

TOTAL DEPTH (FEET)
CPT-3
(100')

SEISMIC CPT LOCATION

TOTAL DEPTH (FEET)

INFILTRATION TEST

TOTAL DEPTH (FEET)
I-1
(3')
B-1
(20')

BORING LOCATION (CTS)

TOTAL DEPTH (FEET)

Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024

APPENDIX A

Boring Logs

0 10
20 30
40 19
15 6
24 82/12"
52 40
48 SP
SC
CH
SP
SC
SP
ALLUVIUM:

Brown, moist, loose, poorly graded SAND.

Very moist - almost wet.

Gray, moist, very loose, clayey SAND.

Wet.

Blackish gray, wet, very stiff, fat CLAY.

Olive brown, wet, dense, poorly graded SAND.

Brown; very dense.

Dense.

Olive brown, wet, medium dense, clayey SAND.

Bluish gray, wet, dense, poorly graded SAND.

BORING B- 1

CITY OF ALAMEDA NEW AQUATIC CENTER
1100 ATLANTIC AVENUE, ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
403773004 | 01/24
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLESDriven

BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)

DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL

CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.

DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 12/5/2023 BORING NO. B-1
GROUND ELEVATION 15' + MSL SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" HSA, B-53R Truck Mounted (Exploration Geo.) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs (wireline) DROP 30 inches

SAMPLED BY SSA LOGGED BY SSA REVIEWED BY RPM/MKW
2 40
50 60
70 80
42 31
50/6"
SP ALLUVIUM (Continued):

Bluish gray, wet, dense, poorly graded SAND.

Very dense.

Total depth = 50.5 feet.

Backfilled with neat cement to approx. 26 ft bgs, monitoring well MW-1 constructed in boring.

Notes:

Groundwater was measured at a depth of approximately 13.0 feet in the borehole shortly after completion of drilling.

Groundwater may rise to a level higher than that measured in borehole due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in the report.

The ground elevation shown above is an estimation only. It is based on our interpretations of published maps and other documents reviewed for the purposes of this evaluation. It is not sufficiently accurate for preparing construction bids and design documents (Google, 2023).

BORING B-1

CITY OF ALAMEDA NEW AQUATIC CENTER
1100 ATLANTIC AVENUE, ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
403773004 | 01/24
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLESDriven

BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)

DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL

CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.

DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 12/5/2023 BORING NO. B-1
GROUND ELEVATION 15' + MSL SHEET 2 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" HSA, B-53R Truck Mounted (Exploration Geo.) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs (wireline) DROP 30 inches

SAMPLED BY SSA LOGGED BY SSA REVIEWED BY RPM/MKW
2 0
10 20
30 40
26 40
10 20
42 35
SP
CL
SP
SC
ALLUVIUM:

Light brown and bluish gray, moist, medium dense, poorly graded SAND.

Bluish gray, moist, hard, lean CLAY.

Firm.

Wet.

Bluish gray, wet, loose, poorly graded SAND.

Bluish gray and brown, wet, dense, clayey SAND.

Total depth = 26.5 feet.

Monitoring well MW-2 constructed in boring.

Notes:

Groundwater was measured at a depth of approximately 13.0 feet in the borehole shortly after completion of drilling.

Groundwater may rise to a level higher than that measured in borehole due to seasonal variations in precipitation and several other factors as discussed in the report.

BORING B-3

CITY OF ALAMEDA NEW AQUATIC CENTER
1100 ATLANTIC AVENUE, ALAMEDA, CALIFORNIA
403773004 | 01/24
DEPTH (feet)
Bulk SAMPLESDriven

BLOWS/FOOT
MOISTURE (%)

DRY DENSITY (PCF)
SYMBOL

CLASSIFICATION
U.S.C.S.

DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
DATE DRILLED 12/5/2023 BORING NO. B-3
GROUND ELEVATION 15' + MSL SHEET 1 OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" HSA, B-53R Truck Mounted (Exploration Geo.) DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs (wireline) DROP 30 inches

SAMPLED BY SSA LOGGED BY SSA REVIEWED BY RPM/MKW
1 Ninyo & Moore | 1100 Atlantic Avenue, Alameda, California | 403773006 | May 13, 2024

APPENDIX B

Boring Logs

APPENDIX B

Laboratory Analytical Results - Groundwater Samples

WorkOrder:

Report Created for: Ninyo & Moore
1301 Marina Village Parkway, Suite 110
Alameda, CA 94501
Project Contact: Sean Igoe
Project: 403773004; Alameda Aquatic Center
Project P.O.:

Project Received: 01/16/2024
Analytical Report reviewed & approved for release on 01/24/2024 by:

Jena Alfaro
2401970
The report shall not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory. The analytical results relate only to the items tested. Results reported conform to the most current NELAP standards, where applicable, unless otherwise stated in a case narrative.

Analytical Report
1534 Willow Pass Rd. Pittsburg, CA 94565 ♦ TEL: (877) 252-9262 ♦ FAX: (925) 252-9269 ♦ www.mccampbell.com CA ELAP 1644 ♦ NELAP 4033 ORELAP
Project Manager
McCampbell Analytical, Inc.
"When Quality Counts"

Page 1 of 30 ends

Alameda City CouncilJuly 1, 2025

Alameda City Council
July 1, 2025