Agenda packet — San Carlos City Council, January 23, 2023 (part 1 of 9)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
January 23, 2023 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
This meeting will be conducted both inperson at City Hall and virtually via Zoom. Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Masks are no longer required, but are still highly recommended in accordance with California Dept of Health Guidelines. To maintain public health and safety, please do not attend in person if you are experiencing symptoms associated with COVID19.

Provide Public Comment. To address the City Council on any item on the posted agenda, fill out a Request to Speak Form located in the back of the Council Chambers and submit it to the City Clerk; or, you may raise your hand when the Mayor calls for public comments.

Remote Participation:

Observe via:
Zoom. https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88256140939; or call 16699009128 and enter the Meeting ID #: 882 5614 0939
Meeting Webportal. www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda Local TV. Comcast Channel 27 and AT&T Uverse Channel 99 Provide Public Comment. If you plan to make a public comment on any item on the posted agenda, please observe the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), and during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address, use the “raise hand” feature. If joining Zoom by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”.

Councilmembers may participate in this meeting remotely as authorized by AB 361.

MAYOR: Adam Rak
COUNCIL:Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Sara McDowell, Pranita Venkatesh

1. CALL TO ORDER
1 ageda,peaseobseeteeetgaoo(seeaboeaccessoato),addugtepubc comment period for the agenda item you wish to address, use the “raise hand” feature. If joining Zoom by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”.

Councilmembers may participate in this meeting remotely as authorized by AB 361.

MAYOR: Adam Rak
COUNCIL:Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Sara McDowell, Pranita Venkatesh

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Recognizing January 2023 as Human Trafficking Prevention Month.
b. Present a City Coin to Community Volunteer John Durkin, recognizing his Service on the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission, San Carlos Lions Club, Hometown Days Parade Committee, and the Museum of San Carlos History.

5. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Communications and Announcements are brief items from members of the City Council regarding upcoming events in the community and correspondence that they have received. They are informational in nature and no action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

6. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

Each speaker is limited to two minutes. If there are more than five individuals wishing to speak during public comment, the Mayor may choose to allow the first five speakers to speak during this time, and the balance of the Public Comment speakers will be called upon at the end of the Council Meeting.

If the item you are speaking on is not listed on the agenda, please be advised that the City Council may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed as allowed under the Brown Act (Government Code Section 54954.2). The City Council's general policy is to refer items to staff for attention, or have a matter placed on a future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the December 12, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the January 5, 2023 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. d. Deny Claim of Nicolas Boyer.
eAdoptaResolutionAcceptingthe2022SewerLateralReplacementProjectC1737 2 refer items to staff for attention, or have a matter placed on a future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the December 12, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. c. Approve the January 5, 2023 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. d. Deny Claim of Nicolas Boyer.
e. Adopt a Resolution Accepting the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project C1737 and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion.

8. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning and Transportation Commission’s Decision on the 703 Knoll Drive Project.
b. Consideration of Adopting Resolutions Certifying the Focused General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report and Focused General Plan Update Consisting of Amendments to the Housing, Environmental Safety and Public Services, Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements and Associated Amendments to the City of San Carlos’ Zoning Ordinance, Sections 18.04 Residential Districts, 18.05 – MixedUse Districts, 18.20 – Parking and Loading, and 18.41 – Terms and Definitions; and Adopting a Resolution Ratifying the 2023 – 2031 Housing Element and Corresponding Zoning Ordinance Amendments.

9. STUDY SESSION
a. Discuss and Provide Feedback on Possible Existing Buildings Reach Code.

10. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

11. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VI, if you need special assistance or translation services to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 8024222 or via email at [email protected]. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. 3 December 12, 2022 1
San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Regular Meeting
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
December 12, 2022 7:00 PM

MINUTES

ROLL CALL
City Council Present: Sara McDowell, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Councilmember
John Dugan, Councilmember
Laura Parmer-Lohan, Councilmember
Adam Rak, Vice Mayor
Staff Present: Kristina Bell, Police Chief
Nil Blackburn, Assistant City Manager
Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Amy Newby, Parks and Recreation Director
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney
Al Savay, Community Development Director

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor McDowell called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor McDowell led the Pledge of Allegiance.

3. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
None.

4. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Dugan and Mayor McDowell congratulated the Parks and Recreation Department on their successful Winter Fest event.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Lauren Boro, HIP Housing Boardmember, spoke on HIP Housing’s services, thanked the City for supporting their organization, presented the 2023 HIP Housing calendar and congratulated Claire, a San Carlos student, upon winning the calendar contest.

7.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 4
December 12, 2022 2

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Adopt City Council Consent Calendar Items ‘a’ – ‘d’.

MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: John Dugan
AYES: Collins, Dugan, Parmer-Lohan, Rak, McDowell
RESULT: Motion Passed 5 – 0
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the November 14, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes. c. Adopt a Resolution Making Findings and Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Commissions Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361.

Resolution 2022-119
d. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter Urging State Legislators to Amend Assembly Bill (“AB”) 2449.

7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Accepting the Certificate of the Chief Elections Officer and the Statement of Votes Cast in the Consolidated General Municipal Election Held on November 8, 2022 and Declaring the Results.

City Clerk Crystal Mui presented the results of the November 8, 2022 General Municipal Election.

MOTION: Adopt Resolution 2022-120 Accepting the Certificate of the Chief Elections Officer and the Statement of Votes Cast in the Consolidated General Municipal Election Held on November 8, 2022 and Declaring the Results.

MOVER: John Dugan
SECONDER: Ron Collins
AYES: Rak, Collins, Dugan, Parmer-Lohan, McDowell
RESULT: Motion Passed 5 – 0

8. REORGANIZATION
a. Presentation to Retiring Councilmember Laura Parmer-Lohan.

Brian Perkins, on behalf of Congresswoman Jackie Speier; Joan Dentler on behalf of Senator Josh Becker and Assembly Member Kevin Mullin; and Brae Hunter, on behalf of San Mateo County Board of Supervisor Don Horsley, presented legislative

7.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 5
December 12, 2022 3
resolutions to Councilmember Parmer-Lohan, recognizing her for her years of service on the San Carlos City Council.

Mayor McDowell presented Councilmember Parmer-Lohan with a proclamation and gift on behalf of the City.

Councilmember Parmer-Lohan spoke on her call for action to serve on the Council.

She highlighted a few of her many accomplishments achieved while on the Council and thanked her family, staff and the community for their support.

Public Comment
Laura Beach thanked Councilmember Parmer-Lohan for her service and complimented the San Carlos Council for their congeniality. b. Seat Newly Elected City Councilmembers.

City Clerk Crystal Mui administered the Oath of Office to newly re-elected Councilmember Sara McDowell; Allison Rak ceremonially administered the Oath of Office to newly re-elected Councilmember Adam Rak; and Ms. Mui administered the Oath of Office to newly elected Councilmember Pranita Venkatesh.

The newly elected members congratulated each other on their election and thanked their family, campaign committee and community for their support. They also spoke on what they’re looking forward to accomplishing during their term. c. Call for Nominations for New Mayor and Vice Mayor.

Mayor McDowell shared some outgoing remarks as Mayor, highlighting Council accomplishments during the last year and thanking city staff, her colleagues on the Council and the community for their work and support.

MOTION: Nominate Adam Rak as the City of San Carlos Mayor.

MOVER: Ronald Collins
AYES: Dugan, Venkatesh, Collins, Rak, McDowell
RESULT: Motion Passed 5 – 0
Lydia Rak ceremonially administered the Oath of Office to Mayor Adam Rak.

Mayor Rak thanked his colleagues for the appointment, highlighted projects that the City will tackle in 2023 and shared what his focus will be as Mayor.

Councilmembers thanked Councilmember McDowell for her mayorship and welcomed Mayor Rak to his new post.

Public Comment
Charles Stone, Belmont Councilmember, thanked Laura Parmer-Lohan and

7.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 6
December 12, 2022 4
Councilmember McDowell for their service, welcomed Councilmember Venkatesh to the Council and congratulated Mayor Rak.

Julia Mates, Belmont Mayor, bid farewell to Laura Parmer-Lohan and congratulated newly elected Councilmembers.

Ray Mueller, Board Supervisor Elect, provided accolades to Councilmember McDowell for her leadership in 2022, congratulated Mayor Rak on his new post and Councilmember Venkatesh for her election, and bid Laura Parmer-Lohan farewell.

MOTION: Nominate Ronald Collins as the City of San Carlos Vice Mayor.

MOVER: John Dugan
AYES: McDowell, Venkatesh, Dugan, Collins, Rak
RESULT: Motion Passed 5 – 0.

Vice Mayor Collins provided comments on his new role and highlighted projects in the year ahead.

Mayor Rak congratulated Vice Mayor Collins on his appointment.

9. AGENDA SETTING
None.

10. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned to the foyer for a reception at 8:19 PM.

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk

7.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 7
January 5, 2023 1
San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Special Meeting
Conducted Remotely in Accordance with Assembly Bill 361 January 05, 2023 4:00 PM

MINUTES

ROLL CALL
City Council Present: Adam Rak, Mayor
Ronald Collins, Vice Mayor
Sara McDowell, Councilmember
Pranita Venkatesh, Councilmember
City Council Absent: John Dugan, Councilmember
Staff Present: Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Rak called the meeting to order at 4:01 PM.

2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Debbie Baldocchi, resident, thanked the City for their proactive work on repairing storm drains, which likely mitigated floods from the current storm.

Elizabeth Rossi, resident, expressed appreciation to City staff for being resilient in addressing the effects of the storms.

3. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Ratifying and Extending the Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Caused by the Existing and Continuing Threat of Atmospheric River Storms.

MOTION : Adopt Resolution 2023-001 Ratifying and Extending the Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Caused by the Existing and Continuing Threat of Atmospheric River Storms.

MOVER: Ronald Collins
SECONDER: Sara McDowell
AYES: McDowell, Venkatesh, Collins, Rak
NAYS: None

7.c
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 8
January 5, 2023 2
ABSENT:

RESULT:

Dugan
Motion Passed 4 – 0 – 1
City Attorney Greg Ruben provided background on the recent atmospheric river storms and spoke on the importance of extending a declaration of emergency.

Public Comment
Caller with a phone number ending in 333 commented that she missed the presentation of the item due to technical difficulties in joining the meeting and questioned where to obtain information on financial assistance for businesses affected by the storms.

City Manager Jeff Maltbie provided a summary of the presentation and noted that should financial information be available for businesses, staff will publish the information on the City website.

Mayor Rak requested that the information be posted on social media as well.

Council thanked staff for their work on addressing the storm and proactively communicating with the public.

4. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:46 PM.
_______________________________
Crystal Mui,
City Clerk

7.c
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 9

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 23, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Deny Claim of Nicolas Boyer.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council deny the claim of Nicolas Boyer as recommended by the Sedgwick representative.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None for this action.

BACKGROUND:

This item is coming before the Council to act on the claim submitted by Nicolas Boyer. Staff is recommending Council’s denial of the claim based on Sedgwick guidance.

The Tort Claims Act. California Government Code Sections 900, seq., mandates that all claims for money or damages against a public entity must be presented in writing to the public entity prior to filing suit. Generally, claims concerning personal injury, wrongful death, damage to personal property, or damage to crops must be presented to the public within six (6) months of the accrual of the claim. All other claims, principally claims on contracts and damage to real property, are subject to a one-year statute of limitations for presentation of the tort claim. Once a tort claim is received by the public entity, the entity has forty-five (45) days to act on the claim. A claim can be settled or rejected. If no action is taken within 45 days, the claim is deemed rejected by operation of law on the last day.

Claims Processing in San Carlos. When the City receives a claim, the claim is immediately forwarded to claims examiners at Sedgwick for investigation. After Sedgwick investigates the claim, Sedgwick provides a recommendation to the City on the handling of the claim.

About Sedgwick. Sedgwick is a leading global provider of technology-enabled risk, benefits and integrated business solutions. In July 2019, Sedgwick acquired York Risk Services Group (“York”). York was originally hired through the Pooled Liability Assurance Network Joint Powers Authority (“PLAN JPA”), and Sedgwick will continue claims administration services to provide claims administration services to the City. The City Council approved the City’s participation in the PLAN JPA (previously known as the Association of Bay Area Government Pooled Liability Assurance Network or “ABAG PLAN”) on November 27, 2017 and designated the Administrative Services Director and Senior Management Analyst as primary and alternate PLAN JPA Board members.

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 10
ANALYSIS:

Nicolas Boyer filed a claim against the City for damages to his vehicle when he drove on Highway 101. On January 4, 2023 around 12:15 a.m., claimant alleged that he hit a pothole on Highway 101 near the Brittan Ave. exit. As a result, he had to replace his car wheel rim. This does not appear to be a case of liability against the City as Highway 101 falls under the jurisdiction of the State of California. As such, Sedgwick has recommended formal rejection of Nicolas Boyer’s claim.

Council’s rejection of this claim does not prohibit staff or the staff of Sedgwick from continuing to work with the claimant to resolve the dispute.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Deny claim of Nicolas Boyer; or

2. Do not deny claim of Nicolas Boyer; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Boyer Claim Form

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 11

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 12

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 13

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 14

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 15

7.d
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 16

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 23, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Accepting the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project C1737 and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution accepting the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project C1737 (“Project”) and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact and no additional appropriation is needed at this time.

The Project is funded by C1737 which has a Project budget of $300,000 for Fiscal Year 2021-22.

City Council awarded the Project to Smelly Mel’s Plumbing, Inc. in the amount of $160,000.

The total cost to complete the Project is $188,952.75. There is sufficient budget to close out the Project.

BACKGROUND:

Every building with indoor plumbing must connect to the sanitary sewer mainline via a sewer lateral pipeline. Each sewer lateral pipeline is divided into two segments, the lower lateral and upper lateral. The lower lateral, extends from the connection point on the mainline to approximately five feet past the property line or the back of sidewalk, whichever is farther. The upper lateral is the remainder of the pipeline that runs from the lower lateral into the building or house. At the point where the upper and lower laterals meet, there is a property-line sanitary sewer cleanout, which provides access to the lateral pipeline for the purpose of clearing out clogs.

It is the City’s responsibility to maintain the lower lateral and cleanout, while it is the property owner’s responsibility to maintain the upper lateral. This maintenance involves as-needed cleaning to resolve blockages such as roots, or repair and replacement if the integrity of the lateral is compromised. When issues with a lateral are reported, maintenance staff investigates the problem by scoping the existing lateral to further examine the issue. Staff performs minor repairs immediately, but greater defects require a more permanent solution.

In August 2013, the Sanitary Sewer Lateral Replacement Program (“Program”) was created to facilitate defective lateral replacement outside of the Annual Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project schedule. This Program aims to reduce sanitary sewer overflows (“SSOs”) which pose health and

7.e
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 17
safety risks and serves to reduce recurring maintenance costs. To date, the Program has replaced over 370 lower laterals. Sewer lateral replacement projects are conducted annually.

SSOs occur for various reasons, the two primary reasons are pipe offset or flow blockage. Pipe offset occurs when the existing pipes are no longer in a sealed alignment. Flow blockages occur most often when foreign objects enter the lateral, such as grease build up or tree root intrusion, which blocks flow and/or displaces the pipe.

When residents or property owners report an issue with their sanitary sewer lower lateral, staff has two options to address the maintenance of the lateral. When possible, staff will first hydroflush and clean the lateral. If this method is successful, staff will continue to maintain the lateral until the lateral can be included in the citywide Annual Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project.

However, if the lateral cannot be hydro-flushed or maintained, the lateral will need to be replaced and this work will be performed under this contract for the Sewer Lateral Replacement Project.

The City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on June 29, 2021, which were approved by the City Council at its meeting on July 12, 2021.

Staff initially advertised on July 23, 2021, held a bid opening on August 19, 2021, and received four bids. After reviewing the bids, staff was not satisfied with the bid proposals and believed there were benefits to re-bidding the Project. Therefore, staff recommended at the September 27, 2021 City Council meeting to reject all bids, and allow the Project to be re-bid.

The Project was re-advertised on January 17, 2022 and bids were opened on February 15, 2022.

The City Council awarded the Project to Smelly Mel’s Plumbing, Inc. at its meeting on April 11, 2022.

ANALYSIS:

The Project began on June 20, 2022 and was completed in December 2022 in accordance with the approved Project specifications.

Therefore, staff recommends accepting the Project and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution accepting the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project C1737 and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida, Public Works Director

7.e
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 18
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

7.e
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 19
RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS ACCEPTING THE 2022 SEWER LATERAL REPLACEMENT PROJECT C1737

AND AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO ISSUE AND RECORD A NOTICE OF COMPLETION.

WHEREAS, it is the City’s responsibility to maintain the lower lateral and cleanout, while it is the property owner’s responsibility to maintain the upper lateral; and WHEREAS, staff performs minor repairs immediately, but greater defects require a more permanent solution; and
WHEREAS, in August 2013, the Sanitary Sewer Lateral Replacement Program (“Program”) was created to facilitate defective lateral replacement outside of the Annual Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project schedule; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on June 29, 2021 which were approved by the City Council at its meeting on July 12, 2021; and WHEREAS, staff initially advertised on July 23, 2021, held a bid opening on August 19, 2021, and received four bids; and
WHEREAS, after reviewing the bids, staff was not satisfied with the bid proposals and believed there were benefits to re-bidding the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project (“Project”); and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021, staff recommended that the City Council reject all bids, and allow the Project to be re-bid; and
WHEREAS, the Project was re-advertised on January 17, 2022, bids were opened on February 15, 2022, and the City Council awarded the Project to Smelly Mel’s Plumbing, Inc. at its meeting on April 11, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Project began on June 20, 2022, and was completed in December 2022 in accordance with the approved Project specifications; and WHEREAS, staff recommends accepting the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project C1737 and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby accepts the 2022 Sewer Lateral Replacement Project C1737 and authorizes the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.
* * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of January 2023, by the following vote:

7.e
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 20
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ___________________________________________ ________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

7.e
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 21

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 23, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning and Transportation Commission’s Decision on the 703 Knoll Drive Project.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal by Mark Howitson and uphold the Planning and Transportation Commission’s decision to grant design review approval for a 1,020 square-foot first story addition and a new 1,933 square-foot second story addition to an existing single-family house at 703 Knoll Drive. (APN: 050-094-100) FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no direct fiscal implications for the City. The appellant has paid the applicable fee to appeal to the City Council.

BACKGROUND:

The Planning and Transportation Commission (“Commission”) denied the appeal of Mark Howitson at its October 17, 2022 meeting and upheld the Residential Design Review Committee’s (“RDRC”) August 15, 2022 decision to grant design review approval for a 1,020 square-foot first story addition and a new 1,933 square-foot second story addition to an existing single-family house at 703 Knoll Drive. See Attachment 2 - RDRC and Commission staff reports and exhibits.

Appellant Mark Howitson subsequently appealed the Commission’s decision. See Attachment 1 – Appeal Letter.

The subject lot measures 11,345 square-foot zoned RS-6, Single-family Residential, and is in the Hillside Overlay zone on Knoll Drive between Elizabeth Street and Cordilleras Avenue. There is an existing one-story residence with detached garage on site. The project proposes a 1,020 square-foot first story addition and a 1,933 square-foot new second story addition. With the proposed additions, the total floor area of the house would be 5,017 square feet. There are 16 trees on site, 11 of which are designated protected trees pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.18.070, Trees. Four unprotected trees are proposed to be removed. Of these four trees, two unprotected Oak trees are the subject of this appeal. See Attachment 3 and 4 - Project Plans and Draft Conditions of Approval.

An appeal is considered a hearing de novo, meaning, the Council reviews the project as new or in its entirety. This staff report focuses on the appellants’ reasons for the appeal and the basis for the Commission’s decision. The August 15, 2022 RDRC and October 17, 2022 Commission staff reports provide a comprehensive analysis of the development application.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 22
ANALYSIS:

The appellant provides the following reasons for an appeal:

1. Removal of oak trees protected by San Carlos Ordinance No. 1580.

Response: Protected trees per Ordinance 1580 (San Carlos Municipal Code section

18.18.070) are defined as; (1) any significant or heritage tree, (2) any tree as part of a replacement requirement; (3) an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan. The following trees shall not be classified as protected trees regardless of size: Bailey, Green or Black Acacia; Tree of Heaven; Fruit trees of any kind; Monterey pine; Eucalyptus genera; and Monocot trees including palms and palm relatives.

The following staff analysis describes if the oak trees fit any of the three criteria listed above to be considered protected trees by Ordinance.
a. Any significant or heritage tree: An oak tree is considered significant if the trunk diameter measured at 54” from natural grade is greater than 9”.

The City Arborist visited the 703 Knoll Drive site on August 23, 2022, and confirmed the trees are not protected based on the trunk diameter, which were 8.8” and 7.5”. For details, please refer to Attachment 5 – City Arborist Site Visit Notes. b. Any tree as part of a replacement requirement: The appellant claims the two existing oak trees were required by the City as replacement trees associated with the RDRC approval of a new residence and associated removal of a protected oak tree on the appellant’s property and the accidental removal of the Monterey pine tree located on the 703 Knoll property, and therefore should be considered protected trees.

The 2015 RDRC approval of the new residence at 731 Knoll Drive (appellant’s house) included removal of a protected oak tree located in the rear yard of the 731 Knoll property.

Replacement planting was required on the same property for the removed tree. In 2016, during the demolition work for a new house at 731 Knoll Drive (appellant’s house), the construction crew accidentally removed a mature Monterey pine tree (unprotected species) located on the 703 Knoll Drive property. To make up for the lost tree, the appellant agreed to plant a tree of the neighbor’s choice on the 703 Knoll Drive site; however, this is considered a private party matter and was not required as a condition of RDRC approval. Further, as the Monterey pine tree is not considered a protected tree (under the current and former ordinance), the RDRC did not have the authority to require replacement tree planting on the neighbor’s property. Refer to minutes from February 1, 2016, and March 6, 2016 (See Attachment 7 – Background Research and Past Meeting Minutes).

The (current and former) Protected Tree Ordinance categories Monterey pine species as an unprotected tree regardless of size, and therefore, even if removed deliberately would not require a removal permit or replacement tree. As stated above, the two new Oak trees planted by the 731 Knoll Drive property owner (appellant) on the 703 Knoll Drive (applicant) property were as a courtesy and not a requirement of the City.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 23
Based on review of the past RDRC meeting minutes and City code requirements, the two Oak trees in question along the 703 Knoll Drive western property line are not considered protected trees as the trees were not considered part of a replacement requirement. c. Any tree as part of an approved development permit or an approved landscaping plan: The RDRC conditions of approval and approved plans for the 731 Knoll Drive project (appellant’s house) do not indicate a requirement to plant trees on the neighbor’s property, for loss of an unprotected tree (See Attachment 6 – 731 Knoll Drive Conditions of Approval).

The two oak trees located on the 703 Knoll Drive property were not part of any development permit or an approved landscaping plan for 731 Knoll Drive.

As such, the oak trees are not protected based on this criterion, the approved plans submitted to the Building Division not showing these trees as part of any requirement, and the final inspection conducted for the site.

2. Privacy Concerns as to the Westerly Facing Windows.

Response: Although not required by the Municipal Code, the applicant has reduced the size of second-story windows along the western façade from the original proposal. This façade change was reviewed and approved by the RDRC during the August 15, 2022, meeting and Planning Commission during the October 17, 2022 meeting. Further, privacy is not regulated and is not contained in the San Carlos Municipal Code. The reduction of the size of these windows was made voluntarily by the property owners of 703 Knoll Drive. In addition, the applicant proposed to plant a new hedge along the western property line.

Proposed hedges along west property line

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 24

3. Soil Subsidence on 703/731 Knoll Drive Border.

Response: Staff routed the proposed plans to the Building Division for a preliminary review. As part of the building permit submittal, the Building Division will require soils engineer to work on the design of the foundation and drainage. The soils engineer will determine what is needed based on the soil of the site and provide specifications and engineering requirements for the foundation design. The applicant’s architect will be working with soils engineer during the building permit phase.

CONCLUSION:

The City Council’s decision on the protected or unprotected status of the two oak trees will determine whether a Tree Protection Plan (TPP), a tree removal permit, and potential project redesign are required, as well as determine the approval or denial of the appeal.

As part of its decision, the Commission determined the trees are not protected based on the review of past correspondence, examination of tree species and dimensions, and analysis of the Protected Tree Ordinance and approved the Design Review for the proposed addition at 703 Knoll Drive.

The diagram and photos below show details of the subject site and location of trees in question on the project site.

Figure 1: Showing Details of the Project Site

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 25
Figure 2: Street View of Existing Residence
Figure 3: Proposed Street View
DESIGN REVIEW APPLICABILITY, FINDINGS, AND CRITERIA:

Should the City Council move to grant design review approval for a 1,020 square-foot first story addition and a new 1,933 square-foot second story addition to an existing single-family house at 703 Knoll Drive, the following findings shall be made:

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 26
Applicability (SCMC 18.27.150, 18.29.060, 18.29.070)
FINDINGS – SCMC 18.29.070
The City Council may only approve a design review application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of this chapter and with the findings below. The “Basis for Finding” notes listed below are based off the RDRC and Commission’s review. Secondly, an appeal is considered a hearing de novo, meaning, the City Council reviews the project as if new or in its entirety. The findings for Design Review Approval are outlined below:
a. The applicable standards and requirements of this title; Basis for Finding: The proposed residence meets all development standards within the Municipal Code.
b. The General Plan and any applicable specific plans the City Council has adopted; Basis for Finding: The proposed residence is permitted in the General Plan Designation Land Use Designation of Single-family. There is no specific plan for this area. c. Any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council; Basis for Finding: There are no design guidelines adopted for single-family residences. d. Any approved tentative map, use permit, variance, or other planning or zoning approval that the project required; and
Basis for Finding: There are no other approvals required for this proposal.

DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA (Section 18.29.060)
When conducting design review, the reviewing authority shall evaluate applications to ensure that they satisfy the Design Review Criteria A-L. To obtain design review approval, the project must satisfy these criteria to the extent they apply:

A. The overall design of the project including its scale, massing, site plan, exterior design, and landscaping will enhance the appearance and features of the project site and surrounding natural and built environment.

Basis for Finding: The residential addition is designed to meet current setback requirements. The proposed exterior materials are compatible with exterior materials in the neighborhood and the gable roof is consistent throughout the design. Although the proposed floor area addition substantially changes the external appearance and style of the proposed house, the use of materials and proposed design complements the surrounding properties.

B. The project design is appropriate to the function of the project and will provide an attractive and comfortable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community.

Basis for Finding: N/A. This criterion does not apply to single-family residences.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 27
C. Project details, materials, signage and landscaping are internally consistent, fully integrated with one another, and used in a manner that is visually consistent with the proposed architectural design
Basis for Finding: The project details, materials, and landscaping are internally consistent, fully integrated with one another, and used in a manner that is visually consistent with the proposed architectural design.

D. The project has been designed to be compatible with neighboring development by avoiding big differences in building scale and character between developments on adjoining lots in the same zoning district and providing a harmonious transition in scale and character between different districts.

Basis for Finding: The neighborhood includes some single-story and many two-story homes. The height and scale of the proposed addition would be similar to homes in the neighborhood. The exterior stucco finishes match the exteriors of surrounding homes. The gable roof brown shingle roof will match roof form and materials of the surrounding properties. The subject property is located within the Hillside Overlay district which allows a higher overall height limit; however, the proposed design is consciously designed to have a lower maximum height to minimize potential impact to the neighboring properties.

Window sizes along the western elevation are designed to minimize any potential privacy concerns to neighboring properties.

E-I. Design Review Criteria E-I do not apply to single-family residential projects but are included below for reference.

J. Lighting and lighting fixtures are designed to complement buildings, be of appropriate scale, provide adequate light over walkways and parking areas to create a sense of pedestrian safety, and avoid creating glare.

Basis for Finding: The proposed light fixtures will be further addressed in the building permit set of plans should the project be approved.

The proposed addition meets the required Design Review Criteria under SCMC 18.29.060, specifically with subsections A, C, D, and J regarding overall design, project details, neighborhood compatibility, lighting, and landscaping, as discussed previously.

PUBLIC COMMENTS:

Staff has not received additional comments as of writing of this staff report. For public comments received during the RDRC and Commission hearings, please refer to Attachment 2.

PUBLIC NOTICE:

Pursuant to SCMC Section 18.29.040 (E), a notice of application was mailed on Tuesday, January 10, 2023, to neighbors within 300 ft. and published in the newspaper on January 11, 2023. See Attachment 8 – Public Noticing Material
ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 28

1. Uphold the Planning Commission’s decision and deny the appeal of Mark Howitson and grant design review approval for a 1,020 square-feet first story addition and a new 1,933 square-feet second story addition to an existing single-family house at 703 Knoll Drive (APN: 050-094-100); or

2. Approve the appeal of Mark Howitson and deny the request for Design Review approval for a 1,020 square-foot first story addition and a new 1,933 square-foot second story addition to an existing single-family house at 703 Knoll Drive (APN: 050-094-100); or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, Community Development Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Appeal Letter

2. RDRC staff report and exhibits from August 15, 2022, and Planning and Transportation Commission staff report and exhibits from October 17, 2022

3. 703 Knoll Drive Project Plans

4. 703 Knoll Drive Conditions of Approval

5. City Arborist Site Visit Notes

6. 731 Knoll Drive Conditions of Approval

7. Background Research and Meeting Minutes

8. Public Noticing Material

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 29

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 30

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 31
Attachment 2: 703 Knoll Drive Appeal
- Link to RDRC Staff Report and Exhibits – August 15, 2022 - Link to PC Staff Report and Exhibits – October 17, 2022

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 32
A0.00
COVER

GENERAL NOTES

REED RESIDENCE

DRAWING INDEX

ARCHITECTURAL

COVER SHEET

PLANNING PACKAGE
A0.00 X

PROJECT INFORMATION

FURNITURE TYPE

FINISH TYPE

ROOM NAME

ROOM NUMBER
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO BE REMOVED
(E)

CONSTRUCTION

DATUM POINT
ALIGN

FLOOR ASSEMBLY

JUNCTION
BOX
(N)

CONSTRUCTION
W/ INSUL, W.O

ENLARGED DETAIL

SECTION DETAIL

SHEET NUMBER

DETAIL NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SECTION NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

ELEVATION NUMBERS

KEY NOTE

PARTITION
TYPE

WINDOW TYPE

DOOR TYPE

GRID LINE REFERENCE
DIM TO CTR. LINE OF

STUD, ELEMENT, OR

OPENING

DIM TO FACE OF STUD
OR ELEMENT, U.O.N.

DIM TO FACE OF
FINISH

DIM TO GRID LINE
(N) INSULATED
WALL

CEILING FINISH

ARCHITECTURAL SYMBOLS KEY
OWNER:

MICHELLE & JOEL REED
703 KNOLL DRIVE
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070
T: 415.407.1520
email: [email protected]
ARCHITECT:
35th COLLECTIVE
812 35TH AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94121
T: 415.505.1102
CONTACT: JULIA PELLEGRINI
email: [email protected]
GENERAL CONTRACTOR:

TBD
CIVIL ENGINEER:

MACLEOD AND ASSOCIATES
965 CENTER STREET
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070
T: 650.593.8580
email: [email protected]
SOILS ENGINEER:

ROMIG ENGINEERS
1390 EL CAMINO REAL, SECOND FLOOR
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070
650.591.5224
email: [email protected]
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER:

TBD

PROJECT DIRECTORY

GENERAL CONTRACTOR NOTES
· EXISTING BASE BUILDING DRAWINGS PROVIDED FOR THESE DOCUMENTS MAY HAVE DISCREPANCIES.
· MPADA DOES NOT GUARANTEE OR WARRANT THE ACCURACY OF THE BASE BUILDING DRAWINGS.
· CONTRACTOR NEEDS TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY MPADA OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
· CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS & ASSURE PROPER FIRE RATING ASSEMBLIES & FINISHES AS REQ'D.
· CONTRACTOR TO BE ACQUAINTED WITH CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA AND REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO BIDDING THE PROJECT. NO EXTRA WILL BE

ALLOWED DUE TO LACK OF FAMILIARITY WITH REQUIREMENTS OR SITE CONDITIONS.

PROJECT ADDRESS:
703 KNOLL DRIVE
SAN CARLOS,CA 94070
LOT SIZE:
11,345 SF, PER SURVEY
EXISTING BUILDING AREA:
2,064 SF
EXISTINGE GARAGE AREA:
440 SF
TOTAL EXISTING SF:
2,504 SF
PROPOSED BUILDING AREA:
5,017 SF (WITH GARAGE)
APN:
050-094-100
ZONING:

RS-6
HEIGHT & BULK:
35' MAX (HILLSIDE

OVERLAY DISTRICT)

PROPOSED BUILDING
HEIGHT:
25'-6 1/2"
CONSTRUCTION TYPE:

VICINITY PLAN GC SHOP DRAWINGS & SUBMITTALS
· GENERAL CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THE FOLLOWING, AT A MINIMUM:

MILLWORK
· GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE MOCK-UPS AS REQUIRED BY CLIENT, & TO PROVIDE SUBMITTALS FOR ALL FINISHES INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:

VENEER WOODS CEILING TREATMENT

SOLID STOCK WOODS CUSTOM FURNITURE

DOOR HARDWARE METALS

HARDWARE PLASTERS/FINISHES

LIGHTING PAINTS

ABBREVATIONS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

THE PROJECT IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME REMODEL AND ADDITION USING THE (E) HOUSE FOOTPRINT. THE PROJECT INCLUDES:
- A 2,513 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE (E) 2,504 SF HOME

INCLUDING A PRIMARY BEDROOM AND EN SUITE, THREE BEDROOMS, TWO BATHROOMS, A PLAYROOM, MUD ROOM, POWDER ROOM, OFFICE AND LAUNDRY. - RECONFIGURING THE EXISTING LIVING, DINING, KITCHEN, ENTRY, SITTING AND EASTERN BEDROOM IN THE (E) HOME FOOTPRINT. - (N) ROOF. - (N) SPRINKLERS. - (E) WATER AND GAS METERS TO REMAIN IN (E) LOCATIONS, (E) ABOVE GROUND ELECTRICAL

SERVICE TO REMAIN, RELOCATION OF (E) TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER PLUS ONE (N) ONE, (N) FURNACE IN LOWER LEVEL, RELOCATION OF (E) AC.
- (E) TREES TO REMAIN, (E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

APPLICABLE CODES:
2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE
2096 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING
CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
2019 MECHANICAL CODE
2019 ELECTRICAL CODE
2021 CITY OF SAN CARLOS

MUNICIPAL CODE
703 KNOLL DRIVE, SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA

PLANNING PACKAGE

REVISION CLOUD

DELTA REVISION
NUMBER

1. THE WORK INCLUDED UNDER THIS CONTRACT CONSISTS OF ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, TRANSPORTATION, TOOLS

AND EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT LEAVING ALL WORK READY FOR USE

2. THE PLANS INDICATE THE GENERAL EXTENT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION NECESSARY FOR THE WORK, BUT ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE ALL-INCLUSIVE. ALL DEMOLITION AND ALL NEW WORK NECESSARY TO ALLOW FOR A FINISHED JOB

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTENTION OF THE DRAWING IS INCLUDED REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR MENTIONED IN THE NOTES. ALL WORK IS NEW, U.O.N.

3. DIMENSIONS ARE TO EDGE OF SLAB, FACE OF STUD, CENTER OF DOOR, CENTER OF WINDOW, AND CENTER OF PLUMBING FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

4. DIMENSIONS ON REFLECTED CEILING ARE FROM FACE OF STUD OR CENTER LINE OF COLUMN TO CENTER LINE OF FIXTURE OR GROUP OF FIXTURES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

5. ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR CONFLICTS FOUND IN THE VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS

SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT'S AND OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR CLARIFICATION BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK.

6. JOB SITE SAFETY IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR.

7. ALL WORK SHALL BE INSTALLED TRUE, PLUMB, SQUARE, LEVEL, AND IN PROPER ALIGNMENT.

8. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL DIMENSIONS AND SITE CONDITIONS. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL INSPECT THE EXISTING PREMISES AND TAKE NOTE OF EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING PRICES. NO CLAIM SHALL BE ALLOWED FOR DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED WHICH COULD HAVE REASONABLY BEEN INFERRED FROM SUCH AN EXAMINATION.

9. ALL DIMENSIONS NOTED "VERIFY" AND "V.I.F." ARE TO BE CHECKED BY CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.

IMMEDIATELY REPORT ANY VARIANCES TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR RESOLUTION.

10. VERIFY ALL ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS WITH STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, & PLUMBING DRAWINGS BEFORE ORDERING OR INSTALLATION OF ANY WORK.

11. VERIFY CLEARANCES FOR FLUES, VENTS, CHASES, SOFFITS, FIXTURES, ETC. BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION, ORDERING OF, OR INSTALLATION OF ANY ITEMS OF WORK.

12. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS TAKE PRECEDENCE. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS.

13. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: IRRIGATION PIPES, ELECTRICAL CONDUIT, WATER LINES, GAS LINES, DRAINAGE LINES, ETC.

14. PROTECT ALL EXISTING BUILDING AND SITE CONDITIONS TO REMAIN INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WALLS, TREES AND SHRUBS, PAVING, CABINETS, FINISHES, ETC.

15. DETAILS SHOWN ARE TYPICAL. SIMILAR DETAILS APPLY IN SIMILAR CONDITIONS.

16. WHERE LOCATIONS OF WINDOWS AND DOORS ARE NOT DIMENSIONED, THEY SHALL BE CENTERED IN THE WALL OR PLACED AS REQUIRED FOR THE FRAME TO CLEAR THE ADJACENT FINISH, AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.

17. ALL CHANGES IN FLOOR MATERIALS OCCUR AT CENTERLINE OF DOOR OR FRAMED OPENING UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS.

18. INSTALL ALL FIXTURES, EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

19. SEALANT, CAULKING AND FLASHING, ETC. LOCATIONS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE ALL-INCLUSIVE. FOLLOW MANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION RECOMMENDATIONS AND STANDARD INDUSTRY AND BUILDING PRACTICES.

20. INSTALL SMOKE DETECTORS AND FIRE EXTINGUISHERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH LOCAL FIRE MARSHAL REQUIREMENTS. PROVIDE TEMPORARY FIRE EXTINGUISHERS IN UNOCCUPIED TENANT SPACES AS REQUIRED.

21. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A CURRENT AND COMPLETE SET OF THE CONSTRUCTION

DOCUMENTS ON THE JOB SITE DURING ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION FOR USE OF ALL THE TRADES AND SHALL PROVIDE ALL THE SUBCONTRACTORS WITH CURRENT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AS REQUIRED.

22. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL SEISMIC BRACING AND HOLD-DOWN CLIPS AS REQUIRED BY CODE FOR ALL SUSPENDED CEILING AND SOFFIT FRAMING CONDITIONS.

23. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL RUBBISH AND WASTE MATERIALS OF ALL SUBCONTRACTORS AND

TRADES ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND SHALL EXERCISE A STRICT CONTROL OVER JOB CLEANING TO PREVENT ANY DIRECT DEBRIS OR DUST FROM AFFECTING, IN ANY WAY, FINISHED AREAS IN OR OUTSIDE JOB SITE.

24. CONTRACTOR SHALL LEAVE PREMISES AND ALL AFFECTED AREAS CLEAN AND ORDERLY, READY FOR OCCUPANCY.

THIS INCLUDES CLEANING OF ALL GLASS (INSIDE AND OUTSIDE) AND FRAMES, BOTH NEW AND EXISTING.

25. STATEMENT OF ENERGY CONSERVATION: THIS PROJECT WILL MEET ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AS ESTABLISHED BY CALIFORNIA TITLE 24.

26. PROVIDE ADEQUATE TEMPORARY SUPPORT AS NECESSARY TO ASSURE THE STRUCTURAL VALUE OR INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING DURING CONSTRUCTION.

27. ALL REQUIRED EXITS SHALL BE OPERABLE FROM INSIDE, WITHOUT THE USE OF KEY OR SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE.

28. GLASS SUBJECT TO HUMAN IMPACT SHALL BE OF SAFETY GLAZING MATERIAL TO MEET STATE AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS.

29. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE SHALL BE MINIMIZED DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION BY MUFFLING AND

SHIELDING INTAKES AND EXHAUST ON CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND BY SHROUDING OR SHIELDING IMPACT TOOLS.

30. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AIA GENERAL CONDITIONS DOCUMENT (LATEST EDITION).

31. CONTRACTOR TO COMPLY WITH CBC CHAPTER 33 REGARDING SAFEWARDS DURING CONSTRUCTION (SECT. 3303.2)

32. CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE ALL PERMITS AND PAY ALL FEES. CONTRACTOR TO ARRANGE FOR ALL INSPECTIONS

THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION PROCESS, AND ANY NECESSARY CERTIFICATIONS AND VERIFICATIONS REQUIRED BY LOCAL OR REGIONAL GOVERNMENT TO ACHIEVE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

33. CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRM AND COORDINATE THAT TIME DURING WHICH CONSTRUCTION IS SCHEDULED MEETS ALL REGULATORY AGENCY REQUIREMENTS AND/OR RESTRICTIONS.

34. COMPLIANCE WITH THE DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2016 ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS IS NECESSARY FOR THIS PROJECT. REGISTERED, SIGNED, AND DATED COPIES OF THE APPROPRIATE FORMS SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT NECESSARY INTERVALS FOR BUILDING INSPECTOR REVIEW. FINAL COMPLETED FORMS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR THE BUILDING OWNER.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN PER CALGREEN AND CITY OF SAN CARLOS REQUIREMENTS.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.

ITEMS UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

X SPRINKLERS
SPRINKLERS SHALL BE SUBMITTED UNDER A SEPARATE PERMIT. NO WORK SHALL COMMENCE ON THE SPRINKLERS UNTIL PLANS HAVE BEEN APPROVED. 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8 1 2 3 5 t h A V E N U E
S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 2 1
4 1 5 . 5 0 5 . 1 1 0 2
09/24/2021 PLANNING PACKAGE
04/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 2
05/20/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 3
06/10/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 4
07/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 5
A0.01 PROJECT DATA TABLES X
A0.12 NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY
A0.13 MATERIALS BOARD
A1.01 SITE PLAN - PROPOSED
A2.00 FLOOR PLAN - DEMO
A2.01 FLOOR PLAN - LOWER
A2.02 FLOOR PLAN - MAIN
A2.03 ROOF PLAN
A3.01 ELEVATIONS - NORTH
A3.02 ELEVATIONS - EAST
A3.03 ELEVATIONS - SOUTH
A3.04 ELEVATIONS - WEST
A3.11 SECTIONS -
A3.12 SECTIONS -
A5.01 3D VIEWS
A5.02 3D VIEWS
A9.01 DETAILS
ENERGY CONSULTANT:

TBD
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A2.04 FLOOR PLAN DIAGRAMS X
A1.00 SITE PLAN - EXISTING X
A0.10 CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
X
A3.13 SECTIONS -
X
1 OF 1 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
X
L1 LANDSCAPE PLAN
PLANNING RESUBMITTAL - REV 2
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A3.15 GRADE PLANE DIAGRAMS X
PLANNING RESUBMITTAL - REV 3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PLANNING RESUBMITTAL - REV 4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PLANNING RESUBMITTAL - REV 5
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 33
A0.01

PROJECT
DATA TABLES 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 34
A0.10

CONSTRUCTION
BEST PRACTICES 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 APR 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8 1 2 3 5 t h A V E N U E
S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 2 1
4 1 5 . 5 0 5 . 1 1 0 2
09/24/2021 PLANNING PACKAGE
04/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 2

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 35
A0.12

NEIGHBORHOOD
COMPATIBILITY 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 APR 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8 1 2 3 5 t h A V E N U E
S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 2 1
4 1 5 . 5 0 5 . 1 1 0 2
09/24/2021 PLANNING PACKAGE
04/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 2
NTS
677 KNOLL
NTS
687 KNOLL
NTS
731 KNOLL
NTS
747 KNOLL
NTS

AXON LOOKING SOUTH
NTS

ADJACENT NEIGHBORS
NTS
700 KNOLL
NTS
706 KNOLL
NTS
724 KNOLL
NTS
760 KNOLL

NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY
IMAGES
NTS
832 HEMLOCK

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 36
A0.13

MATERIALS
BOARD 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 APR 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8 1 2 3 5 t h A V E N U E
S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 2 1
4 1 5 . 5 0 5 . 1 1 0 2
09/24/2021 PLANNING PACKAGE
04/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 2
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE,

WIDE JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLO
S-1 EXTERIOR STUCCO
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE

WHITE DOVE OR

APPROVED EQUAL
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1

WINDOW INSPIRATION

EXTERIOR ROOF AND OVERALL PALETTE INSPIRATION

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 37

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 38
DATE
TITLE
SHEET NO.

REVISIONS
SCALE
1025 ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS
SUITE 107
BELMONT, CA 94002
650-576-1935
[email protected]
OM

DRAWN BY
0 4 8 12 16 20 FT

KRISTEN RUDGER
1/8" = 1'- 0
R
E
E
D
R
E
SID
E
N
C
E
7 0
3 K
N
O
L
L
D
RIV
E
S
A
N
C
A
R
L
O
S, C
A
9 4
0 7
0 1
Add Screening trees along
Property line

LANDSCAPE PLAN
L1
SOIL PREP, PLANTING AND IRRIGATION NOTES:

PLEASE FOLLOW SOIL PREP INSTRUCTIONS HERE. 1) LOOSEN THE TOP 10" OF COMPACTED SOIL. 2) SPREAD A ORGANIC COMPOST AT A RATE OF 3-5 CUBIC YARDS PER 1000 SF. 3) THOROUGHLY BLEND COMPOST INTO THE TOP 6 INCHES OF SOIL. PLANTING METHODS TO CONFORM TO ISA LANDSCAPE STANDARDS. TREES TO BE STAKED ACCORDING TO ISA LANDSCAPE STANDARDS. ALL PLANTING AREAS TO BE MULCHED 3" THICK WITH SMALL FIR BARK MULCH.

IRRIGATE ALL PLANTING AREAS WITH NETAFIM TECHLINE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.

LANDSCAPE AREA IN FRONT SETBACK 1939 SF/ 71%
HARDSCAPE AREA IN FRONT SETBACK 784 SF/ 29%

FRONT SETBACK CALCULATIONS
TOTAL AREA OF FRONT SETBACK 2723 SF

PAVER DRIVEWAY

PAVER DRIVEWAY
SenS SenS SenS SenS SenS
SenS SenS SenS SenS SenS SenS
LomP
LomP
LomP
LomP LomP LomP
LomP
LomP
LomP
LomP
LomP
LomPLomP
LomP
LeuG
AcaC-1
AcaC-1
AcaC-1
AcaC-1
AcaC-1 AcaC-1
AcaC-1
AcaC-1AcaC-1 AcaC-1 AcaC-1 AcaC-1AcaC-1 AcaC-1
AcaC-1 AcaC-1AcaC-1AcaC-1AcaC-1 AcaC-1 AcaC-1
AcaC-1
AcaC-1
AcaC-1
CeO
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN
Existing Tree Report
ID Botanical Name Common Name No. of
Stems Action DBH
E01 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 34" E02 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 16" E03 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 14" E04 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 2 Retain 13"10" E05 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 3 Retain 14"11"19" E06 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 14" E07 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 30" E08 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 12"16" E09 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 11" E10 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 14"16"17" E11 QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK 1 Retain 9" E12 PINUS PINEA STONE PINE 3 Retain 14"16"17" (E) NON IRRIGATED LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN
Plant List
ID Qty Latin Name Common Name Scheduled Size
AcaC-1 24 Acacia 'Cousin Itt' Prostrate acacia 'Cousin Itt' 5 gallon CeO 1 Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud 15 gallon
LeuG 1 Leucadendron 'Goldstrike' Goldstrike leucadendron 5 gallon LomP 14 Lomandra longifolia 'Platinum Beauty' Platinum beauty lomandra 1 gallon Pruc 11 Prunus caroliniana 'Bright & Tight' Compact Carolina Laurel 24 inch Std. SenS 11 Senecio Skyscraper Senecio ficoides 'Skyscraper' 1 gallon THERE IS 0 SF LAWN ON THE PROPERTY
(E) NON IRRIGATED LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN
(E) NON IRRIGATED

LANDSCAPE TO
REMAIN
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN
*N/A RHUS LANCEA AFRICAN STONE PINE 1 Remove 7"
*SEE EXISTING SITE PLAN SHEET A1.00 FOR LOCATION
Pruc Pruc Pruc Pruc Pruc Pruc Pruc
Pruc
Pruc
Pruc
Pruc 1
*N/A 1 Remove 5" *N/A 1 Remove 5" 6" *N/A 1 Remove 6" PISTACIA CHINENSIS

QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA

LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA

CHINESE PISTACHE

COAST LIVE OAK

CRAPE MYRTLE

PLANTER
ELEC. GAS

RINNAI TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER
RUR160iN (NEEDS AN OUTLET)

REUSE (E) AC
E01
E02
E03
E04
E05
E06
E07
E08
E12
E09
E10 E11
15'-0" REQUIRED

FRONT YARD
13'-10" RIGHT
OF
WAY
JUNE 13, 2022
Tree Protection Plan will be submitted for protected trees per arborist recommendation REVISED 08/08/22

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 39
2 A3.12
2 A3.11
2 A3.04
2 A3.02
(E) CURB CUT TO
REMAIN
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN
(N) FENCE IN (E) FENCE LOCATION
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN
2 A3.01
2 A3.03
19'-0" SECOND STORY

FRONT YARD SETBACKS
15'-0" FIRST STORY
6'-0" PUBLIC UTILITY

EASEMENT

REMOVE (E)
6" TRUNK

NON-PROTECTED
TREE
149'-7 1/2"
PROPERTY LENGTH 92'-10 1/2" PROPERTY LENGTH
15'-0" REAR YARD SETBACK
10'-0"

SIDE YARD SETBACKS SIDE YARD SETBACKS
5'-0"
FIRST
STORY

SETBACK
9'-0"
SECOND
STORY
SETBACK 15'-0" FIRST STORY 19'-0" SECOND STORY

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
27'-2"
(E) DRIVEWAY WIDTH TO REMAIN
(N) FENCE IN (E) FENCE LOCATION
731 KNOLL

ADJACENT NEIGHBOR
677 KNOLL

ADJACENT NEIGHBOR
(E) WATER METER

OVERHEAD POWERLINE

ELECTRIC METER

TO REMAIN IN (E)

LOCATION

GAS METER TO

REMAIN IN (E)
LOCATION 5'-0" FIRST STORY SETBACK9'-0" SECOND STORY SETBACK (E) AC TO BE

RELOACATED
(E) TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER

TO BE RELOACATED, ONE

ADDTIONAL THANKLESS HOT

WATER HEATER TO BE ADDED
(E) FENCE TO
REMAIN
27'-5" FIRST STORY
33'-5" FIRST STORY
7'-6"
GARAGE

REMOVE (E)
7" TRUNK

NON-PROTECTED
TREE

REMOVE (E)
6" TRUNK

NON-PROTECTED
TREE

REMOVE (E)
5" TRUNK

NON-PROTECTED
TREE

EXISTING SITE PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
1 A1.00 A1.00

SITE PLAN
EXISTING703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8 1 2 3 5 t h A V E N U E
S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 2 1
4 1 5 . 5 0 5 . 1 1 0 2
09/24/2021 PLANNING PACKAGE
04/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 2
05/20/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 3
06/10/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 4
07/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 5
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
5 5
5 8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 40
5/12
5/12
5/12 5/12
FLAT 10/12 10/12 10/12 10/12
1'-0" TYP.
1'-0" TYP. 5/12 5/12 CHIMNEY

CHIMNEY
SKYLIGHT 1/12
2 A3.12
2 A3.11
2 A3.04
2 A3.02
(E) CURB CUT TO
REMAIN
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN
(N) FENCE IN (E) FENCE LOCATION
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN
(E) TREES TO
REMAIN
2 A3.01
2 A3.03
19'-0" SECOND STORY

FRONT YARD SETBACKS
15'-0" FIRST STORY
6'-0" PUBLIC UTILITY

EASEMENT
149'-7 1/2"
PROPERTY LENGTH 92'-10 1/2" PROPERTY LENGTH
15'-0" REAR YARD SETBACK
10'-0"

SIDE YARD SETBACKS SIDE YARD SETBACKS
5'-0"
FIRST
STORY

SETBACK
9'-0"
SECOND
STORY
SETBACK 15'-0" FIRST STORY 19'-0" SECOND STORY

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE
27'-2"
(E) DRIVEWAY WIDTH TO REMAIN
(E) LANDCAPING AND RETAINING TO REMAIN
(E) PAVERS TO BE REUSED
@ LOWER HALF OF

DRIVEWAY

STAMPED CONCRETE AT

UPPER HALF OF

DRIVEWAY, OR REUSE (E)
PAVERS
731 KNOLL

ADJACENT NEIGHBOR
677 KNOLL

ADJACENT NEIGHBOR
(E) WATER METER

OVERHEAD POWERLINE

ELECTRIC METER

TO REMAIN IN (E)

LOCATION

GAS METER TO

REMAIN IN (E)

LOCATION
(N) DRIVEWAY, 15% SLOPE TO UPPER
FLAT PORTION +/- THE LENGHT OF A
CAR (SLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 18%) 5'-0" FIRST STORY SETBACK9'-0" SECOND STORY SETBACK (E) AC TO BE

RELOACATED
(E) TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER

TO BE RELOACATED, ONE

ADDTIONAL THANKLESS HOT

WATER HEATER TO BE ADDED
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE
(E) FENCE TO
REMAIN
(E) LANDCAPING TO REMAIN
MIN. 2'-0" LANDCAPED AREA

ADJACENT TO DRIVEWAY
MIN. 2'-0" LANDCAPED AREA

ADJACENT TO DRIVEWAY
(E) MAN HOLE
(E) MAN HOLE
27'-5" FIRST STORY

DOWNHILL BUILDING FACE
(N) LOW WATER

PLANTS IN
PLANTERS 15'-2" RIGHT-OF-WAY
1 A3.13
2 A3.13
0 4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SITE PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
1 A1.01 A1.01
SITE PLAN 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

LEGEND:
(N) ADDITION

PROJECT

INFORMATION
PROJECT ZONING:

USE TYPE:

OCCUPANCY:

PARKING REQUIREMENTS:

FRONT YARD SETBACKS REQ'D
1ST STORY:
2ND STORY:

FRONT YARD SETBACKS PROVIDED:

DATE OF ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION:

LOT SIZE:

EXISTING BUILDING AREA
EXISTING MAIN LEVEL:

GARAGE:

TOTAL:

PROJECT BUILDING AREA
MAIN LEVEL (2ND FLOOR) :

LOWER (1ST FLOOR), W/ GARAGE:

TOTAL (2,513 ADD'L):

MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE %:

LOT COVERAGE %:

MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
(HILLSIDE OVERLAY):

NEW BUILDING HEIGHT:

RS-6

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
R-3
2 SPACES
15'
30'-10"
1962
11,345 SF, PER SURVEY
50%
42%
2,064 GSF
3,987 GSF
440 GSF
1,030 GSF
2,504 GSF
5,017 GSF
APN: 050-094-100
19'

SIDE YARD SETBACKS REQ'D
1ST STORY:
2ND STORY:
5'
9'
AVERAGE SLOPE OF LOT: 23.3%

AVERAGE SLOPE OF LOT UNDER (E)
BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 13.5%
FLOOR AREA: 44%
SIDE YARD SETBACKS PROVIDED:
1ST STORY:
2ND STORY:
5'
9'
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA %: 50%
EXISTING BUILDING HEIGHT: 17-10'
1ST STORY:
2ND STORY:
20'-0"
35'-0"
1ST STORY:
2ND STORY:
10'-10"
25'-6 1/2"
5 5

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 41
WASHER
BELOW
DRYER
BELOW
FRIDGE
FRZR

TRASH DW

MICROWAVE REAR YARD SETBACK

SIDE YARD SETBACK

FRONT YARD SETBACK
LAWN

PLANTER

PLANTER
19'-0" SECOND STORY
ELEC. GAS

RINNAI TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER
RUR160iN (NEEDS AN OUTLET)

REUSE (E) AC
LAWN 4'-10"
1 A3.12
1 A3.11
1 A3.04
1 A3.02
1 A3.01
1 A3.03
57'-7 3/4"
20'-5" (WALL E - DEMO)
53'-9 1/2" (WALL 4 - REMAINING)
5'-11 1/2" (WALL H - DEMO) 19'-1 3/4" (WALL 3 - REMAINING) 17'-11 3/4" (WALL B
- DEMO BECOMING

INTERIOR)
9'-1 3/4" (WALL C - DEMO

BECOMING INTERIOR))
12'-0 3/4" (WALL D - DEMO) C
A
B
D
E
6 H
I
12'-0 1/2" (WALL I - DEMO)

EXISTING GARAGE

EXISTING HOUSE
7'-11 3/4" (WALL 5 - REMAINING)
6'-8 3/4" (WALL A -
DEMO)
3'-10 1/4"
(WALL 6 - REMAINING)
1 2
3 4
5 PLANTER BOX BELOW WALL 1 REMAINING
24'-7 3/4" (WALL 2 - REMAINING)
15'-7 1/4" (WALL 1 - REMAINING) 7 5'-5 3/4" (WALL 7 - REMAINING) 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

MAIN LEVEL

FLOOR PLAN -
DEMO

MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN - DEMO
3/16" = 1'-0"
1 A2.00
SHEET NOTES:

LEGEND:

T-2 FINISH TYPE
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO BE REMOVED
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT

IMMEDIATELY IF ANY EXISTING SITE

CONDITIONS HAVE DISCREPANCIES

WITH THE ARCHITECUTRAL

DRAWINGS
KEY NOTES: FLOOR PLANS

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
192 SF PORCH PLUS RECESS,
GREATER THAN THE MIN. 40 SF PER
SCMC 18.04.040 B

VISUAL PROMINENCE OF THE GARGE

HAS BEEN MINIMZED PER SCMC

18.04.030 G
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AS

MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AREAS NOT

UNDER STRUCTURES WITH A FINAL
SLOPE GREATER THAN 15% SHALL BE

LEFT UNCOVERED BY IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE PER SCMC 18.12.040 D

FINISHED DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL
NOT EXCEED 18% PER SCMC

18.12.050 D (1)

RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT AND
REAR YARDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 6
FEET PER SCMC 18.12.050 E, RETAINING
WALLS OVER 4 FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL
BE SCREENED PER SCMC 18.12.070

ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE HIGH

QUALITY TO ALLOW FOR LONG-TERM

DURABILITY AND APPEARANCE, PER
SCMC 18.04.040 E

EXISTING HOUSE

TOTAL LENGTH OF (E) EXTERIOR
WALLS: 214'-10"

EXTERIOR DEMO WALLS
DEMO WALL A: 6'-8 3/4"
DEMO WALL D: 12'-3/4"
DEMO WALL E: 20'-5"
DEMO WALL H: 5'-11 1/2"
DEMO WALL I: 12'-1/2"
TOTAL: 57'-2 1/2"

EXTERIOR WALLS TO BECOME INTERIOR
(COUNT TOWARD DEMO)
WALL B: 17'-11 3/4"
WALL C: 9'-1 3/4"
TOTAL: 27'-1 1/2"

TOTAL LENGTH OF (E) EXTERIOR WALLS
REMOVED: 84'-4"

EXTERIOR WALLS REMAINING
WALL 1: 15'-7 1/4"
WALL 2: 24'-7 3/4"
WALL 3: 19'-1 3/4"
WALL 4: 53'-9 1/2"
WALL 5: 7'-11 3/4"
WALL 6: 3'-10 1/4"
WALL 7: 5'-5 3/4"
TOTAL: 130'-6"

TOTAL LENGTH OF (E) EXTERIOR WALLS TO
REMAIN: 130'-6"

PER SAN CARLOS PLANNING CHECKLIST

PERCENTAGE OF EXTERIOR WALLS REMOVED
(incl. B&C): 40%

PERCENTAGE OF EXTERIOR WALLS
REMAINING: 60%

PER CBC

PERCENTAGE OF EXTERIOR WALLS REMOVED
(exterior walls to become interior not included):
27% = (57'-2 1/2"/214-10")

PERCENTAGE OF EXTERIOR WALLS
REMAINING : 73% = (157'-7 1/2"/214-10")
HOUSE DEMO CALCS:

GARAGE DEMO CALCS:

EXISTING GARAGE

TOTAL LENGTH OF (E) EXTERIOR
WALLS: 84'-1/4"

TOTAL LENGTH OF (E) EXTERIOR
WALLS REMOVED: 84'-1/4"

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 42
30'-5" 36'-9"
26'-7 1/2"
4'-6"
27'-11 1/2"
(N) MECH
ABOVE10'-0" PARING SPACE REQUIREMENT
26'-7 1/2" 27'-6"
20'-0" PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT 30'-5" 13'-5 1/2" 16'-11 1/2" LAWN
PLANTER 5'-0" 4'-4"
2 A3.12
2 A3.11
2 A3.04
2 A3.02
2 A3.01
2 A3.03
(N) GARAGE
(N)
TRASH

ENCLOSURE
(N) STORAGE
(N) GARAGE/STORAGE SIDE YARD SETBACKS
5'-0"
FIRST
STORY

SETBACK
9'-0"
SECOND
STORY
SETBACK 15'-0" FIRST STORY 19'-0" SECOND STORY

PROPERTY LINE
1 A3.13
2 A3.13 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

LOWER LEVEL

FLOOR PLAN -

OVERALL

LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
3/16" = 1'-0"
1 A2.01
SHEET NOTES:

LEGEND:

T-2 FINISH TYPE
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO BE REMOVED
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT

IMMEDIATELY IF ANY EXISTING SITE

CONDITIONS HAVE DISCREPANCIES

WITH THE ARCHITECUTRAL

DRAWINGS
KEY NOTES: FLOOR PLANS

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
192 SF PORCH PLUS RECESS,
GREATER THAN THE MIN. 40 SF PER
SCMC 18.04.040 B

VISUAL PROMINENCE OF THE GARGE

HAS BEEN MINIMZED PER SCMC

18.04.030 G
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AS

MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AREAS NOT

UNDER STRUCTURES WITH A FINAL
SLOPE GREATER THAN 15% SHALL BE

LEFT UNCOVERED BY IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE PER SCMC 18.12.040 D

FINISHED DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL
NOT EXCEED 18% PER SCMC

18.12.050 D (1)

RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT AND
REAR YARDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 6
FEET PER SCMC 18.12.050 E, RETAINING
WALLS OVER 4 FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL
BE SCREENED PER SCMC 18.12.070

ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE HIGH

QUALITY TO ALLOW FOR LONG-TERM

DURABILITY AND APPEARANCE, PER
SCMC 18.04.040 E
0 2 4 8
Scale: 3/16"=1'-0"
5 5

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 43
11'-8"
4'-6"

CONVERTIBLE SOFA
5'-2 3/4"
4'-7"
14'-8 1/4" 12'-3"
KING
FRIDGE
WASHER
BELOW
DRYER
BELOW
FRIDGE
FRZR
12'-10" 22'-7 3/4" 4'-6" 4'-6"
26'-7"
2'-2 3/4" 15'-1"

WINE FRIDGE

ICE MKR

TRASH DW ARCH ARCH ARCH ARCH
ARCH

TWIN TWIN

DESK FULL
13'-6 3/8"
DW

ENTRY TABLE
CUBBIES BENCH WITH STORAGE UNDERNEATH 8'-0" 12'-11" 7'-7 1/2"

MICROWAVE
CUBBIES 5'-0"
15'-0" REAR YARD 10'-0"

REAR YARD SETBACK
6'-0" EASEMENT
9'-0" SECOND STORY
5'-0" FIRST STORY SIDE YARD SETBACK 5'-0" FIRST STORY

SIDE YARD SETBACK
4'-6"
FRONT YARD SETBACK 20'-0" MIN. DRIVEWAY FOR SECOND PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT LAWN

PLANTER

PLANTER
19'-0" SECOND STORY 13'-6 1/2"
3'-9"
4'-6" 3'-0"
7'-6"
5'-6" 6'-5" 6'-5" 5'-6"
2'-0" 3'-3" 10'-6" 11'-4" 15'-7 1/4"
15'-9"
6'-1 1/2"

DRESSER
DESK 10'-2"
11'-6" 3'-6"
ELEC. GAS

RINNAI TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER
RUR160iN (NEEDS AN OUTLET)

REUSE (E) AC
LAWN 63'-7 1/8"
53'-9 1/2" 10'-8" 11'-6" FULL
BENCH
2'-6
1/2"
4'-6" DRESSER
2'-6
1/2" DRESSER DESK
5'-4" 7'-5 1/2" 3'-0" 4'-10" 5'-0" ROOF LINE BELOW ROOF LINE BELOW 27'-11 1/2" 6'-9 3/4" 14'-4" 6'-9 3/4"
(N) LIVING ROOM IN
(E) LIVING ROOM LOCATION
(N) DEN IN
(E) DEN LOCATION
(N) ENTRY
(N) POWDER (N)

STORAGE
(N) SITTING ROOM
(N) BEDROOM 1
(N)
BEDROOM 2
(N) BATH 1
(N) LINEN

BUILT-IN
(N) BEDROOM 3
(N) PANTRY
(N) KITCHEN
(N) GUEST ROOM/OFFICE IN
(E) BEDROOM LOCATION
(N) OFFICE
(N) LAUNDRY
(N)

PRIMARY BATH
(N) PRIMARY BEDROOM
(N) TERRACE
(N) MUDROOM
(N) CLOSET (N) FRONT ENTRY PORCH
(N) STAIRS/
PATH
(N) BATH 2
(N) BATH 3
(N) CLOSET
(N) PORCH IN (E) PORCH

LOCATION
(N) PORCH IN (E) PORCH

LOCATION
2 A3.12
2 A3.11
2 A3.04
2 A3.02
2 A3.01
2 A3.03
(N) DINING ROOM IN
(E) DINING ROOM LOCATION
(E) OVERHEAD

ELECTRICAL
1 A3.13
2 A3.13 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

MAIN LEVEL

FLOOR PLAN

MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
3/16" = 1'-0"
1 A2.02
SHEET NOTES:

LEGEND:

T-2 FINISH TYPE
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO BE REMOVED
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT

IMMEDIATELY IF ANY EXISTING SITE

CONDITIONS HAVE DISCREPANCIES

WITH THE ARCHITECUTRAL

DRAWINGS
KEY NOTES: FLOOR PLANS

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
192 SF PORCH PLUS RECESS,
GREATER THAN THE MIN. 40 SF PER
SCMC 18.04.040 B

VISUAL PROMINENCE OF THE GARGE

HAS BEEN MINIMZED PER SCMC

18.04.030 G
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AS

MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AREAS NOT

UNDER STRUCTURES WITH A FINAL
SLOPE GREATER THAN 15% SHALL BE

LEFT UNCOVERED BY IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE PER SCMC 18.12.040 D

FINISHED DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL
NOT EXCEED 18% PER SCMC

18.12.050 D (1)

RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT AND
REAR YARDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 6
FEET PER SCMC 18.12.050 E, RETAINING
WALLS OVER 4 FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL
BE SCREENED PER SCMC 18.12.070

ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE HIGH

QUALITY TO ALLOW FOR LONG-TERM

DURABILITY AND APPEARANCE, PER
SCMC 18.04.040 E
0 2 4 8
Scale: 3/16"=1'-0"
5 5

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 44
5/12
5/12
5/12 5/12
FLAT 10/12 10/12 10/12 10/12
1'-0" TYP.
1'-0" TYP. 5/12 5/12 CHIMNEY

CHIMNEY
SKYLIGHT 1/12

PLANTER
ELEC. GAS

RINNAI TANKLESS HOT WATER HEATER
RUR160iN (NEEDS AN OUTLET)

REUSE (E) AC
2 A3.12
2 A3.11
2 A3.04
2 A3.02
2 A3.01
2 A3.03
1 A3.13
2 A3.13 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

ROOF PLAN

ROOF PLAN
3/16" = 1'-0"
1 A2.03
SHEET NOTES:

LEGEND:

T-2 FINISH TYPE
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO BE REMOVED
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT

IMMEDIATELY IF ANY EXISTING SITE

CONDITIONS HAVE DISCREPANCIES

WITH THE ARCHITECUTRAL

DRAWINGS
KEY NOTES: FLOOR PLANS

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
192 SF PORCH PLUS RECESS,
GREATER THAN THE MIN. 40 SF PER
SCMC 18.04.040 B

VISUAL PROMINENCE OF THE GARGE

HAS BEEN MINIMZED PER SCMC

18.04.030 G
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AS

MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AREAS NOT

UNDER STRUCTURES WITH A FINAL
SLOPE GREATER THAN 15% SHALL BE

LEFT UNCOVERED BY IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE PER SCMC 18.12.040 D

FINISHED DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL
NOT EXCEED 18% PER SCMC

18.12.050 D (1)

RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT AND
REAR YARDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 6
FEET PER SCMC 18.12.050 E, RETAINING
WALLS OVER 4 FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL
BE SCREENED PER SCMC 18.12.070

ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE HIGH

QUALITY TO ALLOW FOR LONG-TERM

DURABILITY AND APPEARANCE, PER
SCMC 18.04.040 E
RF-1
RF-1
RF-2
RF-2
LEGEND:

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
0 2 4 8
Scale: 3/16"=1'-0"
4 8 16
Scale: 1/8" = 1'-0"
RF-2 MODIFIED BITUMEN, COLOR
SIMILAR TO RF-1
5 5

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 45
(N) TOTAL LOWER FLOOR AREA: 1,030 SF (N) TOTAL MAIN FLOOR AREA: 3,987 SF TOTAL LOT AREA: 11,345 SF, PER SURVEY
(N) AREA LOT COVERAGE: 4,839
(N) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE: 42%
MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: 50%
(N) TOTAL FLOOR AREA (MAIN + LOWER): 5,017 SF
TOTAL LOT AREA: 11,345 SF, PER SURVEY
TOTAL FLOOR AREA RATIO: 44%
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO: 50%
C
A B
D
E
F
Q
O
N
L
M
K
H
G
I J
P

UNCOVERED PATIO
SPACE

EXEMPT PER

18.03.100

UNCOVERED PATIO
SPACE

EXEMPT PER

18.03.100
50% OPEN TRELLIS

EXEMPT PER

18.03.100

UNCOVERED PATIO
SPACE

EXEMPT PER

18.03.100

TRELLIS

EXTERIOR
PATIO

EXTERIOR
PATIO 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

FLOOR PLAN

DIAGRAMS
SHEET NOTES:

LEGEND:

T-2 FINISH TYPE
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO BE REMOVED
(E) CONSTRUCTION

TO REMAIN
(N) WALL

CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT

IMMEDIATELY IF ANY EXISTING SITE

CONDITIONS HAVE DISCREPANCIES

WITH THE ARCHITECUTRAL

DRAWINGS
KEY NOTES: FLOOR PLANS

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
192 SF PORCH PLUS RECESS,
GREATER THAN THE MIN. 40 SF PER
SCMC 18.04.040 B

VISUAL PROMINENCE OF THE GARGE

HAS BEEN MINIMZED PER SCMC

18.04.030 G
(E) LANDSCAPE TO REMAIN AS

MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AREAS NOT

UNDER STRUCTURES WITH A FINAL
SLOPE GREATER THAN 15% SHALL BE

LEFT UNCOVERED BY IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE PER SCMC 18.12.040 D

FINISHED DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL
NOT EXCEED 18% PER SCMC

18.12.050 D (1)

RETAINING WALLS IN THE FRONT AND
REAR YARDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 6
FEET PER SCMC 18.12.050 E, RETAINING
WALLS OVER 4 FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL
BE SCREENED PER SCMC 18.12.070

ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE HIGH

QUALITY TO ALLOW FOR LONG-TERM

DURABILITY AND APPEARANCE, PER
SCMC 18.04.040 E

TOTAL LOT AREA DIAGRAM
1/16" = 1'-0"
3 A2.04

TOTAL LOWER FLOOR AREA DIAGRAM
1/16" = 1'-0"
1 A2.04

TOTAL MAIN FLOOR AREA DIAGRAM
1/16" = 1'-0"
2 A2.04
A (ENTRY): 101 SF
B (DEN): 194 SF
C (LIVING/DINING/KITCHEN): 914 SF
D (GUEST SUITE): 316 SF
E (PANTRY): 190 SF
F (BEDROOM 3) 211 SF
G (OFFICE): 53 SF
H (LAUNDRY): 57 SF
I (POWDER): 31 SF
J (CLOSET): 26 SF
K (STORAGE): 126 SF
L (PRIMARY SUITE): 834 SF
M (HALL): 237 SF
N (SITTING ROOM) 234 SF
O (BEDROOM 1): 239 SF
P (BATH): 66 SF
Q (BEDROOM 2): 158 SF
TOTAL: 3,987 SF
AREA CALCS:

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 46
1 A3.12
1 TYP.
1 TYP. 17'-10"
2 A3.12
2 TYP.
9 TYP. 9
TYP.
3 TYP.
4 10
8 5
5 5
12 5
7 7'-0"
6 7'-6"
14 12
13 5'-0" 3'-3" 2'-1"
25'-1 1/2" 6'-0" 17'-3 7/16" (35'-0" MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT) 12 5 10'-10" (20'-0" MAX.)
25'-6 1/2" (35'-0" MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT) 8'-0"
1 A3.13
A3.01

ELEVATIONS

EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.01

PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.01 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"

DOWNHILL BUILDING FACE

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 47
1 2
3 3
4 4
5 7
9 9
TYP.
10 8 25'-6 1/2" (35'-0" MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT) 10'-10" (20'0" MAX.) 7'-0" 8'-0" 12 5 3'-8"
A3.02

ELEVATIONS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING EAST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.02

PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.02 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 48
1 1
TYP.
14'-0 31/32"
19'-10 7/16"
2 3
3 8
4 TYP.
9 TYP.
12 5
A3.03

ELEVATIONS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.03

PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.03 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 49
19'-4 7/16"
25'-6 15/32" (35'-0" MAX.) 8'-0" 10'-10" (20'-0" MAX.) 3'-8" 9 TYP.
3 TYP.
4 10
15 12
10 A3.04

ELEVATIONS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING WEST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.04 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.04
SHEET NOTES:

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 50

KITCHEN
TO
HALL
TO
HALL

WALK-IN WC HALL LIVING RM STORAGE
TO
MASTER
TO
MASTER
WC
TO
HALL 8'-0" KITCHEN HT. 6'-0" PER SCMC 18.12.060-D
(N) DECK
13'-8 1/8"
LIVING ROOM HT.
2 A3.12
(N) KITCHEN/LIVING ROOM (N) OFFICE (N) HALL (N) BATH 1 (N) BEDROOM 1 8'-0" 11'-4" BEDROOM HT. 1 A3.13
A3.11

SECTIONS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING SECTION LOOKING SOUTH - WITH DEMO
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.11

PROPOSED SECTION LOOKING SOUTH
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.11 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 51

BDRM HALL HALL KITCHEN DINING
TO
BATH
TO
EXT.
12 1
12 5
2 A3.11
(N) PANTRY
8'-1 1/2" 8'-0"
(N) LIVING/DINING
(N) ENTRY (N) FRONT PORCH
(N) KITCHEN
9'-8 1/2"
13'-11 1/2"
2 A3.13
A3.12

SECTIONS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0"

EXISTING SECTION LOOKING WEST - DEMO
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.04 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

PROPOSED SECTION LOOKING WEST
1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.12
SHEET NOTES:

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 52
2 A3.11 11'-4"
(N) SITTING ROOM
(N) PRIMARY BATHROOM
(N) BEDROOM 13'-7"
(N) PRIMARY BEDROOM
(N) BEDROOM 13'-7" 9'-0 1/2"
(N) STORAGE (N) GARAGE
(N) CLOSET
(N) ATTIC
9'-0 1/2"9'-0 1/2" 11'-4" 5'-2 1/2"
(N) CRAWLSPACE
(N) DRIVEWAY
(N) STORAGE
(N) PRIMARY BEDROOM 13'-7" 9'-0 1/2"
(N) STORAGE (N) GARAGE
A3.13

SECTIONS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

PROPOSED SECTION LOOKING WEST THROUGH GARAGE
1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.13
SHEET NOTES:

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

PROPOSED SECTION LOOKING SOUTH THROUGH GARAGE & PRIMARY BEDROOM 1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.13

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 53
2 A3.11 11'-4"
(N) SITTING ROOM
(N) PRIMARY BATHROOM
(N) BEDROOM 13'-7"
(N) PRIMARY BEDROOM
(N) BEDROOM 13'-7" 9'-0 1/2"
(N) STORAGE (N) GARAGE
(N) CLOSET
(N) ATTIC
9'-0 1/2"9'-0 1/2" 11'-4" 5'-2 1/2"
(N) CRAWLSPACE
(N) STORAGE
5'-0"

GRADE PLANE
5'-0"
1'-6 1/2"
8'-4 1/2"
(N) PRIMARY BEDROOM 13'-7" 9'-0 1/2"
(N) STORAGE (N) GARAGE
5'-0" 5'-0" 1'-8" 9'-9 1/2"

GRADE PLANE
A3.15

GRADE PLANE

DIAGRAMS
0 2 4 8
Scale: 1/4" = 1'-0" 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

GRADE PLANE - PROPOSED SECTION LOOKING WEST THROUGH GARAGE 1/4" = 1'-0"
1 A3.15
SHEET NOTES:

KEY NOTES: ELEVATIONS
& SECTIONS
(N) SKYLIGHT
(N) STUCCO, PAINTED (PT-1)

DEMO SHOWN DASHED
(N) DOORS & WINDOWS (MT-1)
(N) RETAINING WALL, STONE (ST-1),

DIVIDED INTO TERRACES,
6'-0" TALL MAX. IN FRONT YARD PER
SCMC 18.12.050 E.
(E) FENCE TO REMAIN
(E) ELEC. METER TO REMAIN
(E) GAS METER TO REMAIN
(N) ROOF (RF-1)
(N) WOOD DECK IN +/- (E) DECK

LOCATION
(N) ADDITION
(N) STAIRS & FRONT PORCH,
STONE (ST-2 )
LEGEND:

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE

RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION

IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

APPROVED PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,

AND ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS

UNDER WHICH THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS WERE APPROVED.

GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO

CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE

ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY
DISCREPANCIES.

PROPERTY LINE
ST-1 CREAM LIMESTONE, WIDE
JOINTS
MT-1 BLACK METAL
RF-1 ASPHALT SHINGLES, WARM

WOOD/TERRACOTTA COLOR
ST-2 STAMPED CONCRETE, COLOR
TO MATCH ST-1
PT-1 BENJAMIN MOORE WHITE DOVE

OR APPROVED EQUAL
(N) GUARDRAIL (MT-1)

SLOPES CREATED BY GRADING OF
THE SITE SHALL NOT EXCEEDED 30%
PER SCMC 18.12.040 F.
(N) TRASH ENCLOSURE

GRADE PLANE - PROPOSED SECTION LOOKING SOUTH THROUGH GARAGE & PRIMARY BEDROOM 1/4" = 1'-0"
2 A3.15

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 54
A5.01
3D VIEWS

EXISTING FRONT AERIAL VIEW
NTS
1 A5.01

PROPOSED FRONT AERIAL VIEW
NTS
2 A5.01

EXISTING SIDE YARD VIEW LOOKING WEST
NTS
3 A5.01

SIDE YARD VIEW LOOKING WEST - CONCEPTUAL
NTS
4 A5.01 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

EXISTING REAR YARD VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST
NTS
5 A5.01

REAR FACADE VIEW - CONCEPTUAL
NTS
6 A5.01 5
5 5

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 55
A5.02
3D VIEWS

EXISTING FRONT FACADE VIEW
NTS
1 A5.02

PROPOSED FRONT FACADE VIEW
NTS
2 A5.02

EXISTING VIEW FROM DRIVEWAY
NTS
3 A5.02

PROPOSED VIEW FROM DRIVEWAY
NTS
4 A5.02 703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 JULY 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

EXISTING ENTRY VIEW
NTS
5 A5.02

PROPOSED ENTRY VIEW
NTS
6 A5.02

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 56
TYP. HEAD AT (N) WDW
3" = 1'-0"
2 A9.01
325_dtl_04
(E) FLR. OR ROOF JOIST,
TYP., VIF.
(E) OR (N) PTD. GWB.

GWB WDW JAMB BYD.

WDW PER SCH.

SIDING PER SCH.

WRB.

FLASHING, PTD.

PTD. 1X TRIM,
SLOPED.

TYP. SILL AT (N) WDW, JAMB SIM.
3" = 1'-0"
1 A9.01
325_dtl_04
GWB WDW JAMB BYD.

J MOLD AT OUTSIDE
CORNERS, TYP.

GWB, PTD., PER SCH.

WALL PER SCH.

SIDING PER SCH.

WRB.

PTD. 1X TRIM.

FLOOR SILL AT (N) WDW
3" = 1'-0"
5 A9.01
325_dtl_04
SEALANT, TYP.

GWB WDW JAMB BYD.
3X PT MUD SILL, S.S.D.

FOUNDATION WALL,
S.S.D.

PTD. 1X TRIM.

SEALANT, TYP.

TILE PER SCH. THIN SET
O/ 1/4" BACKER BOARD
PER TCNA RH135-20.

SIDING TRIM BD. 6" MIN.

GRADE.

SHEATHING, S.S.D.

SM FLASHING.

ELEC. HEATING MAT

EMBEDDED IN THINSET
PER MFR. REC.

SEALANT.

A9.01
DETAILS703 KNOLL DRIVE SAN CARLOS, CA 94070 REED RESIDENCE 29 APR 2022
03/03/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 1

PLANNING PACKAGE
703 KNOLL DRIVE

AS NOTED

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8 1 2 3 5 t h A V E N U E
S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 2 1
4 1 5 . 5 0 5 . 1 1 0 2
09/24/2021 PLANNING PACKAGE
04/29/2022 PLANNING PACKAGE REV 2

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 57

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 58

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 59

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 60

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 61

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 62
1 of 3
Rev. 3/26/18

PLANS VERIFICATION CHECKLIST
Please include the following plan sheets in the order outlined below.

Include the reference sheet number for all items.

Please note: Incomplete submittals will not be accepted TITLE/COVER SHEET Reference Sheet
Number
a. Vicinity Map (aerial view optional)
b. Data tables copied from the City of San Carlos template directly onto the plans
• Table 1: Project Data (required)
• Table 2: Tree Data (required)
• Table 3: Hillside Overlay District Determination (required) • Table 4: Hillside-Overlay District Data (required only if within H Overlay District)
c. Project Address, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN), Zoning District d. Table of Contents
e. Written Scope of Work
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY (Required for New Residences)
Boundary Survey may be required for all other projects
Reference Sheet
Number
a. Topographic survey prepared by a qualified surveyor illustrating the legal boundaries, dimensions of all property lines, easements, rightof-way, trails, public utilities and utility poles, location of all existing improvements/structures, setback of existing improvements/ structures, tree trunks, tree species (if possible) and accurate depiction of tree canopies/drip line along with spot elevations across the site, including designated spot elevations from where the building height will be measured .
b. Slope Calculations, as applicable.
c. Surveys shall be signed and stamped and shall be a separate sheet from site plans.

SITE PLAN Scale (1/8”, 10’ or similar)
Shall be a separate sheet from survey
Reference Sheet
Number
a. North arrow, property lines with dimensions. Show the entire lot on one sheet.
b. Existing and proposed site plan. Footprint and eaves of all existing and proposed buildings, accessory structures and fences/walls on the site.
c. For two story or taller projects, show approximate locations and setbacks of neighboring buildings and windows as well as significant trees on neighboring lots.
d. Driveways, parking areas, paths and walkways (note paving materials and dimension drivewaywidth).
e. Improvements in the public right-of-way (streets, curbs, sidewalks, and trees.

A0.11
A0.00
A0.00
A0.00
1 OF 1
1 OF 1
1 OF 1
A1.01
A1.01
A1.00
n/a
A1.01
n/a

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 63
2 of 3
Rev. 3/26/18
f. Creeks or waterway easements on or adjacent to the property.

Indicate top of bank as defined by SCMC 18.14.
g. Easements (public or private, and indicate who easement benefits) h. Rights-of-way (label distance between street curb and property line) i. Dimension all required and proposed setbacks including any special setbacks (e.g. non-conforming setbacks or creek setback) measured to finish material
j. Clearly indicate (via shading or another method) the difference between the first and second floors.
k. Outdoor mechanical equipment (pool filters, air conditioners, etc.) l. All existing and proposed trees. Indicate the size and species of trees. An arborist report may be required for trees to be removed and/or tree protection measures.
m. Indicate any trees proposed for removal (if applicable). n. Location of existing and proposed overhead and underground utility distribution lines (water, gas, sewer, cable, irrigation, etc.). Location of gas and electric meters. (New homes require utility distribution to be underground per SCMC 18.15.120.)
DEMOLITION PLAN Scale 1/4" Reference Sheet
Number
a. Complete demolition plans indicating what is proposed for removal (windows, walls, exterior finish, etc.). Please note if the house is proposed for complete demolition, this can be combined with the existing floor plan.
b. Calculation of total length of existing exterior walls. Calculation of exterior walls to be removed. Exterior walls that are becoming interior walls are considered “removed.” Demonstrate percentage of walls to be removed. Calculate this separately for each building. c. A key indicating the shading or hatching for “Walls to Remain”, “Walls to be Removed.”
FLOOR PLANS Scale 1/4" Reference Sheet
Number
a. Existing and proposed floor plans: include demising walls, existing uses, and identify the use of each room, indicate how the interior of the building affects the exterior design, particularly window and door placement, space usage, stairs, etc.
b. Diagram showing total floor area and blocked-out areas and calculations for each block to determine total floor area (overlay this information on a separate floor plan)
c. Diagram showing total lot coverage and blocked-out areas and calculations for each block to determine lot coverage compliance (overlay this information on a separate floor plan).
d. A key indicating “Walls to Remain,” “Walls to be Removed,” and “New Walls.”
e. Dimension the interior width and depth of the parking area (free and clear of chimneys, washer and dryer, water heater, stairs, etc.) f. Show location of washer/dryer, furnace, water heater, etc. on floor plans (demonstrate they are not encroaching into the minimum garage dimensions).
n/a
A1.01
A1.01
A1.01
A1.01
A1.01
A1.00
A1.01
A2.01
A2.00
A2.00
A2.00
A2.02
A2.01
A2.00
A2.04
A2.04
A2.02
A2.00
A2.01
A2.01
A2.02

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 64
3 of 3
Rev. 3/26/18
ROOF PLAN Reference Sheet
Number
a. Show roof pitches and dimension overhang depths. Include arrows that indicate the direction of the slope of the roof and include the slope of the roof in each direction.
b. Differentiate between the wall lines and the location of the eaves. c. Indicate roof material.

ELEVATIONS Scale 1/4"
Shall not be shaded.

Reference Sheet
Number
a. Existing Elevations of all sides of buildings, including accessory structures
b. Proposed Elevations of all sides of buildings, including accessory structures.
c. Height indicated on each elevation (include ridge height, plate height, and measured to the top-most materials)
d. Label and accurately depict siding and roofing materials, trim, windows, entry, garage doors, stairs, balconies, doors, eaves, chimneys, lighting, window trim, porch columns, railings and other architectural features on proposed elevations.
e. Provide a typical window detail including the proposed window type, recess and trim.
f. Call out the downhill building face (for Hillside Overlay District) SECTIONS Scale 1/4"
a. Provide a lengthwise section drawings through the residence.

Include minimum of one longitudinal and one transversal section.

For more complex projects and those within the Hillside Overlay District, provide additional sections as needed.

LANDSCAPE PLAN Scale (1/8” or 1”= 10’) Reference Sheet
Number
a. All existing trees including size and species.
b. Indicate whether any trees are proposed for removal (tree removal application may be required).
c. New trees proposed (size, number and species).
d. Demonstrate there is no more than 50% paving within the required front yard (measured as the total area of the width of the lot multiplied by the required front setback).
e. Demonstrate a maximum of 25% lawn within the required front yard and exterior side yard (if a corner lot).
f. Location of new underground utility distribution lines (new homes) g. Growth information, root depth, etc. for new trees if there is the potential for conflict with utilities.
h. General planting plan
Advisory- Plan sheets should not include:
• BMP Sheets
• Interior Elevations
• Electrical Plans
• Structural Plans/Details
A2.03
A2.03
A2.03
A3.01, A3.02,
A3.03, A3.04
A3.01, A3.02,
A3.03, A3.04
A3.01, A3.02,
A3.03, A3.04
A3.01, A3.02,
A3.03, A3.04
A9.01
A3.01
A3.11, A3.12
A1.00
A1.01
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
A1.01

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 65
1 1/1/16 v.2
Complete this form for stand-alone single family home projects of any size that are not part of a larger project; or for projects in the following categories that create and/or replace less than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface: restaurants, retail gasoline outlets, auto service facilities1and parking lots (stand-alone or part of another use); or for any other type of project that creates and/or replaces less than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface.

A. Project Information
A.1 Project Name:

A.2 Project Address:

A.3 Project APN:

B. Select Appropriate Site Design Measures
B.1 Does the project create and/or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface2? Yes No  If yes, and the project received final discretionary approval on or after December 1, 2012, the project must include at least one of the Site Design Measures listed below in section a through f. 3 Fact sheets regarding site design measures a
through f may be downloaded at www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment#flyers  If no, or the project received final discretionary approval before December 1, 2012, the project applicant shall be encouraged to implement appropriate site design measures4from the list below, which may be required at municipality discretion. Consult with municipal staff about requirements for your project.

B.2 On the list below, indicate whether each site design measure is included in the project plans and the plan sheet number:
1 See Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes here. 2 Complete the C.3/C.6 Development Review Checklist if the project is not an individual single family home, and it creates and/or replaces 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface; or if it is a restaurant, retail gasoline outlet, auto service facility, or parking lot project that creates and/or replaces 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. 3 See MRP Provision C.3.i.
4 See MRP Provision C.3.a.i.(6).

Yes No
Plan
Sheet No.
a. Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels and use rainwater for irrigation or other non-potable use.
b. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas.
c. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. d. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. e. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. f. Construct bike lanes, driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces.
g. Minimize land disturbance and impervious surface (especially parking lots). h. Maximize permeability by clustering development and preserving open space. i. Use micro-detention, including distributed landscape-based detention. j. Protect sensitive areas, including wetland and riparian areas, and minimize changes to the natural topography.
k. Self-treating area (see Section 4.2 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) l. Self-retaining area (see Section 4.3 of the C.3 Technical Guidance) m. Plant or preserve interceptor trees (Section 4.1, C.3 Technical Guidance) Stormwater Checklist for Small Projects
Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
600 ELM STREET
(650) 802-4200
http://www.cityofsancarlos.org/depts/publ
icworks/engineering/stormwater_program/
default.asp
703 Knoll Drive
703 Knoll Drive, San Carlos, CA 94070
050-094-100
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A1.01
A1.01
A1.01
X A1.01
X
X
X
A1.01
A1.01
A1.01

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 66
Stormwater Checklist for Small Projects
2 1/1/16 v.2
C. Select appropriate source controls (Encouraged for all projects; may be required at municipal discretion. Consult municipal staff.5) 5 See MRP Provision C.3.a.i(7).
6 Any connection to the sanitary sewer system is subject to sanitary district approval. 7 Businesses that may have outdoor process activities/equipment include machine shops, auto repair, industries with pretreatment facilities.

Are these
features in
project?
Features that
require source
control
measures
Source control measures
(Refer to Local Source Control List for detailed requirements) Is source control
measure included
in project plans?
Yes No Yes No
Plan
Sheet No.

Storm Drain  Mark on-site inlets with the words “No Dumping! Flows to Bay” or equivalent.

Floor Drains  Plumb interior floor drains to sanitary sewer [or prohibit].

Parking garage  Plumb interior parking garage floor drains to sanitary sewer.6 Landscaping  Retain existing vegetation as practicable.  Select diverse species appropriate to the site. Include plants that are pestand/or disease-resistant, drought-tolerant, and/or attract beneficial insects.  Minimize use of pesticides and quick-release fertilizers.  Use efficient irrigation system; design to minimize runoff.

Pool/Spa/Fountain  Provide connection to the sanitary sewer to facilitate draining.6 Food Service
Equipment
(nonresidential)
Provide sink or other area for equipment cleaning, which is:
 Connected to a grease interceptor prior to sanitary sewer discharge.6  Large enough for the largest mat or piece of equipment to be cleaned.  Indoors or in an outdoor roofed area designed to prevent stormwater run-on and run-off, and signed to require equipment washing in this area.

Refuse Areas  Provide a roofed and enclosed area for dumpsters, recycling containers, etc., designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff.
 Connect any drains in or beneath dumpsters, compactors, and tallow bin areas serving food service facilities to the sanitary sewer.6 Outdoor Process
Activities7
 Perform process activities either indoors or in roofed outdoor area, designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff, and to drain to the sanitary sewer.6 Outdoor
Equipment/
Materials
Storage
 Cover the area or design to avoid pollutant contact with stormwater runoff.  Locate area only on paved and contained areas.
 Roof storage areas that will contain non-hazardous liquids, drain to sanitary sewer6, and contain by berms or similar.

Vehicle/
Equipment
Cleaning
 Roofed, pave and berm wash area to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff, plumb to the sanitary sewer6, and sign as a designated wash area.  Commercial car wash facilities shall discharge to the sanitary sewer.6 Vehicle/
Equipment
Repair and
Maintenance
 Designate repair/maintenance area indoors, or an outdoors area designed to prevent stormwater run-on and runoff and provide secondary containment. Do not install drains in the secondary containment areas.
 No floor drains unless pretreated prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. 6  Connect containers or sinks used for parts cleaning to the sanitary sewer. 6 Fuel
Dispensing
Areas
 Fueling areas shall have impermeable surface that is a) minimally graded to prevent ponding and b) separated from the rest of the site by a grade break.  Canopy shall extend at least 10 ft. in each direction from each pump and drain away from fueling area.

Loading Docks  Cover and/or grade to minimize run-on to and runoff from the loading area.  Position downspouts to direct stormwater away from the loading area.  Drain water from loading dock areas to the sanitary sewer.6  Install door skirts between the trailers and the building.

Fire Sprinklers  Design for discharge of fire sprinkler test water to landscape or sanitary sewer6 Miscellaneous
Drain or Wash
Water
 Drain condensate of air conditioning units to landscaping. Large air conditioning units may connect to the sanitary sewer.6
 Roof drains shall drain to unpaved area where practicable.  Drain boiler drain lines, roof top equipment, all washwater to sanitary sewer 6.

Architectural
Copper
 Drain rinse water to landscaping, discharge to sanitary sewer 6, or collect and dispose properly offsite. See flyer “Requirements for Architectural Copper.” X
X
X
X X A1.01
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

8.a
January 23, 2023 PacNet Pg.
Stormwater Checklist for Small Projects
3 1/1/16 v.2
D. Implement construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) (Required for all projects.) D.1 Is the site a “High Priority Site”? (Municipal staff will make this determination; if the answer is yes, the project will be referred to construction site inspection staff for monthly stormwater inspections during the wet season - October 1 through April 30.) (“High Priority Sites” require a grading permit, are “hillside projects” [defined starting 7/1/16 as disturbing >= 5,000 sq.ft. of land area and a slope based on municipal criteria or map or >=15%] are adjacent to a creek, or are otherwise high priority for stormwater protection during construction per MRP Provision C.6.e.ii(2).) Yes No
D.2 All projects require appropriate stormwater BMPs during construction - indicate which BMPs are included in the project, below.

Name of applicant completing the form:

Signature: Date:

E. Comments (for municipal staff use only):

F. NOTES (for municipal staff use only):

Section A Notes:

Section B Notes:

Section C Notes:

Section D Notes:

Yes No Best Management Practice (BMP)
Attach the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program’s construction BMP plan sheet to project plans and require contractor to implement the applicable BMPs on the plan sheet.

Temporary erosion controls to stabilize all denuded areas until permanent erosion controls are established.

Delineate with field markers the following areas: clearing limits, easements, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas, buffer zones, trees to be protected and retained, and drainage courses.

Provide notes, specifications, or attachments describing the following:
 Construction, operation and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls, include inspection frequency;  Methods and schedule for grading, excavation, filling, clearing of vegetation, and storage and disposal of excavated or cleared material;
 Specifications for vegetative cover & mulch, include methods and schedules for planting and fertilization;  Provisions for temporary and/or permanent irrigation.

Perform clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather.

Use sediment controls or filtration to remove sediment when dewatering and obtain all necessary permits.

Protect all storm drain inlets in vicinity of site using sediment controls (e.g., berms, socks, fiber rolls, or filters.) Trap sediment on-site, using BMPs such as sediment basins or traps, earthen dikes or berms, silt fences, check dams, compost blankets or jute mats, covers for soil stock piles, etc.

Divert on-site runoff around exposed areas; divert off-site runoff around the site (e.g., swales and dikes).

Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas from construction impacts using vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes, mulching, or other measures as appropriate.

Limit construction access routes and stabilize designated access points.

No cleaning, fueling, or maintaining vehicles on-site, except in a designated area where washwater is contained and treated.

Store, handle, and dispose of construction materials/wastes properly to prevent contact with stormwater.

Contractor shall train and provide instruction to all employees/subcontractors re: construction BMPs.

Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including pavement cutting wastes, paints, concrete, petroleum products, chemicals, washwater or sediments, rinse water from architectural copper, and non-stormwater discharges to storm drains and watercourses.

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Julia Pellegrini
29 September 2021

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 68
Re: 703 knoll | structural proposal request
Justen Peek <[email protected]>
Mon 7/11/2022 10:16 AM
To: Julia Pellegrini <[email protected]>
Cc: Michelle Reed <[email protected]>;katherine annin <[email protected]> Hello Julia,
It was nice connecting with you this morning. Thank you for providing more insight as to the demolition requirements. As we discussed, I'm confident we can develop a solution that strictly follows the proposed demolition plans. Regarding demo wall 2, we will need to determine the existing header conditions in order to develop the detailing to allow for the existing framing to remain where applicable. It is likely we will need a steel beam and a deeper section above the doors to accommodate the existing framing and new support framing.

Again, I'm confident we can achieve this goal. I hope this helps provide some clarification. Feel free to call or email with any other questions.

Sincerely,
Justen Peek, P.E.

Partner / Principal
Advanced Engineering
Structural Engineering Solutions
3381 Walnut Blvd. Ste. 220, Brentwood, CA 94513
Phone: 925.516.3502 Ext. 23
Direct: 925.306.0023
Fax: 925.262.4662
Email: [email protected]

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 69

DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Division Conditions (For questions, contact Planning at (650) 802-4231

1. The design and materials of the residence shall be in substantial compliance with the plans prepared by 35th Collective, dated Friday, July 29, 2022, consisting of eleven (25) sheets and as presented to and approved by the City Council on Monday, January 23, 2023. Any changes determined to be substantive by Planning Staff shall require review and approval by the RDRC.

2. This project will require a building permit. Construction of this project shall be in strict conformance with the plans approved by the City Council on Monday, January 23, 2023. If the Building Division’s set of drawings, or other subsequent revisions, differs substantially as determined by Planning Staff from the approved drawings, the entire proposal shall require re-review and approval by the RDRC prior to changes being made in the field.

3. This Design Review approval is valid for up to eighteen months from the date of approval.

The Zoning Administrator may approve a two-year extension of any permit or approval upon receipt of a written application with the required fee within one year of the date of the approval.

4. No protected trees are proposed for removal. A tree removal permit shall be filed with the Planning Division, subject to RDRC review, for the future removal of any Protected Trees on the property. The applicant shall incur any fees associated with the tree removal permit application.

5. At the foundation stage of construction, but prior to final foundation inspection, the applicant’s surveyor or civil engineer licensed by the State of California shall verify in writing that the structure complies with the City of San Carlos minimum setback regulations for single-dwelling units in the RS-6 zoning district. The written verification shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Division for review.

6. At the framing stage of construction, but prior to final frame inspection, the applicant’s surveyor or civil engineer licensed by the State of California shall verify in writing that the structure complies with the City of San Carlos maximum height regulations for singledwelling units in the RS-6 zoning district. The written verification shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Division for review.

7. Exterior materials shall not be changed without approval from the Planning Division.

Substantial changes to the exterior materials will require review by the RDRC.

8. The City may stop work on this project and construction related activities if actions violate project conditions of approval, or any part of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

9. The exterior lighting of the home shall not be excessive, nor shall it spillover to neighboring properties. All lighting fixtures shall be shielded so as not to produce obtrusive glare onto the public right-of-way or adjoining properties. All luminaires shall meet the most recently adopted criteria of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) for cutoff or full cutoff luminaires. Light fixtures shall comply with Section 18.15.070 of the SCMC.

10. Efficient irrigation systems shall be used throughout all landscaped areas in accordance with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 70
Draft Conditions of Approval: 703 Knoll Drive (050-094-100) 2

11. Whenever feasible, project shall incorporate landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates other appropriate sustainable landscaping practices such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping.

12. The applicant shall complete the Stormwater Requirements Checklist for Small Projects as part of the building permit submittal.

13. Trim at least one inch in depth must be provided around all windows, or window must be recessed at least two inches from the plane of the surrounding exterior wall. For doublehung and horizontal sliding windows, at least one sash shall achieve a two-inch recess.

Exceptions may be granted through the design review process to accommodate alternative window design complementary to the architectural style of the structure.

14. All materials shall be high quality to allow for long-term durability and appearance. The exterior use of foam or stucco as trim and plywood or aluminum as siding materials is prohibited.

15. All electrical, telephone, cable television, and similar distribution lines providing direct service to the project shall be installed underground within the site pursuant to Municipal Code Section 18.15.120. Plans submitted to Building for permits shall indicate the location of underground utilities on the civil plans. The civil plans shall be internally consistent with the site plan, landscape plan, and all other sheets.

16. The maximum width of the driveway is twenty feet pursuant to Municipal Code

18.04.040(H)(2).

17. A two-foot wide planted area shall be installed on each side of the driveway pursuant to Municipal Code 18.04.040(H)(3).

18. The maximum amount of paving in street-facing yards is fifty percent of the required yard pursuant to Municipal Code 18.04.040(G).

19. Colors and materials may not be changed without previous approval from the Planning Division. Please note that substantial changes will require review by the RDRC.

20. Required landscaping shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the project pursuant to Municipal Code Section 18.18.100(A) and 18.12.070 Hillside Overlay Landscaping. All landscaping shall be installed consistent with approved plans and specifications, in a manner designed to promote and maintain healthy plant growth pursuant to Municipal Code Section 18.18.100(B).

21. Certification of Substantial Completion. Upon completion of the installation of the landscaping and irrigation system, a field observation shall be completed by the licensed project contractor. A certificate of substantial completion shall be submitted to the City by the licensed project contractor. The certificate shall specifically indicate that the plants were installed as specified and that the irrigation system was installed as designed, along with a list of any deficiencies.

22. With the Building Permit plan set, the applicant shall sign and photocopy the ‘Existing Walls to Remain Affidavit’ within the plan set. If more than 50% of the existing exterior walls are

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 71
Draft Conditions of Approval: 703 Knoll Drive (050-094-100) 3 demolished, a stop work will be issued by the Building Division, and the project will be considered a complete demolition by the Planning Division. You’ll then have to resubmit to the Planning Division with new plans that meet new house criteria per the City of San Carlos Municipal Code / Zoning Ordinance. This affidavit shall include the following language, “Signing below acknowledges that the contractor/owner, __________________________. (CSLB: _____________), will not demolish more than 50% of the existing exterior walls, and if more than 50% of the exterior walls are removed, the project will have to be re-submitted to the Planning Division as new construction for review.” Planner to make this affidavit available to the applicant.

Building Division Conditions (For questions, contact the Building Official at 650-802-4262)

23. All remodels, additions, site treatment work, new construction or demolition with valuation of at least $50,000 shall be subject to the City of San Carlos Construction & Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance. The C&D Ordinance requires specific monetary deposits, encourages salvaging of building materials before demolition, and requires recycling of 65 percent of construction and demolition debris.

24. Plans received for a Building Permit shall comply with 2019 CBC, CPC, CEC, CMC, and the CALGreen Checklist for New Residential. Documentation of the proposed green building measures (checklist) shall be submitted directly to the Building Division at the time of building plan check submittal.

25. Additional Branch Circuit Raceway Required for Future All-Electric. New one- and twofamily dwellings, townhouses, and Residential Reconstruction projects (as defined in the California Residential Code), for each dwelling unit, shall install listed raceways to accommodate a dedicated branch circuit for the following electric appliance locations:
• Clothes Dryer
• HVAC
• Kitchen Cooking
The raceway shall be not less than trade size 1 (nominal 1-inch inside diameter). The raceway shall originate at the main service or sub-panel and shall terminate in a listed cabinet, box, or other enclosure in close proximity to the electrical appliance location(s).

Raceways are required to be continuous at enclosed, inaccessible, or concealed areas and spaces. The service panel and/or sub-panel shall provide capacity to accommodate these branch circuits and permit the installation of branch circuit overcurrent protective devices for each appliance.

26. Additional Branch Circuit for Water Heating Systems. Systems using gas or propane water heaters in new one- and two-family dwellings, townhouses, and Residential Reconstruction projects (as defined in the California Residential Code) shall include the following branch circuit components:

A dedicated 125 volt, 20-amp receptacle connected to the main service or sub-panel with a 120/240 volt 3 conductor, 10 AWG branch circuit, within 3-feet of the water heater and accessible to the water heater with no obstructions. Both ends of the unused conductor shall be labeled “Spare” and be electrically isolated, and a reserved single-pole circuit breaker space in the electrical panel shall be provided and labeled “Future 240V Use.”

27. Main electric service shall be sized to accommodate future all-electric appliances.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 72
Draft Conditions of Approval: 703 Knoll Drive (050-094-100) 4

28. Rooftop solar is required for new single-family dwellings. Plans shall include notation that solarvoltaic system is required and will be a deferred submittal.

29. New one- and two-family dwellings, townhouses, and Residential Reconstruction projects (as defined in the California Residential Code), for each dwelling unit, shall install a listed raceway to accommodate a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit for electric vehicle (EV) charging. EV ready electrical required in garage area.

30. The raceway shall be not less than trade size 1 (nominal 1-inch inside diameter). The raceway shall originate at the main service or sub-panel and shall terminate in a listed cabinet, box, or other enclosure in close proximity to the electrical appliance location(s).

31. Your project will require a soils report if you are adding more than 1000 square-feet of area in Hazard Zone “A”, or if you are adding more than 500 square-feet of area in Hazard Zone “B”. A soils report is required in Hazard Zone “A” and “B” if work is proposed within 50-feet of an unprotected creek bank. A soils report is required for all new residences.

32. If a soils report is required, please provide a Plan Review Letter by the Soils Engineer of Record that states the plans are in general conformance with the findings of the geotechnical investigation for this project. The Soils Engineer Plan Review Letter shall be included with the Building Division plan review submittal.

33. If your project meets the definition of Residential Reconstruction, and is 2500 square feet or greater, including the garage (if attached), fire sprinklers are required. New commercial and residential construction requires fire sprinklers.

34. Plans received after 12/23/19 shall include notation that solar-voltaic system is required and will be a deferred submittal.

35. Any new Fire Department Connections shall be unobtrusive. All firewater plumbing shall be enclosed within the structure’s walls, or aesthetically placed behind a design element, with only the necessary connection and required drains or test valves visible. Final design and placement shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to sprinkler permit issuance.

36. Construction noise and delivery hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday. No construction is permitted on Sunday and holidays, including Juneteenth. No radios on the job site. Construction noise hours shall be provided on cover page of plans.

37. If required, a construction-staging plan shall be submitted for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit.

38. A tree protection plan, based upon recommendations by a licensed professional arborist, for protected trees on the subject properties shall be submitted for review and approval to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and Building Official prior to issuance of a building permit. The tree protection plan must comply with the Protected Tree Ordinance Code Section. SCMC 18.18.070

39. Location of existing and / or new gas and electric meters shall be provided.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 73
Draft Conditions of Approval: 703 Knoll Drive (050-094-100) 5

40. Location of existing and / or new mechanical equipment shall be provided.

41. All new homes require a site survey and all additions built to current setbacks require a survey.

42. Complete MEP plans required.

Public Works Conditions (For questions, contact Public Works at 650-802-4200)

43. If grading quantities (calculated as cut + fill, not NET) exceed 50 cubic yards, a grading permit is required from Public Works and the following comments apply:
a. Please submit a soils investigation report that is prepared by a firm of consulting engineers, licensed in the State of California, specializing in soil mechanics and foundation engineering, and shall clearly state that the proposed grading conforms to conservative safe engineering practices.
b. To comply with the City’s policy, the applicant’s civil engineer must submit a drainage report, hydrologic study, hydraulic calculations, and drainage improvement plans. Drainage systems that are designed to rely on pumps are not allowed. Storm water shall, under no circumstances, be introduced into the sanitary sewage system, but shall be confined to surface and subsurface drainage facilities provided. Applicant must provide pre-improvement runoff and post-improvement runoff calculations. Post improvement runoff totals cannot exceed pre-improvement runoff totals.
c. The applicant shall submit detailed earthwork quantity calculations that include total cut, fill and import or export quantities. The calculations shall include cross sections or other evidence of how the quantities were obtained such that the quantities can be easily verified. Grading fees will be calculated based on verifiable grading quantities. Also include the Total Hauling Quantities, including import and off-haul. Also provide table on Grading plan sheet with the following:
i. Total area inside the property of the project
ii. Total displaced quantities, including cut and fill amounts iii. Total hauling quantities, including import and off-haul iv. Total area of impervious surfaces before and after the project v. Total surface area of each retaining wall.
d. All applications where the total amount to be graded exceeds one thousand cubic yards (including both cut and fill) shall be acted upon by the Planning Commission and shall be granted if the proposed grading will not adversely affect the drainage or lateral support of other properties in the area, is consistent with the San Carlos General Plan and Municipal Code, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.
e. Based on the extent of the grading plan, a Grading Bond, in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer, shall be posted and remain in place until all grading is complete and approved.
f. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant shall submit a proposed haul route plan and obtain approval from Public Works.
g. Elevations shall tie to a City benchmark. Assumed datums shall not be used. For City benchmark information please visit the City’s website. h. Applicant will need to submit 2 sets of wet signed 24” x 36” civil plan sheets that include a Cover Sheet, a separate Utility Plan, a separate Grading and Drainage Plan, Erosion Control, and a separate Detail Plan. Include the current San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program’s Construction BMP plan sheet.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 74
Draft Conditions of Approval: 703 Knoll Drive (050-094-100) 6 Applicant shall submit civil plan sheets per the City of San Carlos standards guidelines, standard details and municipal code.

44. If shoring is required, shoring shall not encroach into the Public Right of Way.

45. Driveway lengths and widths need to meet all requirements of San Carlos Municipal Code.

All driveway dimensions should be shown on plans.

46. The driveway approach serving the property needs to be ADA compliant. Make a note on the appropriate plan sheet and include City Standard Detail 9-1 or 9-5 in the plan set.

47. The applicant needs to repair or replace any locations where the existing curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway approach are cracked, damaged, or do not meet current ADA standards.

48. The property owner shall disclose public or private easements on their property and shall graphically represent such easements on plans submitted to the Building Division for property improvements. Property owners shall not build structures or add impervious surfaces over sewer, storm drain, or public utility easements without written permission from the Director of Public Works. The property owner shall consult with the County of San Mateo or property title documents regarding the exact location of any easements on the property.

49. Project shall comply with all requirements of the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit Provision C.3. including the requirements for Stormwater for Small Projects. Please refer to the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program’s (SMCWPPP) C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance Manual for assistance in implementing LID measures at the site, if applicable. http://flowstobay.org/newdevelopment.

50. Swimming pool and fire sprinkler test water, if applicable, shall be designed to discharge to onsite vegetated areas.

51. Landscaping within the driveway’s sight distance triangle shall be maintained to heights and standards set forth by San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.15.130.B, including that vegetation in the sight distance triangle shall be maintained to be below a height of three feet and street trees in the sight distance triangle shall be pruned at least seven feet above the established grade of the curb so as not to obstruct clear view by motor vehicle drivers.

Trees to remain and to be removed shall be clearly shown on the landscape plans.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 75

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 76

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 77

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 78

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 79

CITY HALL
600 ELM STREET
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070-3085

PLANNING DIVISION
TELEPHONE (650) 802-4263
FAX (650) 595-6763
WEB: http://www.cityofsancarlos.org
April 8, 2016
Lisa Wellman
Plan A Design Group
727 Industrial Road, Ste 100
San Carlos, CA 94070
Re: PLN2015-00141: 731 Knoll Drive, Landscape Plan for New Residence Dear Ms. Wellman:

Thank you for submitting an application for Landscape Review associated with a New Residence at 731 Knoll Drive, San Carlos. On March 7, 2016 the Residential Design Review Committee (RDRC) approved your project, subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

1. Landscaping shall be installed as demonstrated on the Landscaping Plan approved by the RDRC on March 7, 2016. All landscaping shall be installed at the same time finish materials are being installed for the residence.

2. The Oak Tree to the rear (referred to as Tree #7) is approved for removal.

3. Proof of the size of all new trees is required and shall be provided by submitting the following to the Planning Division of the City of San Carlos: a receipt of purchase for the trees, a photograph showing the entire replacement tree before planting, and a photograph showing the entire replacement tree after planting. These materials shall be submitted prior to a request for a Planning final inspection.

4. A Planning final inspection shall be required prior to a Building Division final to ensure that all planting is completed in strict accordance with the landscape plan date-stamped January 26, 2016.

5. Decisions by the Residential Design Review Committee may be appealed to the Planning Commission by filing a written appeal with the Planning Division. Any appeal must be filed within 10 days from the date of decision.

6. Efficient irrigation systems shall be used throughout all landscaped areas in accordance with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

7. Whenever feasible, project shall incorporate landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates other appropriate sustainable landscaping practices such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 80

8. Any changes determined to be substantive by Planning Staff shall require review and approval by the RDRC. All changes shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review prior to any changes made in the field.

9. No trees may be planted in the Right-Of-Way or easement without permission from the Public Works Department. If proposed, the tree species, size and location shall be preapproved by the Public Works Department.

10. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Building Division demonstrating the fence located within the easement will be removed prior to Building final inspection.

11. Landscaping within the right-of-way shall be planted at the same time as finish materials are installed at the new residence.

12. A 48-inch box replacement tree, (species to be determined by the Landscape Architect) shall be planted in the same location as the tree that is approved for removal.

As no appeal application was submitted prior to 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 17, 2016 the approval is now effective. Should you have any questions regarding the process or the content of this letter, please feel free to contact me at (650) 802-4285 or email: [email protected].

Sincerely,
Andrea Mardesich
Assistant Planner
City of San Carlos

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 81
Research on Trees Associated with 2016 Application for a New Residence at 731 Knoll Drive Project: 703 Knoll Drive under RDRC Review for a Major Addition Topic: Status of two Oak trees Located at 703 Knoll Drive (along the shared property line with 731 Knoll Drive)
At the July 5, 2022, RDRC hearing, a question arose about whether trees planted on the property of 703 Knoll, by the owner of 731 Knoll are considered protected trees and therefore require a Tree Protection Plan.

Background: In October 2015, the RDRC approved a new house at 731 Knoll Drive. (See Attachment 1 for project minutes). Subsequently the applicant applied for removal of an existing Oak Tree (referred to as “Tree #7) located on the 731 Knoll property and a revised landscaping plan was reviewed and the February 1, 2016, at the March 6, 2016, RDRC meetings (See Attachments 2 and 3 for project minutes). The previous owner at 703 Knoll Drive indicated that during demolition the construction crew for 731 Knoll Drive accidentally removed a mature Monterey Pine tree on the 703 Knoll Drive site. Monterey Pine trees were not and are not considered protected trees per the Municipal Code. The 703 Knoll property owner asked for a new tree be planted on his lot as compensation. To make up for the lost tree, the 731 Knoll Drive owner agreed to plant a tree of the neighbor’s choice on the 703 Knoll Drive site; however, this was not required as a condition of approval as the removed tree was not considered to be a protected tree. Refer minutes from February 1, 2016, and March 6, 2016 (Attachments 2 and 3).

Further, the motion from this meeting, as stated below, does not include requiring replacement Oak trees for the Monterey Pine, as a requirement from the City. The approved conditions of approval and approved plan also do not indicate a requirement to plant trees on the neighbor’s property, for loss of an unprotected tree (See Attachment 4). This motion refers to the request of the applicant for removal of the large oak tree located on the 731 Knoll property and a revised landscape plan that were the subject of the meeting.

Motion: “Committee Member Pedrin moved to approve the tree removal and landscape plan with additional Condition #12, which requires 48-inch box replacement tree, with the species to be determined by the Landscape Architect, to be located in the same location as the tree that is approved for removal.” Analysis: The (current and former) Protected Tree Ordinance categories Monterey Pine species as an unprotected tree regardless of size, and therefore, even if removed deliberately would not require any permit or replacement tree. Additionally, the two new Oak trees planted by the 731 Knoll property owner on the 703 Knoll property were as a courtesy and not a requirement from the City. The oak trees currently measure less than 6” and do not meet the size threshold requirement under the Municipal Code to classify as a Protected Tree. Based on the documents and past correspondence staff believes the two Oak trees in question along the 703 Knoll western property line are not protected trees.

The approved plans submitted to the Building Division do not show these trees as part of any requirement, and the final inspection addressed the landscaping plan for the site.

Reference images below:

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 82
Two Oak Trees in
question
Project Site
731 Knoll
Estimated location of
protected Oak tree
that was approved for
removal. Tree #7
Estimated location of
Monterey Pine tree
accidentally removed
in 2016.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 83
731 Knoll Approved Landscaping Plan showing major replacement tree locations Attachments

1. Meeting minutes – October 5, 2015, RDRC Meeting

2. Meeting Minutes – February 1, 2016, RDRC meeting

3. Meeting Minutes – March 6, 2016, RDRC meeting

4. Landscape Plan Conditions of Approval

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 84

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 85

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 86

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 87

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 88

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 89

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 90

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 91

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE

SPECIAL MEETING
March 7, 2016
5:00 P.M.

City Hall, Council Chambers, 600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA
www.cityofsancarlos.org

APPROVED MINUTES

ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Lisa Porras, Principal Planner David Silberman, Chair
Andrea Mardesich, Assistant Planner Bonnie McClure
Joaquin Pedrin
I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chair Silberman at 5:00 p.m.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.

IV. NEW ITEMS

a) Request for Approval of a Landscape Plan and Tree Removal - 731 Knoll Drive (APN: 050- 094-090).

Andrea Mardesich presented the item.

Chair Silberman asked about the tree that had already been removed.

Mark Howitson, property owner, responded that he worked with the neighbor to remove the tree.

Committee Member Pedrin as the City Arborist, Richard Huntington to expand on his report, and asked how old the tree is.

Richard Huntington responded that it was 100-150 years old. He noted that when he had first visited the site he did not know the location of the retaining walls.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 92
2 Kevin Kielty, Consulting Arborist, looked at the health and safety of the tree and possibility of failure. He used a drill bit to determine the strength of the tree. Mr. Kielty noted that about 75% of the tree would have to be removed in order to retain the tree. He agreed that the tree seemed to be about 100 years old.

Public Comment:

Fred Weissberg, neighbor, explained about the Monterey Pine that had been removed and asked that there be a replacement tree.

Sara Timby expressed concern over the oak tree and asked if the retaining wall could be changed.

Jason Fitzsimmons, Contractor, noted that there is a lot of loose soil and the new walls will help retain the soil.

Committee Member Pedrin moved to approve the tree removal and landscape plan with additional Condition #12, which requires 48-inch box replacement tree, with the species to be determined by the Landscape Architect, to be located in the same location as the tree that is approved for removal.

The motion was seconded by Committee Member McClure.

Motion passed 3-0.

Ayes: Silberman, McClure, Pedrin
Noes: None
Chair Silberman advised of the 10-day appeal period.

V. REPORTS & GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE

None.

VI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 93

CITY HALL
600 ELM STREET
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070-3085

Conditions:

2. The Oak Tree to the rear (referred to as Tree #7) is approved for removal.

6. Efficient irrigation systems shall be used throughout all landscaped areas in accordance with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 94

10. A landscape plan shall be submitted to the Building Division demonstrating the fence located within the easement will be removed prior to Building final inspection.

11. Landscaping within the right-of-way shall be planted at the same time as finish materials are installed at the new residence.

12. A 48-inch box replacement tree, (species to be determined by the Landscape Architect) shall be planted in the same location as the tree that is approved for removal.

Sincerely,
Andrea Mardesich
Assistant Planner
City of San Carlos

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 95
If you require translation for this notice, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 650-802-4222

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the San Carlos City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, January 23, 2023 at 7:00 p.m., for the purpose of hearing and considering all comments of all persons interested in or concerned with the appeal of Mark Howitson of the Planning Commission’s October 17, 2022 decision to uphold the Design Review approval for a residential addition at 703 Knoll Drive (APN: 050-094- 100) pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapters 18.04,18.18, 18.20, 18.27,18.29.

This project has been determined to be exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 15301, Class 1(e) “Existing Facilities”.

The agenda and relevant materials for this item will be available for viewing online - www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda; at the City Clerk’s Department in City Hall – 600 Elm Street; and at the San Carlos Library – 610 Elm Street, beginning Thursday, January 19, 2023. The public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the Council in–person in City Hall’s Council Chambers or remotely via Zoom. Details and instructions will be available on the agenda.

Questions regarding the project may be directed to Rucha Dande, Senior Planner at [email protected]. Comments may be sent via email to the City Clerk[email protected] and the City Council – [email protected]; or mailed to the City Clerk at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070, or made in person at the public hearing.

All persons interested in the above are hereby invited to participate remotely in this Public Hearing and be heard. If you challenge this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk prior to the public hearing.

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
Mailing Date: January 10, 2023
Publication Date: January 11, 2023

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 96

CALIFORNIA NEWSPAPER SERVICE BUREAU
SPEN#

D A I L Y J O U R N A L C O R P O R A T I O N
To the right is a copy of the notice you sent to us for publication in the ENQUIRER-BULLETIN. Please read this notice carefully and call us with any corrections. The Proof of Publication will be filed with the County Clerk, if required, and mailed to you after the last date below. Publication date(s) for this notice is (are):

Mailing Address : 915 E FIRST ST, LOS ANGELES, CA 90012 Telephone (800) 788-7840 / Fax (800) 464-2839
Visit us @ www.LegalAdstore.com

CRYSTAL MUI

CITY OF SAN CARLOS/CITY CLERK
600 ELM ST
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070

HRG NOTICE OF HEARING
703 Knoll Drive Appeal
01/11/2023
Publication
Total
$72.60
$72.60
Notice Type:

Ad Description

COPY OF NOTICE
3658125
!A000006202858!
The charge(s) for this order is as follows. An invoice will be sent after the last date of publication. If you prepaid this order in full, you will not receive an invoice.

City of San Carlos Notice of
Public Hearing - NOTICE IS
HEREBY GIVEN THAT the
San Carlos City Council will
hold a public hearing on
Monday, January 23, 2023 at
7:00 p.m., for the purpose of
hearing and considering all
comments of all persons
interested in or concerned
with the appeal of Mark
Howitson of the Planning
Commission's October 17,
2022 decision to uphold the
Design Review approval for
a residential addition at 703
Knoll Drive (APN: 050-094-
100) pursuant to San Carlos
Municipal Code Chapters

18.04,18.18, 18.20,

18.27,18.29. This project has
been determined to be
exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) 15301, Class 1(e)
“Existing Facilities”. The
agenda and relevant
materials for this item will be
available for viewing online -
www.cityofsancarlos.org/age
nda; at the City Clerk's
Department in City Hall –
600 Elm Street; and at the
San Carlos Library – 610
Elm Street, beginning
Thursday, January 19, 2023.

The public will have the
option to observe•the
meeting•aanndd aaddddrreessss tthhee
Council in–person in City
Hall's Council Chambers or remotely via Zoom. Details and instructions•wwiillll bbee available on the agenda. Questions regarding the project may be directed to Rucha Dande, Senior Planner at [email protected]. Comments may be sent via email to the City Clerk- City- [email protected] and the City Council – CityCoun- [email protected]; or mailed to the City Clerk at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070, or made in person at the public hearing. All persons interested in the above are hereby invited to participate remotely in this Public Hearing and be heard. If you challenge this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues
you or someone else raised
at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in
written correspondence
delivered to the City Clerk
prior to the public hearing.

Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Mailing Date: 1/10/23
Publication Date:
1/11/23
SPEN-3658125#
EXAMINER - ENQUIRERBULLETIN

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 97
050112210
1728 Elizabeth St
San Carlos, CA 94070-2949
050112150
1732 Elizabeth Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
050112160
1750 Elizabeth St
San Carlos, CA 94070
050112200
1827 Carmelita Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2956
050103140
840 Hinckley Rd Ste 120
Burlingame, CA 94010
050103070
1865 Carmelita Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2956
050103060
1881 Carmelita Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2956
050112170
2061 St Francisc Way
San Carlos, CA 94070
050094230
657 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2944
050103040
665 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070-2911
050112180
P O Box 226
San Carlos, CA 94070
050094220
677 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070
050103030
685 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070-2911
050094210
687 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2944
050112190

688 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2943
050103130
700 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070
050103020
701 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070-2913
050094100
703 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2942
050103090
706 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070
050103010
707 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070-2913
050093150
711 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070
050103100
San Carlos, CA 94070-2941
050093140
717 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070-0875
050093130
723 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070
050103110
724 Knoll Drive
San Carlos, CA 94070
050093120
727 Cordilleras Ave
San Carlos, CA 94070-2913
050103120
Gilbert William John Tr
730 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2941
050094090
731 Knoll Rd
San Carlos, CA 94070
050093160
732 Knoll Drive
San Carlos, CA 94070-2941
050093170
742 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2941

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 98
050093180
744 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2941
050094080
747 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2942
050093190
750 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2941
050094070
2646 E Red Knob Way
Heber, UT 84032
050094240
757 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-2942
050093200
760 Knoll Drive
San Carlos, CA 94070
050094250
765 Knoll Dr
San Carlos, CA 94070-0000

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 99
© Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.

0.07 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere

0.07 Miles This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.
0 0.04
2,257
San Mateo map
1:

San Mateo County

8.a
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 100

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 23, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting Resolutions Certifying the Focused General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report and Focused General Plan Update Consisting of Amendments to the Housing, Environmental Safety and Public Services, Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements and Associated Amendments to the City of San Carlos’ Zoning Ordinance, Sections

18.04 - Residential Districts, 18.05 – Mixed-Use Districts, 18.20 – Parking and Loading, and 18.41 – Terms and Definitions; and Adopting a Resolution Ratifying the 2023 – 2031 Housing Element and Corresponding Zoning Ordinance Amendments.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Planning and Transportation Commission recommends that the City Council take the following actions:

1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update; and

2. Adopt a Resolution to repeal the City of San Carlos 2015-2023 Housing Element and to adopt the City of San Carlos 2023-2031 Housing Element; and

3. Adopt a Resolution to repeal the 2030 City of San Carlos General Plan’s Community Safety and Services Element in its entirety and replace it with the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element and adopt amendments to the 2030 City of San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements; and

4. Adopt an Ordinance to amend the City of San Carlos’ Municipal Code Title 18, Zoning, Sections 18.04 - Residential Districts, 18.05 – Mixed-Use Districts, 18.20 – Parking and Loading, and 18.41 – Terms and Definitions, and related Zoning Map Amendments.

In addition, in order to satisfy the State Department of Housing and Community Development’s (“HCD”) firm deadline to adopt Housing Elements and any corresponding Zoning Ordinance amendments by January 31, 2023, staff is recommending that the City Council take the additional following action:

5. Adopt a Resolution to Ratify the 2023-2031 Housing Element and Corresponding Zoning Ordinance Amendments as adopted on January 23, 2023.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 101
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On May 26, 2020, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement with MIG in an amount not to exceed $800,000 to prepare a Focused General Plan Update to the Land Use, Housing, and Safety Elements plus Zoning Ordinance amendments and an associated Environmental Impact Report. The City Council appropriated $800,000 toward this project in fund C1906.

On January 24, 2022 the City Council authorized a contract amendment for additional $21,276, or for a total of $821,276.

The City was awarded a total of $349,441 in planning grants for this project (SB2: $160,000; LEAP: $150,000; REAP: $39,441), which resulted in a fiscal impact to the City in the amount of $471,835.

The proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element includes actionable implementation items the City would commit to completing throughout the duration of the Housing Element’s 8-year planning period. These are unfunded State mandates. At the time of implementation, if additional resources are necessary beyond the scope of the regular biennial Community Development Department’s Divisional budget allocations, staff would request additional funding at that time.

SUMMARY:

The City Council is required by the San Carlos Municipal and California Government Code to hold a public hearing for consideration of amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

According to State land use law, the City Council is the final decision-making body authorized to adopt changes to the San Carlos General Plan and Municipal Code.

The City of San Carlos’ Focused General Plan Update includes several interrelated documents:

1. The General Plan’s Housing Element for the planning period 2023-2031

2. Amendments to the General Plan’s Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements

3. The General Plan’s Environmental Safety and Public Services Element

4. Zoning Ordinance Amendments (to implement the 2023-2031 Housing Element)

5. The Focused General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report The purpose of this regularly scheduled and duly noticed meeting of the City Council on January 23, 2023, is to conduct a public hearing, accept public comment, close the public hearing, and consider the Planning and Transportation Commission’s recommendation to adopt four resolutions for adoption, plus one additional resolution recommended by staff.

This project implements the City Council’s Strategic Goal for Housing which states: The City of San Carlos will actively encourage and support the creation of housing to provide a safe, diverse and affordable supply by facilitating development of housing for all income levels; and further sets forth the following objective to achieve it: Study land use and other regulatory options to increase all types of housing.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 102
This project also implements a State law that requires all California cities and counties to address housing as part of their General Plans. The purpose of the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element is to establish housing goals, policies, and actions (implementation items and programs) in response to the City’s housing conditions and needs. The Housing Element is required to be updated every 8 years. The City’s current Housing Element covers the period between 2015 and 2023 and is recommended to be repealed and replaced in its entirety with the proposed 2023- 2031 Housing Element.

HCD has declared that it stands firm on its deadline that requires all cities and counties in the Bay Area region to adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 by January 31, 2023.

Should the City Council adopt the Focused General Plan Update project, specifically the Housing Element and the corresponding Zoning Ordinance amendments, at its January 23, 2023 meeting, the City of San Carlos would meet this mandated deadline.

In addition to this work, the Community Safety and Public Services Element of the 2030 General Plan has also been updated to address new State laws including SB 379 to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies. In addition, and pursuant to another new law, AB 2911, the proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element was submitted to the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection for review in November 2022 to ensure it addressed wildland fire risk reduction and mitigation. The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection found that the proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element satisfactorily complies with its requirements and such policies and programs have been included in the full Focused General Plan Update project.

BACKGROUND:

The Focused General Plan Update project is a culmination of a multi-year effort. The planning process for the Focused General Plan Update engaged many key audiences: the City Council Housing Subcommittee, the Planning and Transportation Commission, the City Council, various other commissions, a wide variety of stakeholders (local agencies and housing groups, community organizations, housing developers, and student groups, etc.), and the general public (residents of the community). Hundreds of residents, businesspeople, and other stakeholders participated across a series of activities. Outreach and participation for this planning process was different than previous years because much of the update process occurred during the COVID19 pandemic. Meetings were promoted through website updates, social media posts, mailers, and flyers posted in public spaces to advertise and invite the community to virtual workshops.

Service organizations were directly contacted to solicit participation in the program, and included organizations representing lower- and moderate-income households, seniors, and youth, among others.

Through this robust outreach and engagement process, the strategies in the Housing Element were defined. The City’s consultant, MIG, facilitated multiple virtual interactive community workshops that addressed housing-related issues as part of the Housing Element update process.

The workshops included a presentation, live polling, virtual whiteboard recording to collect input from the participants, and an interactive discussion. Prior to the workshops and surveys, City staff conducted robust community outreach to encourage maximum participation. This included social media posts on Facebook, NextDoor, Instagram, and Twitter. Announcements about the project and workshop were made at public meetings of the City Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, Economic Development Advisory Council, and Youth Advisory Council. In addition,

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 103
the workshops were promoted through the City’s Spotlight Newsletter, Good Living Newsletter, City Council Newsletter, Adult Community Center Newsletter, Chamber of Commerce Newsletter, and E-notify blasts. Grassroots efforts included booths at the San Carlos Farmers’ Market and flyers distributed throughout the Downtown.

Discussions about the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element were also interwoven into these community workshops, surveys, and committee, commission, and City Council meetings. Specifically, Workshop #1 gave an overview of what the Safety Element consists of and what aspects needed updating. Workshop #2 discussed the survey findings related to the Safety Element. Finally, in October 2022, there was a Planning and Transportation Commission Study Session dedicated specifically to reviewing the Draft Safety Element. In accordance with State Law, CAL FIRE provided recommended revisions to the draft Safety Element.

Across all Housing and Safety Element related workshops and surveys, there were 370 stakeholders who participated. The table below provides an overview of the Community Workshops and survey participants. Attachment 13 provides a detailed overview of the entire community engagement process and list of all related workshops, surveys, focus groups, subcommittee meetings, commission meetings, and City Council meetings.

Community
Workshop
Date / Date
Range
Topic Number of
Participants
Link to Summary
Reports
Survey #1 Mid-Oct. to
Dec. 7, 2020
Housing and
Environmental Safety
76 Summary of Survey #1
Workshop
#1
Nov. 30,
2020
Community Values,
Issues, and Concerns
65 Summary of Workshop
#1
Survey #2 Jan. 11 –
Feb. 12,
2021
Key Housing Priorities 75 Summary of Survey #1
Workshop
#2
Jan. 20,
2021
Values and Land Use
Strategies
75 Summary of Workshop
#2
Workshop
#3
May 26,
2021
Housing Changes and
Solutions
37 Summary of Workshop
#3
Workshop
#4
Aug.11,
2021
Housing Changes and
Zoning Strategies
42 Summary of Workshop
#4
ANALYSIS:
2023-2031 Housing Element
All California cities and counties are required to have a Housing Element included in their General Plans. The Housing Element establishes housing objectives, policies, and actions (i.e., programs) in response to community housing conditions and needs. The draft 2023-2031 Housing Element is designed to respond to current and near-term housing needs in San Carlos and to provide a framework for the community’s longer-term approach to addressing its housing needs.

State Law Requirements
Unlike other mandatory General Plan elements, the Housing Element requires periodic updating and is subject to detailed statutory requirements and mandatory review by HCD.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 104
State law establishes detailed content requirements for Housing Elements and a regional “fair share” approach for distributing new housing throughout all communities in the Bay Area. The law recognizes that for the private sector and non-profit housing sponsors to address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans and implement regulations that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development.

The City of San Carlos’ fair share of the region’s housing need is 2,735 new units for the 2023- 2031 planning period. Of these 2,735 new units, 1,602 must be affordable to persons with income levels that are below 120% of the median income of San Mateo County (see Table 1 below).

Table 1. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for 2023-2031, San Carlos Income Level Projected Housing
Need
Percentage
Distribution
Very Low (up to 50% of area median
income) 739 27%
Low (51% to 80% of area median
income) 425 16%
Moderate (81% to 120% of area median
income) 438 16%
Above Moderate (>120% area median
income) 1,133 41%
TOTAL 2,735 100%
Since not every property identified for housing development is guaranteed to be constructed with the amount of affordable housing to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). A common practice by many jurisdictions is to plan for a higher number of units as back up, or as “buffer” units. Although HCD’s focus will be to ensure San Carlos has enough sites to accommodate 2,735 units, staff and the consultant team recommended an additional 30% of the low-income RHNA of 1,602 (481 units) as a minimum to provide the buffer that HCD recommends.

This results in a total of 3,216 units to plan for in this housing element update. Because there are a number of projects in the pipeline (352 units) and some identified sites may be removed through the HCD review process and deemed inadequate, an additional small buffer was included in this first draft Housing Element, resulting in a total of 3,595 housing units to plan for in this housing element update.

The State also requires Housing Elements to:
▪ Provide goals, policies, quantified objectives and scheduled programs to preserve, improve, and, develop housing.
▪ Identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community.
▪ Identify, and where possible, remove constraints to housing development.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 105
▪ Identify adequate sites that will be zoned and available within the Housing Element planning period – between 2023 and 2031 – to meet the City’s fair share of regional housing needs at all income levels.
▪ Undergo review by HCD and be certified by HCD in compliance with State law.

Housing Element policies must be clear and well formulated to provide unambiguous direction for making decisions. The State requires that the goals, policies, and actions (i.e., programs) promote the following topic areas:
• Support the provision of adequate sites;
• Assist in the development of new units;
• Conserve and improve the existing housing stock;
• Preserve at-risk units;
• Remove or mitigate constraints to the production of housing; and, • Ensure equal housing opportunity.

Although the Housing Element must be responsive to the State’s statutory requirements, San Carlos’ draft 2023-2031 Housing Element is a local plan and reflects the vision and priorities of the community as expressed in the City’s General Plan, and as received from the community throughout the update process.

Based on the sites that have been identified to meet these housing needs, staff has identified the ability to accommodate a total of 3,173 new units (see Table 2 below), which is just shy of 43 units from the buffer goal of 3,216 new units, but is still 790 more than the base RHNA requirement of 2,735 new units.

Table 2: Sites to Meet the RHNA
Project
Extremely /
Very LowIncome (0-
50% AMI)
LowIncome
(50-80%
AMI)
Moderate
-Income
(80-120%
AMI)
Above
Moderate
-Income
(+120%)
Total
RHNA After Approved /
Proposed Projects are
credited 736 362 431 854 2,383
Projected ADU construction 10 61 102 30 203
Vacant/Underutilized
Residential Sites 31 18 81 238 368
Vacant/Underutilized MixedUse Sites 986 584 293 739 2,602 Total Sites 1027 663 476 1007 3,173
RHNA Status (+surplus/-
deficit)
+291 +301 +45 +153 +790
The primary strategy to meet the City’s State mandated RHNA allocation is to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow greater densities (units per acre) and taller building heights in the City’s multifamily and mixes-use zoning districts. This is further described in the next section below.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 106
The proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element was submitted to HCD in October 2022 for review.

On January 6, 2023, City staff received a copy of HCD’s review letter and made revisions to the Housing Element, which are shown in track changes and attached to this staff report.

Related Zoning Ordinance Amendments
To achieve the RHNA targets to accommodate new housing opportunities in San Carlos for current and future residents, amendments are required to San Carlos’s Zoning Ordinance, which is a critical part of this Housing Element update and discussed further below.

In developing a strategy to accommodate San Carlos’ fair share of housing, staff and the consultant team worked with participants at community workshops where three big themes emerged:
• Place new housing units in existing residential neighborhoods where housing is already allowed under current zoning regulations.
• Focus most of the housing growth along major transit corridors next to everyday needs and services and in higher-density zoning districts that allow residential. • Amend the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance to increase densities (units/acre) and building heights to accommodate additional housing.

Table 3 below, copied from the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element, summarizes the primary changes to Zoning Districts that will accommodate and meet the State mandated RHNA.

Table 3: Proposed Changes to San Carlos Zoning Densities and Building Heights The proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance were shared with the City Council on September 27, 2021 and were further shared in detail with the Planning and Transportation Commission on September 19 and October 17, 2022, and with the City Council on September 26 and November 28, 2022. In addition, City staff sent a courtesy notice to all individuals who own property in the

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 107
City’s multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts to inform them that their properties were proposed for upzones and height increases. On January 3, 2023, the Planning and Transportation Commission adopted Resolution No. PTC 2023-04 recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments.

Related General Plan Amendments
The 2030 General Plan has been amended to be consistent with the proposed draft 2023-2031 Housing Element. This necessitated revisions to the Land Use Element and a minor revision to the Noise Element. In addition, the update of the Community Safety and Public Services Element required associated amendments to the Circulation and Environmental Management Elements.

The draft revisions were shared with the Planning and Transportation Commission on October 17, and with the City Council on November 28, 2022. Since then, the following amendments have been made in responses to comments received.

Land Use Element
New edits to the Land Use Element are shown below.
• Action LU-1.8: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address the new multiple-family and mixed-use designations as part of the 2023 Focused General Plan Update. • Policy LU-9.10: On school and formerly school sites, allow low and moderate income rental housing units made available to local educational employees, local public employees, and then the general public at densities and development standards in accordance with AB2295, 2022. In the event of closure of a school, the primary planned use of these sites re- mains for school and associated recreation purposes, or housing.

The school site should be considered for acquisition by the City. • Policy LU-9.14: Legally nonconforming multi-family residential structures located within multi-family residential zoning districts may be replaced, restored, or rebuilt, or repaired and used consistent with the Zoning Ordinance in effect at the time the structure was originally constructed only upon issuance of a conditional use permit approved by the Planning Commission the time of the replacement, restoring, or rebuilding. • Policy LU-9.21: Consider allowing public school districts and local private schools to provide affordable housing units on school or school-related sites concurrent with continued school operations.
• Action LU-9.3: Update development standards to allow for single family attached, multiple family detached, and/or multiple family attached affordable housing units to be constructed and maintained concurrent with school operations.

Environmental Safety and Public Services Element
The following edits have been made to the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element.

Specifically, Action ESPS-5.6 is a new action presented in response to public comment received on the Draft EIR.

Action ESPS 3.7: Adopt a formal written policy. Periodically re-evaluate the City’s policy regarding the City’s policy allowing rebuilding in the VHFHSZ. Periodically, re-evaluate the policy to assure

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 108
consistency with State law and local preferences. Allowing rebuilding in the VHFSHZ. If the policy is unwritten, adopt a formal written policy.

Action ESPS-5.6: Prepare regulations that address biosafety levels (BSL) for new life science, biotechnology, or other scientific developments to ensure a healthy and safe San Carlos community.

Final Environmental Impact Report
The Focused General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR) provides a complete evaluation of the Focused General Plan Update as the proposed “Project”, and the cumulative impacts of the Project along with other existing and proposed uses and alternatives to the Project (See Attachments 10, 11 and 12). The Final EIR consists of:
1) The Draft EIR
2) Comment letters received during the review period for the Draft EIR 3) Responses to the comment letters
4) The Final EIR also includes the following modifications to the Draft EIR:
a. Additional minor General Plan text changes.
b. Text changes to provide clarity to the analysis, make minor text corrections, or fix grammatical or typographic errors.
c. Text changes to reflect the comments received on the Draft EIR. d. Minor changes to zoning (Zoning Amendments) for clarification purposes.

These revisions do not constitute considerably different changes in the project description, environmental setting, conclusions of the environmental analysis, or in the mitigation requirements incorporated into the project or otherwise provide significant new information that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

In addition, due to changes to the Housing Element required by HCD in its January 6, 2023 comment letter, a Final EIR Addendum has been prepared to account for these changes. Thus, the Final EIR Amendment is presenting information that addresses these items to be included in the Final EIR of the proposed Focused General Plan Update Project.

None of the criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 (Recirculation of an EIR Prior to Certification) indicating the need for recirculation of the Draft EIR has been met as a result of the revisions. In particular:
• No new significant environmental impact due to the project or due to a new mitigation measure has been identified;
• No substantial increase in the severity of a significant environmental impact has been identified; and
• No additional feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others analyzed in the Draft EIR has been identified that would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project.

The additional text revisions in this Final EIR Amendment are described and provided as an attachment to this report.

Evaluation of the Project

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 109
Final EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects that could result from implementation of the Focused General Plan Update. Those effects were related to air quality, biological resources, and tribal cultural resources, which would be reduced to below a level of significance. A significant unmitigable impact associated with air quality (construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions, including cumulative impacts) was identified and thus a statement of overriding considerations is required and has been included.

The two impacts cannot be mitigated and are significant and unavoidable. These impacts are noted as AIR-1 and AIR-2 in the EIR.

Review and Acceptance of the EIR
According to State statute and the San Carlos Municipal Code, the Planning and Transportation Commission has made a recommendation to the City Council on adoption of the EIR and the Focused General Plan Update. Where significant unavoidable impacts are identified, findings and a statement of overriding considerations are made at the City Council level where the General Plan is approved and the EIR is certified.

In recommending project approval, the City Council must make a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant but unavoidable environmental effects. The findings indicate that the decision makers have weighed the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Focused General Plan Update against significant unavoidable environmental impacts and determined that the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable” (See Attachment 1 – Resolution Recommending the City Council Certify the EIR). It is generally common for General Plan EIRs in California to trigger air quality impacts and for cities to adopt a statement of overriding considerations for these impacts since they are regional issues beyond the control of local governments.

NEXT STEPS
Following the City Council’s actions, staff will present the adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element to HCD for certification.

The State stands firm on its requirement that all jurisdictions in the Bay Area have an adopted Housing Element by January 31, 2023.

RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Transportation Commission recommends that the City Council take the following actions:

1. Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update; and

2. Adopt a Resolution to repeal the City of San Carlos 2015-2023 Housing Element and to adopt the City of San Carlos 2023-2031 Housing Element; and

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 110

In addition, in order to satisfy the State Department of Housing and Community Development’s (“HCD”) firm deadline to adopt Housing Elements and also any corresponding Zoning Ordinance amendments by January 31, 2023, staff is recommending that the City Council take the additional following action:

5. Adopt a Resolution to Ratify the 2023-2031 Housing Element and Corresponding Zoning Ordinance Amendments as adopted on January 23, 2023.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Proceed with all five (5) recommended actions; or

2. Do not proceed with all five (5) recommended actions; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, Community Development Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution Recommending Council Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report a. Exhibit A – Draft EIR
b. Exhibit A – Draft EIR Appendices
c. Exhibit A – Final EIR
d. Exhibit A – Final EIR Addendum
e. Exhibit B – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

2. Resolution Recommending City Council Adopt the 2023-2031 Housing Element a. Exhibit A – Housing Element Statutory Provisions Checklist b. Exhibit B – Findings Responding to Letter from Department of Housing and Community Development dated January 06, 2023

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 111
c. Exhibit C – Proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element

3. Resolution Recommending City Council Adopt Amendments to the 2030 General Plan’s Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Safety and Public Services, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements
a. Exhibit A – Proposed Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements
b. Exhibit B – Proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element

4. Resolution Recommending City Council Adopt Zoning Ordinance Amendments a. Exhibit A – Proposed Zoning Amendments
b. Exhibit B – Proposed Zoning Map

5. Resolution to Ratify the 2023 – 2031 Housing Element and Corresponding Zoning Ordinance Amendments

6. Proposed Land Use Map

7. HCD Comment Letter of January 6, 2023

8. Civic Engagement Summary

9. Proof of Publication

10. Planning and Transportation Commission Resolution No. PTC 2023-01

11. Planning and Transportation Commission Resolution No. PTC 2023-02

12. Planning and Transportation Commission Resolution No. PTC 2023-03

13. Planning and Transportation Commission Resolution No. PTC 2023-04

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 112
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS FOCUSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE.

WHEREAS, in May 2020 the City Council of the City of San Carlos approved a professional services agreement with MIG for consulting services to prepare a Focused General Plan Update, corresponding Zoning Ordinance amendments, and an Environmental Impact Report, altogether referred to as the “Project”, in response to the City Council’s Strategic Objective to study land use and other regulatory options to increase all types of housing pursuant to the State mandate to update the San Carlos Housing Element consistent with State law; and, WHEREAS, the City solicited public input through community surveys from mid-October through early December 2020 and again from early January 2021 through mid-February 2021; and,
WHEREAS, the City held public outreach workshops with the community on November 30, 2020; January 20, 2021; May 26, 2021; and August 11, 2021 to discuss housing and environmental safety; community values, issues, and concerns; key housing priorities; land use strategies; housing changes and solutions; and housing changes and zoning strategies; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021 the City Council held a study session to receive a status report on the Housing Element Update process for the 2023-2031 planning period, including proposed zoning density and building height increases; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2022 the City of San Carlos staff and MIG consulting team held a scoping meeting at a regular meeting of the Planning and Transportation Commission to solicit input on the project’s forthcoming Environmental Impact Report for the Housing Element Update and other associated amendments to the San Carlos General Plan and Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2022 the Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed a Preliminary Draft Housing Element and provided comments to staff prior to submitting the Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for review; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 2022 the City Council reviewed a Preliminary Draft Housing Element and provided comments to staff prior to submitting the Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development for review; and WHEREAS, the Focused General Plan update includes these interrelated documents:

The San Carlos Housing Element for the planning period 2023-2031; associated amendments to the Land Use, Circulation, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements; the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element, and Noise Elements; Zoning Ordinance Amendments (to implement the 2023-2031 Housing Element), the San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report, and the Final EIR Amendment which includes further text revisions to the Draft EIR and Final EIR volume, a revised map of proposed Opportunity Sites, and a revised Appendix B containing the revised Housing Element Update, and all documents incorporated therein; and

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 113
2 WHEREAS, an environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared for the proposed City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Project and circulated for a 45-day public review to solicit agency and public input on the analysis of the potential environmental effects associated with implementation of the Project;
WHEREAS, the Findings of Fact (Findings) and Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) presented herein address the environmental effects associated with the Project that are described and analyzed within the Final EIR. These Findings have been made pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), specifically Public Resources Code Sections 21081 and 21081.6, as well as the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) Sections 15091 and 15093; and WHEREAS, Further, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, whenever significant effects cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, the City as the decision-making agency is required to balance, as applicable, the benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered “acceptable,” in which case the lead agency must adopt a formal statement of overriding considerations; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects that could result from implementation of the project. Those effects were related to air quality, biological resources, and tribal cultural resources, which would be reduced to below a level of significance.

A significant unmitigable impact associated with air quality (construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions, including cumulative impacts) was identified and thus a statement of overriding considerations is required; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified goals, policies and actions contained in the updated Environmental Safety and Public Services Element related to potential risks associated with operations at the San Carlos Airport and concluded that conformance with and implementation of those goals, actions and policies as well as with the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for the environs of the San Carlos Airport would reduce potential safety hazards and excessive noise impacts to less than significant levels: and WHEREAS, there are no proposed housing land uses within the flight path area of the San Carlos Airport and the proposed building heights are limited to a maximum of 75 feet, which is below the 150-foot limit contained in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), on January 3, 2023, the City of San Carlos Planning and Transportation Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, received public comment, and adopted Resolution No. PTC 2023-01 recommending that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) for the San Carlos Focused General Plan Update; make findings relating to significant impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives, and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT:

1. The above recitals and findings are hereby incorporated by this reference and are hereby

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 114
3 approved.

2. Having received, reviewed, and considered the information in the Final EIR for this project, as well as the supporting administrative record, the City hereby makes the findings set forth herein pursuant to, and in accordance with, Sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code.

3. Environmental Effects Found Not to be Significant
The subject program-level EIR is intended to serve as a public information and disclosure document identifying and analyzing those environmental impacts resulting from the project that are expected to be significant and describing mitigation measure and alternatives that could avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts and increase beneficial effects.

Through project scoping and the environmental analysis contained within the Final EIR, it was determined that the Project would not result in a potential significant effect on the environment with respect to aesthetics, agricultural and forestry resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire. Therefore, no further findings are required for these subject areas.

4. Findings for Significant but Mitigated Effects
The following findings have been made for the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR related to biological resources and tribal cultural resources.

Impact BIO-1: Project-Specific Biological Resources Evaluation. The project could have a significant adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species listed as candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife.

Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. (CEQA Section 15091(a)(1)).

Mitigation Measures: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the following mitigation measures have been included in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Prior to construction of new housing on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, and/or vegetation thinning or creation of fuel breaks, a project-specific biological resources evaluation shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The biologist shall utilize relevant resources such as the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) as well as a field survey covering the project site and adjacent areas. A biological resources report or memo shall be prepared documenting the results of the evaluation, to a level of detail appropriate for the project. At a minimum, the report or memo shall include a description of existing vegetation, habitats, and aquatic features on the project site; an evaluation of special-status species and sensitive habitats that could occur on the site; and suitable mitigation measures as needed to avoid project-related impacts to biological resources.

Mitigation measures from the biological resources evaluation shall be incorporated into

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 115
4 the CEQA document for the project and/or adopted as project conditions of approval.

Applies To: New housing development on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks.

Significance after Mitigation: With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, significant environmental effects to biological resources (Project-Specific Biological Resources Evaluation) would be reduced to less than significant.

Impact BIO-2: Nesting Birds, Bat Habitat. The project could have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: To avoid impacts to nesting birds and avoid potential violation of state and federal laws pertaining to birds, all construction of new housing (including but not limited to mobilization and staging, clearing, grubbing, tree removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading) and/or vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks should occur outside the avian nesting season (that is, prior to February 1 or after September 15) if possible. If construction and/or vegetation thinning or creation of fuel breaks occurs within the avian nesting season (from February 1 to September 15), all suitable habitats located within the project’s area of disturbance including staging and storage areas plus a 250-foot (passerines) and 1,000-foot (raptor nests) buffer around these areas shall be thoroughly surveyed, as feasible, for the presence of active nests by a qualified biologist no more than five days before commencement of any site disturbance activities and equipment mobilization. If project activities are delayed by more than five days, an additional nesting bird survey shall be performed. Active nesting is present if a bird is building a nest, sitting in a nest, a nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are observed carrying food to the nest. The results of the surveys shall be documented.

If pre-construction nesting bird surveys result in the location of active nests, no site disturbance and mobilization of heavy equipment (including but not limited to equipment staging, fence installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading), shall take place within 250 feet of non-raptor nests and 1,000 feet of raptor nests, or as determined by a qualified biologist, until the chicks have fledged.

Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Applies To: All housing construction and/or vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks during the nesting bird season (February 1 through September 15).

Mitigation Measure BIO-3a: Bat Habitat Assessment. Prior to removal of trees or structures for housing development or fire hazard reduction, a qualified biologist shall

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 116
5 conduct a bat habitat assessment of trees and structures to be removed, as well as surrounding trees and structures. The biologist shall search for large cavities and crevices in trees and structures that could support maternity roosts as well as habitat for specialstatus bat species. Signs of bats such as guano or the smell of bats shall also be noted.

Results of the bat habitat assessment shall be documented.

If no suitable roosting habitat or signs of bats are found, then no further action is required, and the project may proceed as planned. If suitable roosting habitat or signs of bats are found, then Mitigation Measure 3b shall be implemented.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3b: Dusk Emergence Bat Survey. If suitable roosting habitat or signs of bats are found in trees or structures to be removed on a new housing site or fire fuel reduction area, a qualified biologist shall conduct a dusk emergence survey for roosting bats within 14 days prior to the removal of the tree(s) or structure(s). The biologist shall monitor all suitable roosting trees and structures at dusk for emerging bats, using acoustic equipment to identify the species. Results of the survey shall be documented.

If no roosting bats are found during the survey, then no further action is required, and the project may proceed as planned. If roosting bats are found during the survey, a disturbance-free buffer zone shall be established around the roost site during the maternity season (April 15-September 15), as determined by a qualified biologist until the maternity season is over. Outside the maternity season, roosting bats may be excluded from the tree(s) or structure(s) prior to tree removal as directed by a qualified biologist. If a specialstatus bat is found, the roosting site shall be preserved if feasible and CDFW shall be consulted prior to exclusion.

Applies To: Any housing project or fuel reduction project that requires removal of trees or structures.

Significance after Mitigation: With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, significant environmental effects to biological resources (Nesting Birds, Bat Habitat) would be reduced to less than significant.

Impact BIO-3: The project could 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.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 117
6 or memo shall be prepared documenting the results of the evaluation, to a level of detail appropriate for the project. At a minimum, the report or memo shall include a description of existing vegetation, habitats, and aquatic features on the project site; an evaluation of special-status species and sensitive habitats that could occur on the site; and suitable mitigation measures as needed to avoid project-related impacts to biological resources.

Mitigation measures from the biological resources evaluation shall be incorporated into the CEQA document for the project and/or adopted as project conditions of approval.

Applies To: New housing development on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks.

Mitigation measures from the biological resources evaluation shall be incorporated into the CEQA document for the project and/or adopted as project conditions of approval.

Applies To: New housing development on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks.

Impact BIO-5: The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 118
7 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. (CEQA Section 15091(a)(1)).

Mitigation measures from the biological resources evaluation shall be incorporated into the CEQA document for the project and/or adopted as project conditions of approval.

Applies To: New housing development on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks.

Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements. Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Applies To: All housing construction and/or vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 119
8 during the nesting bird season (February 1 through September 15).

Mitigation Measure BIO-3a: Bat Habitat Assessment. Prior to removal of trees or structures for housing development or fire hazard reduction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a bat habitat assessment of trees and structures to be removed, as well as surrounding trees and structures. The biologist shall search for large cavities and crevices in trees and structures that could support maternity roosts as well as habitat for specialstatus bat species. Signs of bats such as guano or the smell of bats shall also be noted.

Results of the bat habitat assessment shall be documented.

Applies To: Any housing project or fuel reduction project that requires removal of trees or structures.

Impact TRIB-1: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource.

Mitigation Measure TRIB‐1: Consider all Native American Archaeological Discoveries to be Significant Resources. All Native American artifacts (tribal finds) shall be considered

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 120
9 as a significant Tribal Cultural Resource, pursuant to PRC 21074 until the lead agency has enough evidence to make a determination of significance. The City shall coordinate with an archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications, as well as an appropriate tribe or tribes, as determined by the NAHC, to develop an appropriate treatment plan for the resources. The plan may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to address treatment of the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. An archaeological report shall be written detailing all archaeological finds and submitted to the City and the Northwest Information Center.

Significance after Mitigation: With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, significant environmental effects to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant.

5. Findings for Significant and Unavoidable Effects
Public Resources Code 21081 and 21081.5, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, require that the City balance the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefit of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental effects when determining to approve a project. And if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effect, the adverse effects may be considered “acceptable.”
A significant and unavoidable effect related to air quality (construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions, including cumulative impacts) was identified for the Project. The following findings and statement of overriding considerations outline the specific reasons to support the City’s approval of the Project.

Impact AIR-1: The project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Finding: The City finds that this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Require a Project-level Construction Assessment for New Discretionary Development Projects. The City shall require applicants to submit a quantitative project-level construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions analysis for future discretionary development projects that are not exempt under CEQA and do not meet the BAAQMD screening criteria. The estimated construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions shall be compared against the thresholds of significance maintained by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and, if emissions are shown to be above BAAQMD thresholds, the City shall require the imposition and implementation of mitigation measures to reduce emissions below the thresholds that have been exceeded. Mitigation measures to reduce emissions could include, but are not limited to:

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 121
10 • Selection of specific construction equipment (e.g., specialized pieces of equipment with smaller engines or equipment that will be more efficient and reduce engine runtime);
• Requiring equipment to use alternative fuel sources (e.g., electric-powered and liquefied or compressed natural gas), meet cleaner emission standards (e.g., U.S.

EPA Tier IV Final emissions standards for equipment greater than 50-horsepower), and/or utilizing added exhaust devices (e.g., Level 3 Diesel Particular Filter); • Minimizing the idling time of diesel-powered construction equipment to two minutes; and
• Application of Low-VOC paints to interior and/or exterior surfaces (e.g., paints that meet BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 3 requirements).

Significance after Mitigation: The City finds that the above mitigation measures to reduce impacts associated with obstructing implementation of the applicable air quality plan are feasible and are adopted. However, these measures would not fully mitigate these air quality impacts. Therefore, impacts related to obstructing implementation of the applicable air quality plan are considered to be significant and unavoidable.

Impact AIR-2: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions to a level that is below the BAAQMDrecommended threshold of significance. However, it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all future development projects occurring under implementation of the proposed project would be able to reduce potential criteria air pollutant emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 122
11 • Selection of specific construction equipment (e.g., specialized pieces of equipment with smaller engines or equipment that will be more efficient and reduce engine runtime);
• Requiring equipment to use alternative fuel sources (e.g., electric-powered and liquefied or compressed natural gas), meet cleaner emission standards (e.g., U.S.

Significance after Mitigation: The City finds that the above mitigation measures to reduce impacts associated with a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants are feasible and are adopted. However, these measures would not fully mitigate these air quality impacts. Therefore, impacts related to a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants are considered to be significant and unavoidable.

6. Statement of Overriding Considerations
Pursuant to PRC Section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a) and (b), the decision-making agency is required to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered “acceptable” (14 CCR 15093[a]).

CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened.

Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (14 CCR 15093[b]).

In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Carlos finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and the MMRP, when implemented, will avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant effects identified in the EIR for the Focused General Plan Update (Focused GPU). However, certain significant impacts of the proposed Focused GPU are unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. These significant unavoidable impacts result from air quality impacts (construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions, including cumulative impacts).

The City finds that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR that are within the purview of the City would be implemented with the proposed Focused GPU, and that those mitigation measures that may be within another agency’s discretion have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. As identified below, the City further finds that the remaining significant unavoidable effects are outweighed and are found to be acceptable due to the following specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits based on the facts set forth above, the Final EIR, and the record.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 123
12 The City finds that any one of the benefits set forth below is sufficient by itself to warrant approval of the proposed Focused GPU. This determination is based on the Findings herein and the evidence in the record. Having balanced the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts against each of the benefits, the City hereby adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations for the following reasons:
1) The Focused GPU will provide long-term growth and enhancement of the community through fulfillment of the objectives stated below. a. Promote the preservation and improvement of the quality of existing housing and neighborhoods.
b. Encourage housing development located close to transit, Downtown, and along El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue with high quality, higher density, multi-family housing.
c. Assist in the development of new housing that is affordable at all income levels.
d. Remove and/or mitigate potential governmental constraints to the provision of adequate, affordable housing.
e. Provide adequate housing for special needs populations. f. Reduce or eliminate discrimination in the provision of housing. g. Reduce the potential loss of life, injury, and property damage due to seismic and geologic hazards.
h. Reduce hazards associated with flooding or inundation from inland flooding and Sea Level Rise. Protect lives and property from risks associated with wildfire-related emergencies.
i. Protect the community from the harmful effects of hazardous materials. j. Combat housing discrimination, lessen racial bias, lessen historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access to foster inclusive communities and achieve racial equity.
k. Continue effective emergency response procedures to ensure public safety in the event of natural or man-made disasters.
l. Identify communities most vulnerable to climate change impacts and establish new goals, policies, and programs for equitable public safety, emergency preparedness, response, and recovery.
2) The Focused GPU contains goals, policies, and programs that will provide City staff and discretionary bodies with a foundation for decisions for long-range planning related to physical development and public services that are intended to achieve the planning goals set forth in the Housing Element and Environmental Safety and Public Services Element of the City’s General Plan and that will comply with applicable State law.

On balance, the City finds that there are specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations associated with the proposed Focused GPU that serve to override and outweigh the significant unavoidable effects of the proposed Focused GPU, and, thus, the adverse effects are considered acceptable.

Therefore, the City hereby adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations.

7. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 124
13 a. As referenced above in the findings, a MMRP has been prepared for the project and is to be adopted concurrently with these findings and statement of overriding considerations pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1). The MMRP is a separate stand-alone document that will be used by the City to track compliance with the project mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period, which includes pre-construction coordination, construction, and post-construction documentation for future development projects. (Exhibit A).

8. Adoption
a. The City Council hereby certifies the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update (Exhibit A).
*****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of January 2023, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ ________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:

A. Focused General Plan Update; Draft Environmental Impact Report; Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Appendices; Final Environmental Impact Report; Final EIR Amendments B. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 125

EXHIBIT A
City of San Carlos
Focused General Plan Update
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Draft Environmental Impact Report Appendices
Final Environmental Impact Report
Found at the following site:
https://www.sancarlos2040.org/documents under “NEW! Draft Documents for the Focused General Plan Update – December 2022” and as listed below:

7. Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”)
o Draft Environmental Impact Report Appendices

8. Draft Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”)

9. Final EIR Amendment

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 126

EXHIBIT B
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
CEQA Statute Section 21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 require a public agency to adopt a reporting or monitoring program (MMRP) to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures adopted by the agency at the time of project approval. A mitigation monitoring program would therefore be required for the San Carlos Focused General Plan Update EIR to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures that are adopted and incorporated into the project.

Adoption of the MMRP would occur at the time of project approval.

This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, which state:
“When adopting a final EIR with findings as required under 14 CCR section 15091(a)(1) the lead agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects” (§15097(a)); and
“The Lead Agency may choose whether its program will monitor mitigation, report on mitigation, or both. “Reporting” generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the decision-making body or authorized staff person. A report may be required at various stages during project implementation or upon completion of the mitigation measure. “Monitoring” is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project oversight. There is often no clear distinction between monitoring and reporting and the program best suited to ensuring compliance in any given instance will usually involve elements of both.” (§15097(c)) The table beginning on the next page lists the impacts, mitigation measures, and timing of the mitigation measure (when the measure will be implemented) related to the Project. The “Impact” column lists each significant impact, by resource topic, that is identified in the EIR and for which mitigation measures are recommended. The “Mitigation Measure” column provides the full text of each mitigation measure identified in the EIR. The “Monitoring” column describes (1) the “implementation entity” responsible for carrying out each mitigation measure (such a “project applicant” or “City of San Carlos Planning Division and Building Division”); (2) mitigation implementation timing requirements (e.g., at the completion of a particular future individual project development review or construction phase, prior to occupancy, or when some other specific threshold is reached); and (3) the entity responsible for performing the monitoring of each mitigation measure (the “monitoring and verification entity;” e.g., a City department or agency, another public agency, or some other entity).

According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(2), “Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.” Therefore, all mitigation measures as listed in this MMRP will be adopted by the City of San Carlos when the project is approved.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 127

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Air Quality
Impact AIR-1: The
project would conflict with
or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality
plan.

This impact would be
considered significant and
unavoidable even with the
incorporation of feasible
mitigation measures.
(Significant and
Unavoidable Impact)
Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Require a
Project-level Construction Assessment for
New Discretionary Development Projects.

The City shall require applicants to submit a
quantitative project-level construction criteria
air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions
analysis for future discretionary development
projects that are not exempt under CEQA and do
not meet the BAAQMD screening criteria. The
estimated construction criteria air pollutant and
toxic air contaminant emissions shall be
compared against the thresholds of significance
maintained by the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) and, if
emissions are shown to be above BAAQMD
thresholds, the City shall require the imposition
and implementation of mitigation measures to
reduce emissions below the thresholds that have
been exceeded. Mitigation measures to reduce
emissions could include, but are not limited to:

Project Applicant City of San
Carlos Planning
Division and
Building
Division
Prior to
discretionary
project approval.
• Selection of specific construction
equipment (e.g., specialized pieces of
equipment with smaller engines or equipment
that will be more efficient and reduce engine
runtime);
• Requiring equipment to use alternative
fuel sources (e.g., electric-powered and
liquefied or compressed natural gas), meet
cleaner emission standards (e.g., U.S. EPA Tier

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 128

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
IV Final emissions standards for equipment
greater than 50-horsepower), and/or utilizing
added exhaust devices (e.g., Level 3 Diesel
Particular Filter);
• Minimizing the idling time of dieselpowered construction equipment to two minutes; and
• Application of Low-VOC paints to
interior and/or exterior surfaces (e.g., paints that
meet BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 3
requirements).

Impact AIR-2: The
project would result in a
cumulatively considerable
net increase of criteria
pollutants for which the
project region is nonattainment under an
applicable federal or state
ambient air quality
standard.

Implementation of
Mitigation Measure AIR-2
would reduce construction
criteria air pollutant and
toxic air contaminant
emissions to a level that is
below the BAAQMDrecommended threshold of
significance. However, it
cannot be definitively
See Mitigation Measure AIR-2, above Project Applicant City of San Carlos Planning
Division and
Building
Division
Prior to
discretionary
project approval.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 129

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
known or stated at this
time that all future
development projects
occurring under
implementation of the
proposed project would be
able to reduce potential
criteria air pollutant
emissions to levels that are
below BAAQMD
thresholds. This impact
would be considered
significant and
unavoidable even with the
incorporation of feasible
mitigation measures.
(Significant and
Unavoidable Impact)
Impact AIR-3: The
project could expose
sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations.

Implementation of
Mitigation Measure AIR-2
would reduce construction
criteria air pollutant and
toxic air contaminant
emissions to a level that is
below the BAAQMDrecommended threshold of
significance. However,
with regard to localized
criteria air pollutant and
See Mitigation Measure AIR-2, above. Project Applicant City of San Carlos Planning
Division and
Building
Division
Prior to
discretionary
project approval.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 130

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
TAC emissions generated
during future construction
activities it cannot be
definitively known or
stated at this time that all
future development
projects occurring under
implementation of the
proposed project would be
able to reduce potential
criteria air pollutant and
TAC emissions to levels
that are below BAAQMD
thresholds. This impact
would be considered
significant and
unavoidable even with the
incorporation of feasible
mitigation measures.
(Significant and
Unavoidable Impact)
Impact AIR-5: The
project could cause
substantial adverse
cumulative impacts with
respect to Air Quality.

Because future
construction activities
could result in ozone
precursor and PM
emissions that exceed
BAAQMD thresholds, the
project could increase the
See Mitigation Measure AIR-2, above. Project Applicant City of San Carlos Planning
Division and
Building
Division
Prior to
discretionary
project approval.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 131

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
frequency and/or severity
of air quality violations in
the Bay Area Basin or
otherwise impede
attainment of air quality
standards. (Significant
and Unavoidable Impact)
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The
project could have a
significant adverse effect,
either directly or through
habitat modifications, on
any species listed as
candidate, sensitive or
special status species in
local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations by
the California Department
of Fish and Game or U. S.

Fish and Wildlife.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Project-Specific
Biological Resources Evaluation. Prior to
construction of new housing on sites that are
on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic
habitat, and/or vegetation thinning or creation
of fuel breaks, a project-specific biological
resources evaluation shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist. The biologist shall utilize
relevant resources such as the California
Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) as well as
a field survey covering the project site and
adjacent areas. A biological resources report or
memo shall be prepared documenting the
results of the evaluation, to a level of detail
appropriate for the project. At a minimum, the
report or memo shall include a description of
existing vegetation, habitats, and aquatic
features on the project site; an evaluation of
special-status species and sensitive habitats that
could occur on the site; and suitable mitigation
measures as needed to avoid project-related
impacts to biological resources. Mitigation
measures from the biological resources
evaluation shall be incorporated into the CEQA
Project Applicant City of San
Carlos Planning
Division and
Public Works
Department
Prior to Issuance
of any Demolition,
Grading, or Tree
Removal Permits.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 132

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
document for the project and/or adopted as
project conditions of approval.

Applies To: New housing development on sites
that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or
aquatic habitat, vegetation thinning and
creation of fuel breaks.

Impact BIO-2: The
project could have a
substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural
community identified in
local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by
the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Birds. To
avoid impacts to nesting birds and avoid
potential violation of state and federal laws
pertaining to birds, all construction of new
housing (including but not limited to
mobilization and staging, clearing, grubbing,
tree removal, fence installation, demolition, and
grading) and/or vegetation thinning and creation
of fuel breaks should occur outside the avian
nesting season (that is, prior to February 1 or
after September 15) if possible. If construction
and/or vegetation thinning or creation of fuel
breaks occurs within the avian nesting season
(from February 1 to September 15), all suitable
habitats located within the project’s area of
disturbance including staging and storage areas
plus a 250-foot (passerines) and 1,000-foot
(raptor nests) buffer around these areas shall be
thoroughly surveyed, as feasible, for the
presence of active nests by a qualified biologist
no more than five days before commencement
of any site disturbance activities and equipment
mobilization. If project activities are delayed by
more than five days, an additional nesting bird
survey shall be performed. Active nesting is
present if a bird is building a nest, sitting in a
nest, a nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are
Project Applicant City of San
Carlos Planning
Division and
Public Works
Department
Prior to Issuance
of any Demolition,
Grading, or Tree
Removal Permits.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 133

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
observed carrying food to the nest. The results
of the surveys shall be documented.

If pre-construction nesting bird surveys result in
the location of active nests, no site disturbance
and mobilization of heavy equipment (including
but not limited to equipment staging, fence
installation, clearing, grubbing, vegetation
removal, fence installation, demolition, and
grading), shall take place within 250 feet of nonraptor nests and 1,000 feet of raptor nests, or as determined by a qualified biologist, until the
chicks have fledged. Monitoring shall be
required to ensure compliance with Migratory
Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and relevant
California Fish and Game Code requirements.

Monitoring dates and findings shall be
documented.

Applies To: All housing construction and/or
vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks
during the nesting bird season (February 1
through September 15).

Mitigation Measure BIO-3a: Bat Habitat
Assessment. Prior to removal of trees or
structures for housing development or fire
hazard reduction, a qualified biologist shall
conduct a bat habitat assessment of trees and
structures to be removed, as well as
surrounding trees and structures. The biologist
shall search for large cavities and crevices in
trees and structures that could support
maternity roosts as well as habitat for specialstatus bat species. Signs of bats such as guano

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 134

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
or the smell of bats shall also be noted. Results
of the bat habitat assessment shall be
documented.

If no suitable roosting habitat or signs of bats
are found, then no further action is required,
and the project may proceed as planned. If
suitable roosting habitat or signs of bats are
found, then Mitigation Measure 3b shall be
implemented.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3b. Dusk
Emergence Bat Survey: If suitable roosting
habitat or signs of bats are found in trees or
structures to be removed on a new housing site
or fire fuel reduction area, a qualified biologist
shall conduct a dusk emergence survey for
roosting bats within 14 days prior to the
removal of the tree(s) or structure(s). The
biologist shall monitor all suitable roosting
trees and structures at dusk for emerging bats,
using acoustic equipment to identify the
species. Results of the survey shall be
documented.

Outside the maternity season, roosting bats
may be excluded from the tree(s) or
structure(s) prior to tree removal as directed by

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 135

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
a qualified biologist. If a special-status bat is
found, the roosting site shall be preserved if
feasible and CDFW shall be consulted prior to
exclusion.

Applies To: Any housing project or fuel
reduction project that requires removal of trees
or structures.

Impact BIO-3: The
project could 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.

See Mitigation Measure BIO-1, above. Project Applicant City of San Carlos Planning
Division and
Public Works
Department
Prior to Issuance
of any Demolition,
Grading, or Tree
Removal Permits.

See Mitigation Measure BIO-1, above. Project Applicant City of San Carlos Planning
Division and
Public Works
Department
Prior to Issuance
of Grading
Permits.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 136

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
Impact BIO-5: The
project would not conflict
with any local policies or
ordinances protecting
biological resources, such
as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance.

See Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and
BIO-3a & 3b, above.

Project Applicant City of San
Carlos Planning
Division and
City of San
Carlos Building
Division and
Public Works
Department
Prior to
discretionary
project approval.

Prior to Issuance
of any Demolition,
Grading, or Tree
Removal Permits.

Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TRIB-1: The
project could cause a
substantial adverse change
in the significance of a
Tribal Cultural Resource.

Mitigation Measure TRIB‐1: Consider all
Native American Archaeological Discoveries
to be Significant Resources. All Native
American artifacts (tribal finds) shall be
considered as a significant Tribal Cultural
Resource, pursuant to PRC 21074 until the lead
agency has enough evidence to make a
determination of significance. The City shall
coordinate with an archaeologist who meets the
U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications, as well as an appropriate tribe
or tribes, as determined by the NAHC, to
develop an appropriate treatment plan for the
resources. The plan may include
implementation of archaeological data
recovery excavations to address treatment of
the resource along with subsequent laboratory
processing and analysis. An archaeological
report shall be written detailing all
Project
Applicant
City of San
Carlos Planning
Division and
Public Works
Department
Immediately
following the
discovery of
subsurface
archaeological
materials.
.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 137

MONITORING VERIFICATION
IDENTIFIED IMPACT RELATED MITIGATION MEASURE Implementation Entity
Monitoring and
Verification
Entity
Timing
Requirements Signature Date
archaeological finds and submitted to the City
and the Northwest Information Center.

NOTES:

S = Significant Impact
LTS = Less than Significant Impact
SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 138
City of San Carlos Focused General Plan Update
Draft Environmental Impact Report
SCH# 2021120442
Lead Agency:

City of San Carlos
Community Development Department
Planning Division
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
October 2022
Prepared with the assistance of MIG, Inc.

CITY~
GOOD
LIVING

SAN CARLOS

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 139
- This document is designed for double-sided printing -

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 140
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-1
October 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1.0: INTRODUCTION

1.1 CEQA and the Purpose of an EIR.................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 Purpose and Scope ........................................................................................................... 1-3

1.2.1 Organization of the Draft Program EIR............................................................... 1-4

1.3 Scoping and Public Review ............................................................................................. 1-6

1.3.1 Notice of Preparation of an EIR........................................................................... 1-6

1.3.2 Public Scoping Meeting....................................................................................... 1-6

1.4 Areas of Known Controversy .......................................................................................... 1-7

1.5 Changes to the Project Since Distribution of the NOP.................................................... 1-7

1.6 Draft EIR Public Review and Comment Period .............................................................. 1-8

1.6.1 Availability of EIR Materials............................................................................... 1-8

1.7 Final EIR/Responses to Comments ................................................................................. 1-8

1.8 Notice of Determination .................................................................................................. 1-9 CHAPTER 2.0: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 Project Location............................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Project Description........................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2.1 Approach to EIR Analysis................................................................................... 2-2

2.2.2 Summary of Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................ 2-3 CHAPTER 3.0: PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 Background...................................................................................................................... 3-2

3.1.1 State Regional Housing Needs Allocation........................................................... 3-2

3.1.2 Housing Element Update ..................................................................................... 3-3

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 141
Table of Contents
TOC-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

3.1.3 Community Safety and Services Element (Being Renamed as the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element) Update................................................................... 3-5

3.1.4 Other Updates for Consistency ............................................................................ 3-6

3.2 Project Location............................................................................................................... 3-6

3.2.1 Land Use .............................................................................................................. 3-6

3.3 Proposed Project .............................................................................................................. 3-7

3.3.1 Purpose and Objectives........................................................................................ 3-7

3.3.2 Housing Element Update ................................................................................... 3-13

3.3.3 Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Update ............................. 3-17

3.3.4 Land Use Element Update ................................................................................. 3-18

3.3.5 Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Update............................................. 3-23

3.3.6 Environmental Management Element Update ................................................... 3-24

3.3.7 Noise Element Update ....................................................................................... 3-24

3.3.8 Title 18 (Zoning) and General Plan Land Use Amendments ............................ 3-24

3.4 Intended Uses of the Program EIR ................................................................................ 3-26 CHAPTER 4.0: IMPACT ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Aesthetics...................................................................................................................... 4.1-1

4.1.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.1-1

4.1.2 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................ 4.1-6

4.1.3 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................. 4.1-12

4.1.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.1-12

4.1.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.1-20

4.2 Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 4.2-1

4.2.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.2-1

4.2.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................... 4.2-10

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 142
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-3
October 2022

4.2.3 Significance Thresholds.................................................................................. 4.2-15

4.2.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.2-17

4.2.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.2-29

4.3 Biological Resources .................................................................................................... 4.3-1

4.3.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.3-1

4.3.2 Regulatory Setting .......................................................................................... 4.3-10

4.3.3 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................. 4.3-18

4.3.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.3-19

4.3.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.3-31

4.4 Cultural Resources and Tribal Resources..................................................................... 4.4-1

4.4.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.4-1

4.4.2 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................ 4.4-3

4.4.3 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................. 4.4-12

4.4.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.4-13

4.4.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.4-17

4.5 Energy........................................................................................................................... 4.5-1

4.5.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.5-1

4.5.2 Regulatory Framework ..................................................................................... 4.5-5

4.5.3 Significance Thresholds and Methodology .................................................... 4.5-12

4.5.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.5-13

4.5.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.5-16

4.6 Geology and Soils......................................................................................................... 4.6-1

4.6.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.6-1

4.6.2 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................ 4.6-8

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 143
Table of Contents
TOC-4 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

4.6.3 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................. 4.6-10

4.6.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.6-11

4.6.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.6-15

4.7 Greenhouse Gases......................................................................................................... 4.7-1

4.7.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.7-1

4.7.2 Regulatory Framework ..................................................................................... 4.7-7

4.7.3 Significance Thresholds.................................................................................. 4.7-16

4.7.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.7-17

4.7.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.7-20

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................ 4.8-1

4.8.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.8-1

4.8.2 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................ 4.8-2

4.8.3 Significance Thresholds.................................................................................. 4.8-14

4.8.4 Impacts and Mitigation ................................................................................... 4.8-15

4.8.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.8-29

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality....................................................................................... 4.9-1

4.9.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................... 4.9-1

4.9.2 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................ 4.9-5

4.9.3 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................. 4.9-10

4.9.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.9-11

4.9.5 References....................................................................................................... 4.9-16

4.10 Land Use ..................................................................................................................... 4.10-1

4.10.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.10-1

4.10.2 Regulatory Setting .......................................................................................... 4.10-3

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 144
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-5
October 2022

4.10.3 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................... 4.10-10

4.10.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................. 4.10-10

4.10.5 References..................................................................................................... 4.10-16

4.11 Noise ........................................................................................................................... 4.11-1

4.11.1 Fundamentals of Environmental Acoustics.................................................... 4.11-1

4.11.2 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.11-5

4.11.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................. 4.11-14

4.11.4 Significance Thresholds................................................................................ 4.11-22

4.11.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................. 4.11-23

4.11.6 References..................................................................................................... 4.11-36

4.12 Population and Housing.............................................................................................. 4.12-1

4.12.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.12-1

4.12.2 Regulatory Setting .......................................................................................... 4.12-3

4.12.3 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................. 4.12-8

4.12.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................... 4.12-8

4.12.5 References..................................................................................................... 4.12-10

4.13 Public Services and Recreation................................................................................... 4.13-1

4.13.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.13-1

4.13.2 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................................ 4.13-13

4.13.3 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................... 4.13-20

4.13.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................. 4.13-20

4.13.5 References..................................................................................................... 4.13-28

4.14 Transporatation ........................................................................................................... 4.14-1

4.14.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.14-1

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 145
Table of Contents
TOC-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

4.14.2 Regulatory Setting .......................................................................................... 4.14-9

4.14.3 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................... 4.14-17

4.14.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................. 4.14-18

4.14.5 References..................................................................................................... 4.14-24

4.15 Utilities and Service Systems...................................................................................... 4.15-1

4.15.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.15-1

4.15.2 Regulatory Setting .......................................................................................... 4.15-5

4.15.3 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................... 4.15-21

4.15.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................. 4.15-21

4.15.5 References..................................................................................................... 4.15-26

4.16 Wildfire ....................................................................................................................... 4.16-1

4.16.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.16-1

4.16.2 Regulatory Setting .......................................................................................... 4.16-5

4.16.3 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................... 4.16-16

4.16.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................. 4.16-17

4.16.5 References..................................................................................................... 4.16-28 CHAPTER 5: ALTERNATIVES

5.1 Impacts of the proposed project....................................................................................... 5-1

5.1.1 Significant Unavoidable Project Impacts............................................................. 5-1

5.1.2 Less Than Significant with Mitigation Project Impacts: ..................................... 5-2

5.2 Rationale for Alternative Selection.................................................................................. 5-3

5.3 Alternatives Selected ....................................................................................................... 5-5

5.3.1 Alternative 1: No Project/Existing Housing Element/2009 General Plan........... 5-5

5.3.2 Alternative 2: RHNA Only Alternative ............................................................... 5-8

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 146
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-7
October 2022

5.4 Summary of attainment of project objectives................................................................ 5-12

5.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative........................................................................... 5-13 CHAPTER 6: CEQA MANDATED SECTIONS

6.1 Impacts Found Less than Significant............................................................................... 6-1

6.1.1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources..................................................................... 6-1

6.1.2 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................... 6-2

6.1.3 References............................................................................................................ 6-4

6.2 Cumulative Impacts......................................................................................................... 6-5

6.2.1 Aesthetics............................................................................................................. 6-5

6.2.2 Biological Resources ........................................................................................... 6-7

6.2.3 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources ............................................................... 6-7

6.2.4 Geology and Soils................................................................................................ 6-8

6.2.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 6-8

6.2.6 Hydrology and Water Quality.............................................................................. 6-9

6.2.7 Land Use ............................................................................................................ 6-10

6.2.8 Population and Housing..................................................................................... 6-10

6.2.9 Public Services and Recreation.......................................................................... 6-10

6.2.10 Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................. 6-11

6.2.11 Wildfire .............................................................................................................. 6-12

6.2.12 References.......................................................................................................... 6-12

6.3 Growth Inducement ....................................................................................................... 6-12

6.3.1 Indirect Impacts ................................................................................................. 6-13

6.3.2 References.......................................................................................................... 6-13

6.4 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS.............................................................. 6-13

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 147
Table of Contents
TOC-8 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

6.5 Significant Irreversible Changes.................................................................................... 6-14

6.5.1 Commitment of Future Generations to Similar Uses......................................... 6-15

6.5.2 Commitment of Non-Renewable Resources...................................................... 6-15 CHAPTER 7.0: PREPARERS

APPENDICES
Appendix A: NOP, Responses and Distribution List
Appendix B: Housing Element Update and Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Update
Appendix C: Air Quality, Energy and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Modeling Results Appendix D: Noise Analysis Technical Appendices
Appendix E: VMT Memorandum

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 148
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-9
October 2022
List of Tables
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................................... 2-4 Table 2-2: Alternatives Impacts Compared to Project Impacts................................................. 2-27 Table 3-1: San Carlos RHNA ...................................................................................................... 3-3 Table 3-2: Comparison of Sites, Pipeline Projects, and RHNA ................................................ 3-13 Table 3-3: Approved and Proposed Projects ............................................................................. 3-15 Table 3-4: Recent ADU Construction Interest........................................................................... 3-16 Table 3-5: Proposed Zones and Densities.................................................................................. 3-25 Table 3-6: Revised General Plan Land Use Designations and Corresponding Zones............... 3-25 Table 4.1 1: Primary and Secondary Gateways........................................................................ 4.1-2 Table 4.2-1: Ambient Air Quality Standards............................................................................ 4.2-4 Table 4.2-2: Local Air Quality Conditions 2017-2019............................................................. 4.2-7 Table 4.2-3: 2040 Project Growth Forecast Operational Emissions....................................... 4.2-22 Table 4.3-1: Land Cover and Vegetation Types in the San Carlos Sphere of Influence.......... 4.3-1 Table 4.3-2: Special-Status Species with the Potential to Occur in the San Carlos SOI.......... 4.3-5 Table 4.5-1: Total Electricity System Power (California 2019)............................................... 4.5-2 Table 4.5-2: PG&E 2019 Power Content Mix.......................................................................... 4.5-4 Table 4.5-3: Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption ............................................. 4.5-14 Table 4.5-4: Unmitigated Annual Operation Energy Demand Summary............................... 4.5-15 Table 4.7-1: Global Warming Potential (GWP) of Common GHGs (100-Year Horizon)....... 4.7-4 Table 4.7-2: 2007-2018 Statewide GHG Emissions (Million MTCO2e)................................. 4.7-5 Table 4.7-3: Existing Land Use GHG Emissions Estimates..................................................... 4.7-7 Table 4.7-4: Unmitigated Project GHG Emissions................................................................. 4.7-18

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 149
Table of Contents
TOC-10 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
Table 4.10-1: Existing Land Uses........................................................................................... 4.10-1 Table 4.11-1: Typical Noise Levels........................................................................................ 4.11-3 Table 4.11-2: Existing Ambient Noise Levels (dBA) in the Project Area ............................. 4.11-9 Table 4.11-3: Existing Ambient Noise Levels (dBA) in the Project Area ............................. 4.11-9 Table 4.11-4: Existing (2019) and Future (2040) Traffic Noise Levels............................... 4.11-10 Table 4.11-5: FTA Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment ....... 4.11-15 Table 4.11-6: Caltrans' Vibration Threshold Criteria for Building Damage ........................ 4.11-16 Table 4.11-7: Caltrans' Vibration Threshold Criteria for Human Response ........................ 4.11-16 Table 4.11-8: OPR General Plan Guidelines for Community Noise Exposure................... 4.11-17 Table 4.11-9: Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines.................................................... 4.11-19 Table 4.11-10: San Carlos Municipal Code Table 18.21.050-A: Noise Limits .................. 4.11-21 Table 4.11-11: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels (dBA) ................................ 4.11-25 Table 4.11-12: 2040 Plus Project Transportation Noise Contour Distances (2040)............. 4.11-29 Table 4.11-13: Future (2040) and Future Plus Project (2040) Traffic Noise Levels............ 4.11-30 Table 4.11-14: Ground-borne Vibration and Noise from Typical Construction Equipment 4.11-33 Table 4.12-1: Population and Projected Growth..................................................................... 4.12-1 Table 4.12-2: Demographics and Racial Profile of the City................................................... 4.12-2 Table 4.12-3: City of San Carlos Regional Housing Needs Allocation ................................. 4.12-3 Table 4.13 1: School Districts and Schools Serving Residents Within the Project Area ....... 4.13-7 Table 4.13 2 School District Enrollment between 2017-2022................................................ 4.13-8 Table 4.13 3 City Parks......................................................................................................... 4.13-10 Table 4.13 4: Developer Fee by School District................................................................... 4.13-27 Table 4.14 1: 2019 Daily VMT Summary – VMT per Service Population.......................... 4.14-20 Table 4.14 2: 2040 Daily VMT Summary – VMT per Service Population......................... 4.14-20

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 150
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-11 October 2022
Table 4.15 1: Cal Water Mid-Peninsula District Projected Potable and Non-Potable Water Use …………………………………………………………………………………………….....4.15-2
Table 5-1: Land Use Alternatives’ Development Assumptions................................................ 5-13 Table 5-2: Alternatives Impacts Compared to Project Impacts................................................. 5-14

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 151
Table of Contents
TOC-12 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
List of Figures
Figure 3-1: Regional location ...................................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-2: Project Area............................................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 3-3: Existing Land Use................................................................................................... 3-10 Figure 3-4: Existing General Plan Land Use Map..................................................................... 3-11 Figure 3-5: Existing Zoning Map .............................................................................................. 3-12 Figure 3-6: Opportunity Sites Inventory Map ........................................................................... 3-14 Figure 3-7: Proposed Land Use Designations Map).................................................................. 3-19 Figure 3-8: Proposed Zoning Map............................................................................................. 3-20 Figure 4.1-1 Gateways.............................................................................................................. 4.1-4 Figure 4.3-1: Vegetation Communities..................................................................................... 4.3-3 Figure 4.3-2: Wetlands and Waterbodies.................................................................................. 4.3-9 Figure 4.6-1: Regional Faults and Historical Earthquakes....................................................... 4.6-3 Figure 4.6-2: San Carlos Area Faults........................................................................................ 4.6-4 Figure 4.6-3: Liquefaction Potential......................................................................................... 4.6-6 Figure 4.9-1: FEMA Flood Zones ............................................................................................ 4.9-4 Figure 4.11-1: Ambient Noise Monitoring Locations ............................................................ 4.11-8 Figure 4.11-2: 2019 Roadway Noise Contours..................................................................... 4.11-12 Figure 4.11-3: 2040 Roadway Noise Contours..................................................................... 4.11-27 Figure 4.11-4: 2040 Plus Project Noise Contours ................................................................ 4.11-28 Figure 4.13-1 Fire Station Service Area ................................................................................. 4.13-2 Figure 4.13-2 Sheriff’s Office Service Area........................................................................... 4.13-5 Figure 4.13-3 Elementary School District Boundaries........................................................... 4.13-6 Figure 4.13-4 Existing Parks and Recreational Facilities....................................................... 4.13-9

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 152
Table of Contents
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR TOC-13 October 2022
Figure 4.14 1: Street Network................................................................................................. 4.14-2 Figure 4.14 2: SamTrans Bus Routes ..................................................................................... 4.14-7 Figure 4.14 3: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities................................................................... 4.14-16 Figure 4.16-1: Fire Hazard Severity Zones............................................................................. 4.16-2 Figure 4.16-2: Evacuation Routes........................................................................................... 4.16-4

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 153
Table of Contents
TOC-14 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
This page intentionally left blank.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 154
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR i
October 2022

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACC Advanced Clean Cars
ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
ACOE U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADT Average daily trips
ADU Accessory Dwelling Units
AF Acre-feet
AFY Acre-feet per year
AIA Airport Influence Area
AMI Area Median Income
APS Alternate Planning Strategy
APSA Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
AQP Air Quality Plan
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BAU Business-as-usual
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
Bay Area Basin San Francisco Bay Area Basin
Bay Plan San Francisco Bay Plan
BCDC Bay Area Conservation and Development Commission
bgs Below ground surface
BMPs Best management practices
BPMP Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
BRT Bus rapid transit
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 CalOSHA California Occupational Safety and Health Administration Caltrans California Department of Transportation

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 155
ii San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
Cal Water California Water Service Company
CAP Bay Area Clean Air Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CBSC California Building Standards Commission
CCA Community Choice Aggregate
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDOC California Department of Conservation
CDPH California Department of Public Health
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CFP California fully protected
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CFV Clean Fuel Vehicle
CHLs California Historical Landmarks
CHP California Highway Patrol
CLUP Comprehensive Airport/Land Use Plan
CMA Congestion Management Agency
CMAP Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CGC California Government Code
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System CH4 Methane
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CRHR California Register of Historic Resources
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
CSS Community Safety and Services
CSSC California Species of Special Concern
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 156
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR iii
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
CWA Clean Water Act
CWPP Community Wildfire Protection Plan
C/CAG City/County Association of Governments
C/CAG-VTA City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County-Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Authority
DAC Disadvantaged Communities
dB Decibels
dBA Decibels A
DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report
DEM Department of Emergency Management
DNL Day/night average sound level
DPM Diesel particulate matter
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIA Untied States Energy Information Administration
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPCRA Federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act EO Executive Order
EOC Emergency Operations Center
EOP Emergency Operations Plan
ESPS Environmental Safety and Public Services
ETWU Estimated total water use
EV Electric Vehicle
FE Federal endangered
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRMs Flood Insurance Rate Maps
FT Federal threatened
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GGNPC Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy
GHG Greenhouse Gases
GPD Gallons per day
GPU General Plan Update
GVWR Gross vehicle weight rating
GWh Gigawatt hours
GWMP Groundwater Management Plan
GWP Global Warming Potential
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutants
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 157
iv San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HESIS Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service
HFC Hydrofluorocarbon
HHW Household hazardous waste
HMC Housing Methodology Committee
HMIS Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement
HMMP Hazardous Material Management Plan
HMTUSA Hazardous Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act HRA High-Resource Area
HVAC Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
Hz Hertz
H2S Hydrogen sulfide
I Interstate
IAQ Indoor Air Quality
IARC International Agency for Research of Cancer
ICS Incident Command System
IEPR Integrated Energy Policy Report
In/sec Inches per second
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISG Individual Supply Guarantee
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
JADU Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit
kg Kilogram
L Liter
LAFCO San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission lb Pounds
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard
Ldn Day/night average sound level
Leq Equivalent noise level
LEV Low-Emission Vehicle
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
LID Low Impact Development
LOS Level of Service
LQG Large Quantity Generators
LRA Local Responsibility Area
LSAA Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
LST Localized Significance Threshold
LT Long-term

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 158
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR v
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank
LZ Lighting Zone
MAWA Maximum applied water allowance
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MMBTU Million British Thermal Units
MMCFD Million cubic feet per day
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Plan
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mpg Miles per gallon
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
MPWD Mid-Peninsula Water District
MROSD Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
MRP Municipal Regional Permit
MT Metric tons
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
MTZ Mutual Threat Zone
MTCO2e Metric tons of CO2 equivalents
Mw Moment Magnitude
MWh Megawatt-hours
MY Model year
m3 Cubic meter
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NIMS National Incident Management System
NLEV National low emission vehicle
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPIAS National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems
NO Nitrogen oxide
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
NOx Oxides of nitrogen
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOAA Fisheries National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 159
vi San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
NOD Notice of Determination
NOI Notice of Intent
NOP Notice of Preparation
NPPA Native Plant Protection Act
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NTP United State National Toxicology Program
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
NWIC Northwest Information Center
N2O Nitrous Oxide
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OES Office of Emergency Services
OPR Office of Planning and Research
OSFM Office of the State Fire Marshal
OSHA Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSP Open Space Preserve
O3 Ozone
PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl
PCE Peninsula Clean Energy
PDA Priority Development Area
PFC Perfluorocarbon
PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric
PHEV Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle
PM Particulate matter
PM2.5 Fine particulate matter
PM10 Coarse particulate matter
PPA Priority Production Area
ppb Parts per billion
ppm Parts per million
PPV Peak particle velocity
Porter-Cologne Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act PRC Public Resources Code
RCRA Resources Conservation and Recovery Act
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
ROG Reactive organic gases
RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
RWS Regional Water System
SAA Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 160
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR vii
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
SAFE Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
SB Senate Bill
SBC State Building Code
SBWMA South Bayside Waste Management Authority
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCS Sustainable communities strategy
SDG&E San Diego Gas & Electric
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SE State endangered
SEMS Standardized Emergency Management System
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas
SF6 Sulfur Hexafluoride
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SMCTA San Mateo County Transportation Authority
SMCWPPP San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program SMGP State Mining and Geology Board
SQG Small Quantity Generators
SoCalGas Southern California Gas
SOI Sphere of Influence
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
SO4
2- Sulfates
SOx Oxides of sulfur
SP Service Population
SRA State Responsibility Area
SRO Single room occupancy
SSMP Sanitary Sewer Management Plan
ST State threatened
ST Short-term
STC Sound transmission class
STLC Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration
SVCW Silicon Valley Clean Water
SWPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC Toxic Air Contaminants
TAZ Traffic analysis zone
TCM Transportation Control Measures
TCR Tribal Cultural Resource
TDM Transportation Demand Management or Transportation Demand Measures

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 161
viii San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym Definition
TEA-21 The Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century TIA Traffic Impact Analysis
TNC Transportation network company
TNM Traffic Noise Model
TRA Transit-Rich Area
TRI Toxic Release Inventory
TTLC Total Threshold Limit Concentration
UCD ITS University California Davis, Institute of Transportation Studies U.S. United States
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
U.S.C. United States Code
U.S. DOE United States Department of Energy
U.S. DOT United States Department of Transportation
U.S. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
V. Version
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
VMT Vehicle miles traveled
VOC Volatile organic compounds
WDR Waste discharge requirement
WETA Water Emergency Transportation Authority
WMP Waste Management Plan
WSA Water Supply Assessment
WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan
WUI Wildland Urban Interface
WWTP Wastewater treatment plant
ZEV Zero Emission Vehicle
µg Micrograms
% Percent
°C Degrees Celsius
°F Degrees Fahrenheit

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 162
Chapter 1 Introduction
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 1-1
October 2022
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 CEQA AND THE PURPOSE OF AN EIR
The City of San Carlos’ (City or Lead Agency) proposes to comprehensively update the existing 2015-2023 Housing Element as required by state housing law, and make a focused amendment to the Community Safety and Services Element to address climate change resiliency planning as required by Senate Bill 379 and California Government Code section 65302(g), and minor amendments to the Land Use Element, Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, Environmental Management Element, and Noise Element for consistency. As the City is revising six General Plan elements (not all seven elements), these amendments are referred to as a Focused General Plan Update (GPU). The purpose of this Focused GPU is to update the City’s existing 2015-2023 Housing Element to reflect new 6
th cycle housing assignments (for the time period 2023-2031) and facilitate new housing growth within the City and to address new climate resiliency planning requirements in the Community Safety and Services Element, renamed as the Environmental Safety and Services Element as part of this project. It is important to note that the Land Use, Circulation and Scenic Highways, Environmental Management, and Noise Elements are being updated only to reflect and support the updated Housing and Environmental Safety and Services Elements. In addition, the City is proposing specific amendments to Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) and amendments to San Carlos’ Zoning Map to remain consistent with the Focused GPU.

The adoption and implementation of a General Plan Update (GPU) is defined as a “project” and is subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 1970 (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et. seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. seq.). Accordingly, the City has prepared this environmental impact report (EIR) to assess the long range and cumulative environmental consequences that could result from adoption and implementation of the proposed Focused GPU. This report has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines and with the City’s local rules and procedures for implementing CEQA. It was prepared by professional planning consultants under contract to the City. The City is the Lead Agency for the preparation of this EIR, as defined by CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21067, as amended), because it has primary discretionary authority with respect to adoption, amendment, and implementation of the proposed Focused GPU. The content of this document reflects the independent judgment of the City.

CEQA was originally enacted in 1970 and has been amended since. The legislative intent of these regulations is established in Section 21000 of the California Public Resources Code, as follows:

The Legislature finds and declares as follows:
a. The maintenance of a quality environment for the people of this state now and in the future is a matter of statewide concern.
b. It is necessary to provide a high-quality environment that at all times is healthful and pleasing to the senses and intellect of man.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 163
Chapter 1 Introduction
1-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
c. There is a need to understand the relationship between the maintenance of high-quality ecological systems and the general welfare of the people of the state, including their enjoyment of the natural resources of the state.
d. The capacity of the environment is limited, and it is the intent of the Legislature that the government of the State take immediate steps to identify any critical thresholds for the health and safety of the people of the state and take all coordinated actions necessary to prevent such thresholds being reached.
e. Every citizen has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.
f. The interrelationship of policies and practices in the management of natural resources and waste disposal requires systematic and concerted efforts by public and private interests to enhance environmental quality and to control environmental pollution. g. It is the intent of the Legislature that all agencies of the state government which regulate activities of private individuals, corporations, and public agencies which are found to affect the quality of the environment, shall regulate such activities so that major consideration is given to preventing environmental damage, while providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian.

The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the State to:
a) Develop and maintain a high-quality environment now and in the future, and take all action necessary to protect, rehabilitate, and enhance the environmental quality of the state. b) Take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise.
c) Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man's activities, ensure that fish and wildlife populations do not drop below self-perpetuating levels, and preserve for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities and examples of the major periods of California history.
d) Ensure that the long-term protection of the environment, consistent with the provision of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian, shall be the guiding criterion in public decisions.
e) Create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony to fulfill the social and economic requirements of present and future generations. f) Require governmental agencies at all levels to develop standards and procedures necessary to protect environmental quality.
g) Require governmental agencies at all levels to consider qualitative factors as well as economic and technical factors and long-term benefits and costs, in addition to short-term

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 164
Chapter 1 Introduction
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 1-3
October 2022
benefits and costs and to consider alternatives to proposed actions affecting the environment.

A concise statement of legislative policy, with respect to public agency consideration of projects for some form of approval, is found in Section 21002, quoted below:

The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.

1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The proposed Focused GPU is a long-range planning program to guide the growth and development of residential housing within the City’s corporate boundaries and to plan and prepare for increased environmental hazards from climate change. It is intended to communicate the City’s vision for the future and to establish a policy framework to govern decision making concerning the physical development of the community and the protection of the public from environmental hazards. Although it will allow for an overall increase in housing development for the entire Project Area, the project would not, by itself, authorize any specific development project or other form of land use approval of any kind of public facilities or capital facilities expenditures or improvements.

The EIR is intended to serve as a public information and disclosure document identifying and analyzing those environmental impacts resulting from the project that are expected to be significant and describing mitigation measures and alternatives that could avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts and increase beneficial effects.

The City has prepared a Program EIR to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the Focused GPU. The advantages of a Program EIR include consideration of effects and alternatives that cannot practically be reviewed at the project-level, consideration of cumulative impacts that may not be apparent on a project-by-project basis, the ability to enact citywide mitigation measures, and subsequent reduction in paperwork. This Program EIR is consistent with the programmatic level of detail of the proposed project. Accordingly, impacts and mitigation are discussed in this EIR at the level of detail sufficient to allow a reasoned decision about the Project.

As a result of the information in this EIR, the City of San Carlos City Council may act to approve or deny the proposed project actions and/or to establish requirements or conditions of approval for future development projects that are considered necessary to mitigate identified project impacts on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, later activities within the scope of the Focused GPU will be reviewed in light of this EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 165
Chapter 1 Introduction
1-4 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
15168, if needed, later environmental analysis may focus on those site-specific and localized environmental issues that could not be examined in sufficient detail as part of this Program EIR.

1.2.1 Organization of the Draft Program EIR
The Draft Program EIR (DEIR or Draft EIR) contains the primary analysis of potential environmental impacts discussed in the following seven sections described below:

Chapter 1.0 Introduction.

Chapter 2.0 Executive Summary: A brief discussion of the project and summary of project impacts, mitigation measures and alternatives.

Chapter 3.0 Project Description: Provides detailed description of the proposed project and the Environmental Setting/Existing Conditions and project objectives.

Chapter 4.0 Environmental Impact Analysis: Evaluates project impacts and identifies mitigation measures designed to reduce significant impacts, where applicable. This Chapter includes 16 sections, each addressing different topical areas (Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gases, Hazards/Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services and Recreation, Transportation, Utilities, and Wildfire).

Chapter 5.0 Alternatives: Provides an analysis of the different alternatives to the proposed project.

Chapter 6.0 CEQA Conclusions: Provides an analysis of growth-inducing impacts, significant unavoidable environmental impacts, and irreversible environmental change.

Chapter 7.0 Preparers: Provides a list of persons involved in the preparation of the Draft EIR.

The appendices include:
• Appendix A: Notice of Preparation (NOP), including comment letters received and the NOP distribution list
• Appendix B: Housing Element Update and Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Update
• Appendix C: Air Quality, Energy and Greenhouse Gas Analysis Technical Appendices • Appendix D: Noise Analysis Technical Appendices
• Appendix E: Transportation Impact Analysis

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 166
Chapter 1 Introduction
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 1-5
October 2022
In compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(1), a mitigation monitoring reporting program (MMRP) will be prepared as a separate document that will be adopted in conjunction with the certification of the Final EIR. The MMRP, responses to public comments on the Draft EIR, and any revisions to the Draft EIR will be included in the Final EIR.

Approach to EIR Analysis
The City of San Carlos, Community Development Department Planning Division, directed and supervised the preparation of this EIR. The proposed project has the potential to result in one or more significant direct, indirect, and/or cumulative environmental impacts in the environmental issue areas listed below. Therefore, each of these sixteen (16) environmental issue areas have been analyzed in this Draft Program EIR.
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services and Recreation
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
Analyses contained in Chapter 6 states that the project would have no impact on agricultural and forestry resources and mineral resources. Therefore, these issues are not covered in detail in this Draft Program EIR.

The approach to the analysis presented in this EIR is programmatic in nature given the broad scope of the GPU. Each environmental issue is analyzed in a similar manner, starting with a discussion of the existing environmental setting, including physical conditions and pertinent planning and regulatory framework. Thresholds of significance are then defined and are used to measure the proposed project’s potential impact to the environment. Thresholds of significance are based on a broad list of questions and impact topics set forth in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.

The impact analysis provided for each the 16 topical areas examines the broad, long-term environmental effects resulting from implementation of the goals and policies contained in the

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 167
Chapter 1 Introduction
1-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
housing element update. The assessment of impacts focuses on how the impact in question could occur and whether the goals, policies or some other aspect of the proposed project would reduce or ameliorate such impacts. The presence of sensitive environmental resources, hazards in specific areas, and the broad implications of the Focused General Plan Update throughout the project area are considered in the determination of impact significance. If the analysis indicates that a significant impact could occur, even with the benefits of any proposed goals or policies, mitigation measures are specified.

1.3 SCOPING AND PUBLIC REVIEW
Public outreach for the EIR included public noticing, issuance of a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for an Environmental Impact Report, and conducting a public scoping meeting for the EIR, as summarized below. Comments received during the public scoping meeting were taken into consideration during the preparation of this Draft EIR.

1.3.1 Notice of Preparation of an EIR
The NOP was prepared and circulated to local, state, and federal agencies and made available to the public on December 17, 2021 (SCH# 2021120442). The NOP contained a summary of the project and resource areas that would be covered in the EIR, and how to submit comments.

Circulation of the NOP consisted of its filing with the San Mateo County Clerk’s Office and was also published in the Examiner-Inquirer-Bulletin appearing in online and print editions published on December 22, 2021. The NOP was also provided to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse for distribution to various State Agencies for review.

Copies of the NOP were made available at the City’s Community Development Department and electronically via a web link on the City’s website. The City provided for a 45-day public review period that ended on January 31, 2022. Written comments in response to the NOP were received from two agencies / organizations and seven interested individuals. The NOP, summary of comments received at the scoping meeting, and the written comments received on the NOP are included in Appendix A of this document.

1.3.2 Public Scoping Meeting
The City held a virtual (online) public scoping meeting on January 12, 2022 before the San Carlos Planning Commission. Oral comments heard at this scoping meeting generally consisted of concerns regarding general topics (the City’s General Plan and its elements, specific proposal to be evaluated in the EIR, where housing would be placed within the city, building design standards, housing receiving clearance under this EIR vs. future evaluation under CEQA); cultural resources/tribal cultural resources; land use; hydrology/hazards (sea level rise and rising groundwater levels, transport of hazardous chemicals in groundwater); and transportation/traffic (vehicle miles traveled [VMT], Transportation Demand Management [TDM] Programs, proposed pedestrian, bicycle and transit network improvements, improvements to the State Transportation Network, Caltrain ridership, walkability and bicycle safety in the City).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 168
Chapter 1 Introduction
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 1-7
October 2022

1.4 AREAS OF KNOWN CONTROVERSY
Pursuant to Section 15123(b)(2) of the state CEQA Guidelines, an EIR shall identify areas of controversy known to the lead agency including potential issues raised by agencies and the public.

The City has implemented a public outreach program during the development of the housing and safety elements. The outreach program consisted of workshops and virtual meetings and outreach efforts to the business and development community and to the residents of San Carlos. Small group meetings were held with various interest groups within the city and information about the housing and safety elements were posted on the project website. Study sessions open to the public were held with both the Planning Commission and the City Council. Areas of controversy raised during this process included the types of housing planned for in the housing element and where new housing will be proposed within the city, concerns were raised over the City’s jobs to housing balance with all the commercial development proposed in the East Side Innovation District area, concerns were raised as to how the city will respond to additional traffic congestion in the downtown area.

The areas of controversy identified during the EIR scoping process are the same as those brought up in the NOP scoping meeting and include land use/housing, hydrology/hazards, and transportation traffic.

1.5 CHANGES TO THE PROJECT SINCE DISTRIBUTION OF THE
NOP
At the time the NOP was issued and the scoping meeting held, the final draft of the General Plan Housing Element (Housing Element), which is one of the two primary subjects of this EIR, had not been completed. Subsequent to the NOP being issued, the Housing Element which contains candidate sites for the development of new housing construction and/or properties proposed for zoning changes that would allow increased residential densities on such sites have been finalized.

Additionally, the Housing Element update requires minor edits to the Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, Environmental Management Element, and Noise Element for consistency.

At the time the NOP was issued and the scoping meeting held, the final draft of the General Plan Environmental Safety and Public Services Element, the second primary subject of this EIR, had not been completed. Subsequent to the NOP being issued, two drafts of the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element were issued on August 30, 2022 and October 11, 2022. Changes in the October 11, 2022 version of the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element were made in response to initial comments from CALFIRE on the wildfire section on the August 30, 2022 version of the element.

All of the comments received during the NOP and scoping process, with the exception of identification of the proposed candidate sites would still be applicable to the project as currently proposed. Minor text changes are also proposed for the Land Use Element, Circulation and Scenic Highway Element, Environmental Management, and Noise Element to maintain consistency throughout the General Plan.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 169
Chapter 1 Introduction
1-8 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

1.6 DRAFT EIR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT PERIOD
Publication of this Draft EIR will mark the beginning of a 45-day public review and comment period. During this period, the Draft EIR will be made available to local, state, and federal agencies, and to interested organizations and individuals for review. Notice of this Draft EIR will be sent directly to every agency, person, and organization that commented on the NOP. Written comments concerning the environmental review contained in this Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period should be sent to:

Lisa Porras, Planning Manager
City of San Carlos
Planning Division
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
[email protected]

1.6.1 Availability of EIR Materials
All materials related to the preparation of this Program EIR, including information incorporated by reference, are available for public review. The Notice of Preparation and the Draft Program EIR are posted on the City’s website: https://www.sancarlos2040.org/. To request an appointment to review these materials, please contact Lisa Porras (see contact information above).

1.7 FINAL EIR/RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
Following the conclusion of the 45-day public review period, the City of San Carlos will prepare a Final EIR in conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132. The Final EIR will consist of:
• Revisions to the Draft EIR (DEIR) text, as necessary resulting from comments received; • List of individuals and agencies commenting on the DEIR; • Responses to comments received on the DEIR, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines (Section 15088); and
• Copies of letters received on the DEIR.

Section 15091(a) of the CEQA Guidelines stipulates that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings.

If the lead agency approves a project despite it resulting in significant adverse environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, the agency must state the reasons for its action in writing. This Statement of Overriding Considerations must be included in the record of project approval.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 170
Chapter 1 Introduction
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 1-9
October 2022

1.8 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
If the project is approved, the City of San Carlos 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, as well as the State Clearinghouse. The filing of the NOD starts a 30-day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15094(g).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 171
Chapter 1 Introduction
1-10 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
This page intentionally left blank.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 172
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-1
October 2022
CHAPTER 2.0: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This chapter provides a summary of the Focused GPU ("project"), a list of associated environmental issues to be evaluated, a summary of significant impacts and mitigation measures associated with the project, and a summary of feasible alternatives to the project, including identification of the environmentally superior alternative.

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The City of San Carlos is located in the central-east portion of San Mateo County on the San Francisco Peninsula, approximately halfway between San Francisco and San Jose. San Carlos’ city limit extends to the City of Belmont to the northwest, the San Francisco Bay to the northeast, the City of Redwood City to the southeast, and unincorporated San Mateo County to the southwest (see Figure 3-1 Regional Location).

The Project area includes lands within the City’s corporate limits and lands within the City’s sphere of influence (SOI). The term “sphere of influence” applies to the area designated by the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission (also known as LAFCO) as the probable, future physical boundary or service area of the City.

The City of San Carlos encompasses approximately eight square miles, nearly all of which are developed with urban land uses. San Carlos’ sphere of influence (Project Area) includes three areas of unincorporated San Mateo County – the Devonshire Area (including two non-adjacent areas:

Devonshire Canyon and a nearby 17-acre area adjacent to Club Drive, Cranfield Avenue, and the City of Belmont), Palomar Park, and Pulgas Ridge (formally known as the Hassler Area). The City’s Project Area consists of 10,348 parcels encompassing 3,570 gross acres (Figure 3 2 - Project Area).

Freeways and highways offer regional access to San Carlos, including the Bayshore Freeway (US 101) on the east and Junipero Serra Freeway (I 280) to the west. A regional artery, El Camino Real (SR 82) traverses San Carlos in a northwest-southeast direction. A subregional arterial through San Carlos is Alameda de las Pulgas.

2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Every city and county in California is required to have a general plan that functions as a comprehensive, long-range policy document. For cities, the general plan guides the physical development of the incorporated city (e.g., city limit) and any land outside city boundaries (e.g., unincorporated sphere of influence area) that has a relationship to the city’s future growth and development. The City of San Carlos’ General Plan was last comprehensively updated in 2009 and the City is proposing to amend the six Elements shown below:
• Housing Element

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 173
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
• Environmental Safety and Public Services Element (previously named the Community Safety and Services Element)
• Land Use
• Circulation and Scenic Highway Element
• Environmental Management Element
• Noise Element
The update solely addresses the updated Housing Element, as well as new requirements for the Safety Element. All other changes to the Land Use, Circulation and Scenic Highway, Environmental Management and Noise Elements are minor changes to maintain consistency throughout the General Plan necessitated by the proposed Housing Element and Safety Element updates.

2.2.1 Approach to EIR Analysis
Analysis provided in Chapter 6 indicate the project would have no impact in the following environmental issue areas:
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources, and
• Mineral Resources
Therefore, these resources are not covered in detail in this Draft Program EIR.

The following environmental issues are analyzed in greater detail in this Draft Program EIR. • Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services and Recreation
• Transportation
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
The approach to the analysis presented in this EIR is programmatic in nature given the broad scope of the housing and safety element updates. Each environmental issue is analyzed in a similar

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 174
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-3
October 2022
manner, starting with a discussion of the existing environmental setting, including physical conditions and pertinent planning and regulatory framework. Thresholds of significance are then defined and are used to measure the proposed Project’s potential impact to the environment.

Thresholds of significance are based on a broad list of questions and impact topics set forth in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.

The impact analysis provided for each of the environmental issue areas examine the broad, longterm environmental effects resulting from implementation of the goals and policies contained in the Focused GPU. If the analysis indicates that a significant impact could occur, even with the benefits of any proposed goals or policies, mitigation measures are identified and imposed.

2.2.2 Summary of Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures For each of the environmental topics listed above, any "significant" Project or cumulative impact and associated mitigation measure(s) identified in this EIR are summarized in Table 2-1. The summary chart has been organized to correspond with the more detailed impact and mitigation discussions in chapters 4.1 through 4.16 of this Draft EIR. The chart is arranged in four columns:
(1) identified impacts, (2) potential significance without mitigation, (3) mitigation measure(s), and (4) the level of impact significance after implementation of the mitigation measure(s). Because the table does not list impacts that are less than significant, and therefore do not require mitigation, the Impact/Mitigation Measure numbering may be out of sequence.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 175
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-4 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
Air Quality
Impact AIR-1: The project would conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2
would reduce construction criteria air pollutant and
toxic air contaminant emissions to a level that is
below the BAAQMD-recommended threshold of
significance. This impact would be considered
significant and unavoidable even with the
incorporation of feasible mitigation measures.
(Significant and Unavoidable Impact)
Potentially
Significant
AIR-2: Require a Project-level Construction Assessment
for New Discretionary Development Projects. The City
shall require applicants to submit a quantitative project-level construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions analysis for future discretionary development projects that are not exempt under CEQA and do not meet the BAAQMD screening criteria. The estimated construction
criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions shall be compared against the thresholds of significance maintained by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD) and, if emissions are shown to be above
BAAQMD thresholds, the City shall require the imposition and implementation of mitigation measures to reduce
emissions below the thresholds that have been exceeded.

Mitigation measures to reduce emissions could include, but are not limited to:
• Selection of specific construction equipment (e.g.,
specialized pieces of equipment with smaller engines or equipment that will be more efficient and reduce engine runtime);
• Requiring equipment to use alternative fuel sources
(e.g., electric-powered and liquefied or compressed natural gas), meet cleaner emission standards (e.g., U.S. EPA Tier IV Final emissions standards for equipment greater than 50- horsepower), and/or utilizing added exhaust devices (e.g., Level 3 Diesel Particular Filter);
• Minimizing the idling time of diesel-powered
construction equipment to two minutes; and
• Application of Low-VOC paints to interior and/or
exterior surfaces (e.g., paints that meet BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 3 requirements).

Significant and
Unavoidable Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 176
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-5
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact AIR-2: The project would result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria
pollutants for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce
construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air
contaminant emissions to a level that is below the
BAAQMD-recommended threshold of significance.

However, it cannot be definitively known or stated
at this time that all future development projects
occurring under implementation of the proposed
project would be able to reduce potential criteria air
pollutant emissions to levels that are below
BAAQMD thresholds. This impact would be
considered significant and unavoidable even with
the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures.
(Significant and Unavoidable Impact)
Potentially
Significant
See Mitigation AIR-2, above.

Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Impact AIR-3: The project could expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would
reduce construction criteria air pollutant and toxic
air contaminant emissions to a level that is below
the BAAQMD-recommended threshold of
significance. However, with regard to localized
criteria air pollutant and TAC emissions generated
during future construction activities it cannot be
definitively known or stated at this time that all
future development projects occurring under
implementation of the proposed project would be
able to reduce potential criteria air pollutant and
TAC emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD
thresholds. This impact would be considered
Potentially
Significant
See Mitigation Measure AIR-2, above. Significant and
Unavoidable Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 177
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
significant and unavoidable even with the
incorporation of feasible mitigation measures.
(Significant and Unavoidable Impact)
Impact AIR-5: The project could cause substantial
adverse cumulative impacts with respect to Air
Quality. Because future construction activities could
result in ozone precursor and PM emissions that
exceed BAAQMD thresholds, the project could
increase the frequency and/or severity of air quality
violations in the Bay Area Basin or otherwise
impede attainment of air quality standards.
(Significant and Unavoidable Impact)
Potentially
Significant
See Mitigation Measure AIR-2, above. Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1: The project could have a significant
adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species listed as candidate,
sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and
Wildlife. Implementation of Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 through BIO-3 would reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level (Less Than
Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
Potentially
Significant Impact
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Project-Specific Biological
Resources Evaluation. Prior to construction of new housing on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, and/or vegetation thinning or creation of fuel breaks, a project-specific biological resources evaluation shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The biologist shall utilize relevant resources such as the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI) as well as a field survey covering the project site and adjacent areas. A biological resources report or memo shall be prepared documenting the results of the evaluation, to a level of detail appropriate for the project. At a minimum, the report or memo shall include a description of existing vegetation, habitats, and aquatic features on the project site; an evaluation of special-status species and sensitive habitats that could occur on the site; and suitable mitigation measures as needed to avoid project-related impacts to biological resources.

Mitigation measures from the biological resources evaluation Less than Significant
Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 178
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-7
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
shall be incorporated into the CEQA document for the project and/or adopted as project conditions of approval.

Applies To: New housing development on sites that are on or adjacent to natural vegetation or aquatic habitat, vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks.

Impact BIO-2: The project could have a substantial
adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level. (Less Than
Significant with Mitigation Incorporated)
Potentially
Significant Impact
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Birds. To avoid
impacts to nesting birds and avoid potential violation of state and federal laws pertaining to birds, all construction of new housing (including but not limited to mobilization and
staging, clearing, grubbing, tree removal, fence installation, demolition, and grading) and/or vegetation thinning and creation of fuel breaks should occur outside the avian nesting season (that is, prior to February 1 or after September 15) if possible. If construction and/or vegetation thinning or creation of fuel breaks occurs within the avian nesting season (from February 1 to September 15), all suitable habitats located within the project’s area of disturbance including staging and storage areas plus a 250-foot (passerines) and 1,000-foot (raptor nests) buffer around these areas shall be thoroughly surveyed, as feasible, for the presence of active nests by a qualified biologist no more than five days before
commencement of any site disturbance activities and
equipment mobilization. If project activities are delayed by more than five days, an additional nesting bird survey shall be performed. Active nesting is present if a bird is building a nest, sitting in a nest, a nest has eggs or chicks in it, or adults are observed carrying food to the nest. The results of the surveys shall be documented.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 179
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-8 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
within 250 feet of non-raptor nests and 1,000 feet of raptor nests, or as determined by a qualified biologist, until the chicks have fledged. Monitoring shall be required to ensure compliance with Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and
relevant California Fish and Game Code requirements.

Monitoring dates and findings shall be documented.

Applies To: All housing construction and/or vegetation
thinning and creation of fuel breaks during the nesting bird season (February 1 through September 15).

Impact BIO-3: The project could 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.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would
reduce potential impacts to a less than significant
level. (Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated)
Potentially
Significant Impact
Mitigation Measure BIO-3a: Bat Habitat Assessment.

Prior to removal of trees or structures for housing
development or fire hazard reduction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a bat habitat assessment of trees and structures to be removed, as well as surrounding trees and structures.

The biologist shall search for large cavities and crevices in trees and structures that could support maternity roosts as well as habitat for special-status bat species. Signs of bats such as guano or the smell of bats shall also be noted. Results of the bat habitat assessment shall be documented.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3b. Dusk Emergence Bat Survey: If suitable roosting habitat or signs of bats are found in trees or structures to be removed on a new housing site or fire fuel reduction area, a qualified biologist shall conduct a dusk emergence survey for roosting bats within 14 days prior to the removal of the tree(s) or structure(s). The biologist shall monitor all suitable roosting trees and structures at dusk for emerging bats, using acoustic equipment to identify the species. Results of the survey shall be documented.

Less than Significant
Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 180
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-9
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
If no roosting bats are found during the survey, then no further action is required, and the project may proceed as planned. If roosting bats are found during the survey, a disturbance-free buffer zone shall be established around the roost site during the maternity season (April 15-September 15), as determined by a qualified biologist until the maternity season is over. Outside the maternity season, roosting bats may be excluded from the tree(s) or structure(s) prior to tree removal as directed by a qualified biologist. If a special-status bat is found, the roosting site shall be preserved if feasible and CDFW shall be consulted prior to exclusion.

Applies To: Any housing project or fuel reduction project that requires removal of trees or structures.

Impact BIO-4: The project would not 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. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
BIO-1 would reduce potential impacts to a less than
significant level. (Less Than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated)
Potentially
Significant Impact
See Mitigation Measure BIO-1, above. Less than Significant Impact
Impact BIO-5: The project would not conflict with
any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3 would reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level.
(Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated)
Potentially
Significant Impact
See Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO-3, above. Less than Significant Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 181
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-10 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 2-1: Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Impacts
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact TRIB-1: The project could cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a
Tribal Cultural Resource. (Less Than Significant
with Mitigation Incorporated)
Potentially
Significant Impact
Mitigation Measure TRIB‐1: Consider all Native
American Archaeological Discoveries to be Significant
Resources. All Native American artifacts (tribal finds) shall be considered as a significant Tribal Cultural Resource, pursuant to PRC 21074 until the lead agency has enough
evidence to make a determination of significance. The City shall coordinate with an archaeologist who meets the U.S.

Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications, as well as an appropriate tribe or tribes, as determined by the NAHC, to develop an appropriate treatment plan for the resources.

The plan may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to address treatment of the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. An archaeological report shall be written detailing all
archaeological finds and submitted to the City and the
Northwest Information Center.

Less than Significant
Impact
NOTES:

S = Significant Impact
LTS = Less than Significant Impact
SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 182
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-25
October 2022
Alternatives to the Proposed Project
To provide a basis for further understanding of the environmental effects of a proposed project and possible approaches to reducing its identified significant impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require an EIR to also “describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.”
Project Objectives
The Focused GPU and Zoning Amendments include the following objectives for the long-term growth and enhancement of the community:

1. Promote the preservation and improvement of the quality of existing housing and neighborhoods.

2. Encourage housing development located close to transit, Downtown, and along El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue with high quality, higher density, multi-family housing.

3. Assist in the development of new housing that is affordable at all income levels.

4. Remove and/or mitigate potential governmental constraints to the provision of adequate, affordable housing.

5. Provide adequate housing for special needs populations.

6. Eliminate discrimination in the provision of housing.

7. Reduce the potential loss of life, injury, and property damage due to seismic and geologic hazards.

8. Reduce hazards associated with flooding or inundation from inland flooding and Sea Level Rise.

9. Protect lives and property from risks associated with wildfire-related emergencies.

10. Protect the community from the harmful effects of hazardous materials.

11. Combat housing discrimination, lessen racial bias, lessen historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access in order to foster inclusive communities and achieve racial equity.

12. Continue effective emergency response procedures to ensure public safety in the event of natural or man-made disasters.

13. Identify communities most vulnerable to climate change impacts and establish new goals, policies, and programs for equitable public safety, emergency preparedness, response and recovery.

Identified Alternatives
The EIR is required to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. The alternatives identified in an EIR are based on the potentially significant impacts of the proposed project. This EIR identified impacts to air quality,

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 183
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-26 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
biological resources, and cultural and tribal cultural resources, primarily related to housing construction activities. Therefore, the EIR identified the No Project Alternatives as required by CEQA and a second alternative, the RHNA Only Alternative, to reduce the number of potential housing units constructed and thereby addressing the impacts identified in the EIR for the proposed project.

Alternative 1: No Project/Existing Housing Element/2009 General Plan The No Project/Existing Housing Element/2009 General Plan (No Project Alternative) assumes that housing development would occur within the City as directed by the currently adopted 2015- 2023 Housing Element and the 2009 General Plan. The No Project Alternative would generate less housing development within the City because none of the General Plan land use designation or Zoning Code amendments that facilitate greater housing development within the City would occur as under the proposed project.

The proposed project includes the Environmental Safety and Public Services Update and would help the City prepare for the adverse effects of climate change. The No Project Alternative would not have the beneficial effect of creating new planning policy for climate change and resiliency planning, including wildfire hazard and sea level rise.

The No Project Alternative would not allow the City to meet its RHNA requirements, or allow the City to comply with state housing laws or SB 379 requiring the inclusion on climate change resilience planning in Safety Elements. The City would face significant, adverse repercussions for not adopting a new Housing Element reflecting the 6th cycle RHNA assignment. State housing law identifies penalties that can be levied against jurisdictions that do not adopt new housing elements (see Chapter 5, Alternatives for a detailed discussion). The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives.

Alternative 2: RHNA Only Alternative
The RHNA Only Alternative reflects a reduced number of residential units from 3,576 units included in the proposed project to the RHNA of 2,735 (reduction of 841 units), and the same amount of non-residential development included in the project. Since the significant impacts of the project (air quality) are largely due to the substantial number of new residential units proposed, this alternative reduces the potential number of future dwelling units, therefore reducing the amount of air emissions and short-term construction noise that would be generated from housing construction. The RHNA Only Alternative would allow the City to meet its RHNA requirements.

The RHNA Only Alternative is marginally superior to the proposed project because it would not substantially reduce the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project due to fewer housing units being constructed. It would meet most of the project objectives except HCD’s requirement to include buffer sites in a housing element to allow for flexibility in planning. Not including buffer units in the Housing Element could jeopardize the ability of the City to obtain HCD approval of the Housing Element Update.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 184
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 2-27
October 2022
Environmentally Superior Alternative
The RHNA Only Alternative is only marginally superior to the proposed project because it would not substantially reduce the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The RHNA Only Alternative would eliminate 841 units from the proposed project. Any reduction in impacts would not be significant because the number of housing units in the proposed project is not that much greater than the RHNA Only Alternative.

The RHNA Only Alternative would comply with State law, and it would satisfy most of the City’s objectives. The RHNA Only Alternative would also provide the benefit of updating the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element with the new wildfire, sea level rise, and climate change resiliency policies and actions included in the proposed Safety Element update.

Therefore, the RHNA Only Alternative is considered the environmentally preferrable alternative.

A comparison of impacts between the project and alternatives is provided below in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2: Alternatives Impacts Compared to Project Impacts Impact/Resource Proposed Project Alternative 1:

No Project
Alternative 2:

RHNA Only Alternative
Aesthetics LTS Reduced LTS Similar LTS
Air Quality SU Reduced SU Similar SU
Biological Resources LTS with
Mitigation Reduced LTS Similar LTS with Mitigation
Cultural Resources and Tribal
Cultural Resources
LTS with
Mitigation Reduced LTS Similar LTS with Mitigation
Energy LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS
Geology and Soils LTS Similar LTS Similar LTS
Greenhouse Gas Emissions LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS
Hazards and Hazardous Materials LTS Similar LTS Reduced LTS Hydrology and Water Quality LTS Similar LTS Similar LTS Land Use LTS Reduced LTS Similar LTS
Noise LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS with
Mitigation
Population and Housing LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS
Public Services and Recreation LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS Transportation LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS
Utilities and Service Systems LTS Reduced LTS Reduced LTS Wildfire LTS Greater LTS Similar LTS
Source: MIG, 2021
LTS= Less than Significant Impacts
SU= Significant and Unavoidable Impacts

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 185
Chapter 2 Executive Summary
2-28 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
This page intentionally left blank.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 186
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-1
October 2022
CHAPTER 3.0: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Every California city and county is required to have a “General Plan” that functions as a comprehensive, long-range policy document.1 For cities, the General Plan guides the physical development of the incorporated city (i.e., city limits) and any land outside city boundaries (i.e., unincorporated sphere of influence area - SOI) that has a relationship to the city’s future growth and development. Together, the incorporated city plus the SOI are called the Project Area. The City of San Carlos’ General Plan (Envision 2030) was last updated in 2009 and includes the Housing Element (last updated and adopted in 2015), Community Safety and Services Element, Land Use Element, Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, Environmental Management Element, Parks and Recreation Element, and Noise Element, all of which were adopted in 2009.

The City proposes to make a comprehensive amendment to the Housing Element, a focused amendment to the Community Safety and Services Element to address climate change resiliency planning as required by SB 379 and CGC section 65302(g), and minor amendments to the Land Use Element, Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, Environmental Management Element, and Noise Element. As the City is revising six General Plan elements (not all seven elements), these amendments are referred to as a Focused General Plan Update (Focused GPU). In addition to the Focused GPU, the City is proposing specific amendments to Title 18 (Zoning) of the San Carlos Municipal Code, and amendments to San Carlos’ Land Use Map and Zoning Map.

Amendments to Title 18 and the Zoning Map are made to comply with California Government Code (CGC) Section 65300 et seq. that require zoning to be consistent with the Focused GPU.

Therefore, the proposed “project” that will be evaluated in this EIR is adoption of both the Focused GPU and amendments to Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code and Zoning Map (collectively, Focused GPU, or the project). It is important to note that the Land Use, Circulation and Scenic Highways, Environmental Management, and Noise elements and Title 18 Municipal Code and Zoning Map are updated only to reflect and support the updated Housing Element and Community Safety and Services Element (see Sections 3.3.3 through 3.3.8).

The intent of updating the Housing and Community Safety and Service Elements is to create a policy framework that will:
• Facilitate new housing growth within San Carlos in response to the Bay Area region’s need for more affordable and market rate housing, as well as identify and develop housing strategies to meet San Carlos’ 2023-2031 housing unit Regional Housing Needs Allocation (i.e., 2,735 new homes); and
1 Each planning agency shall prepare and the legislative body of each county and city shall adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and of any land outside its boundaries which in the planning agency’s judgment bears relation to its planning. Chartered cities shall adopt general plans which contain the mandatory elements specified in Section 65302. CA Govt Code § 65300 (2021).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 187
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
• Provide updated information about natural and man-made hazard risks to the community, provide new information related to wildfire hazard, add sea level rise and resiliency planning strategies, and present policies designed to protect life and property from these hazards.

The project will ensure that the General Plan meets the requirements of the California Government Code (CGC), Article 5 (Authority for and Scope of General Plans); addresses changes to the demographic, economic, and environmental conditions in San Carlos that are anticipated to occur through the year 2031; and that Title 18, Zoning is consistent with General Plan. The project includes goals, policies, and actions and amendments to the Title 18 of the Municipal Code to be enacted after adoption of the Focused General Plan Update project; however, this EIR contemplates these actions as implementing actions and activities of the project. The purpose of the amendments is to make Title 18 consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the project.

Amendments to Title 18 necessary to implement these actions will be adopted for the “opportunity sites” to implement the Housing Element, and as necessary to meet RHNA, as well as to implement Safety Element policy and actions.

3.1 BACKGROUND

3.1.1 State Regional Housing Needs Allocation
California Government Code Section 65584 recognizes local governments play a vital role in developing housing affordable to all income levels. In 1969, the State mandated all California cities, towns, and counties must plan for the housing needs of residents, regardless of income. This mandate is called the Housing Element and Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA. As part of RHNA, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) determines the total number of new homes California needs to plan for, and their affordability levels in order to meet the housing needs of people at all income levels. The state-wide RHNA is then broken down to regional allocations, which are then broken down to the local jurisdictions.

The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)2representing nine counties and 101 cities and towns in the San Francisco Bay area region, working with a designated Housing Methodology Committee (HMC), distributes a share of the region's housing need to each city, town, and county in the region. Each local government must then update its Housing Element to show the locations where housing can be built to accommodate the RHNA and the policies and strategies necessary to meet the community's housing needs.

For the ABAG region, the RHNA covers an 8.5-year projection period (June 30, 2022 – December 15, 2030, also known as the Sixth Cycle) and is divided into four income categories: very low, low, moderate, and above moderate (within the very low-income category is the “extremely low2 The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is the comprehensive regional planning agency and council of governments for the nine counties and 101 cities and towns of the San Francisco Bay region.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 188
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-3
October 2022
income category). The ABAG region’s projected housing need is 441,176 new housing units for the Sixth Cycle. San Carlos’ Sixth Cycle RHNA is 2,735 housing units, with the units distributed among the four income categories as shown in Table 3-1. The updated Housing Element for this planning period demonstrates that San Carlos has sufficient capacity to meet its 2023-2031 RHNA obligations with projects in the pipeline, anticipated accessory dwelling unit and SB9 unit construction, and identified housing opportunity sites.

Table 3-1: San Carlos RHNA
Income Group % of County Median Family
Income
RHNA
(Housing Units) Percentage of Units
Very Low 0 -50% 739 27.0%
Low 51 – 80% 425 15.5%
Moderate 81 – 120% 438 16.0%
Above Moderate 120% + 1,133 41.4%
Total 2,735 100%
In developing a methodology to assign the RHNA, ABAG has to meet five statutory objectives, as summarized below:

1. Increase housing supply and mix of housing types, with the goal of improving housing affordability and equity in all cities and counties within the region.

2. Promote infill development and socioeconomic equity; protect environmental and agricultural resources; encourage efficient development patterns; and achieve greenhouse gas reduction targets.

3. Improve intra-regional jobs-to-housing relationship, including the balance between lowwage jobs and affordable housing units for low-wage workers in each jurisdiction.

4. Balance disproportionate household income distributions (more high-income allocation to lower-income areas, and vice-versa)

5. Affirmatively further fair housing.

The RHNA must also be consistent with the growth pattern identified in Plan Bay Area 2050, which is the Bay Area region's long-range plan for transportation, housing, the economy, and the environment.

3.1.2 Housing Element Update
All California cities and counties are required to plan for their fair share of the State’s housing needs. The planning process to accomplish this is the Housing Element update, which now has an eight-year period. Housing Elements, long-range policy documents, are required to be reviewed and certified by the State of California’s Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). The City of San Carlos’ existing Housing Element Update covers the period of 2015-2023 (Fifth Cycle) and includes a RHNA allocation of 596 new housing to be planned for during the 2015 through 2023 planning period. Between 2015 and 2021, 622 units of the current 596-unit RHNA assignment were constructed. Although total construction exceeded the full RHNA

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 189
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-4 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
allocation, this was largely due to the development of above-moderate income units. Only 11 percent of very low-income units, 13 percent of low-income units, and 13 percent of moderateincome units were built during this period.

All ABAG jurisdictions are currently planning for the Sixth Cycle and their respective allocated RHNA. The ABAG jurisdictions’ housing element update statutory deadline for adoption is January 31, 2023. Government Code requirements state that jurisdictions must adopt housing element updates within 120 calendar days from the statutory deadline.

A housing element’s components, as required by Government Code Section 65583, include a:
• Detailed analysis of the jurisdiction’s demographic, economic, and housing characteristics; • Comprehensive analysis of the barriers to producing and preserving housing; • Review of the jurisdiction’s progress in implementing its adopted housing policies and programs;
• Identification of policies and actions, and a full list of programs that will help the jurisdiction carry out the policies; and
• List of Opportunity Sites (i.e., sites for housing) that can accommodate new housing, demonstrating the jurisdiction’s ability to meet its RHNA target allocation.

To meet its RHNA target, San Carlos is permitted to count anticipated units associated with the following scenarios:
• Development projects approved by the City but not yet constructed, • Proposed residential and/or mixed-use projects,
• Sites of a sufficient size and having other characteristics to be identified as “opportunity sites”; and
• A projection of anticipated construction associated with accessory dwelling units and/or duplexes in low-density residential zones associated with the new State law, Senate Bill 9 (SB 9).

The composition of potential housing types to meet San Carlos’ RHNA requirements include:
• Single-Unit
• Multi-Unit
• Mixed-Use (i.e., multi-family units built alongside commercial or office uses in a vertical or horizontal layout, either in the same building or as separate buildings) • Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
• SB9 units?
The Housing Element maps are updated to show where future housing is anticipated to be built to meet the RHNA (Opportunity Sites) and identifies the potential number of residential units that may be built at the locations, consistent with State law.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 190
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-5
October 2022
The Housing Element is integral to other General Plan Elements and is consistent with the goals and policies set forth by the General Plan. The Land Use Element will be updated to reflect land use and density changes and other policies to be consistent with the Housing Element. Likewise, Title 18, Zoning, of the Municipal Code will be amended for consistency with the General Plan in accordance with State law.

3.1.3 Community Safety and Services Element (Being Renamed as the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element) Update
The contents of a Safety Element are specified in Government Code §65304(g) and recent State legislation is in effect since the City’s Community Safety and Services Element was last updated and adopted in 2009. Specifically, California Senate Bill 379 (“SB 379”), California Senate Bill 1035 (“SB 1035), and California Senate Bill 1241 (“SB 1241”) placed new requirements on how and when cities need to update the Safety Element. A Safety Element contain goals, policies and implementation plans to prepare for and protect the public from the harmful impacts of environmental hazards. The Safety Element for San Carlos is contained in the Community Safety and Services Element. Currently, the Safety Element addresses geologic, flooding, and wildfire hazards. It is being updated to comply with new state requirements to address climate change and resiliency planning, as well as new requirements to address sea level rise, flooding, and a more robust planning effort to address wildfire hazards.

Efforts to streamline state and local planning include allowing a jurisdiction to incorporate local hazard mitigation plans and other climate adaptation and resilience planning documents by reference in the General Plan. The San Carlos Community Safety and Services Element, now being renamed the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element under this project, is being updated as necessary as part of the project to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies and ensure consistency with the San Mateo County 2021 Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, the San Carlos Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan, and other regional resiliency planning documents. The wildfire policies will be reviewed and approved by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE).

The proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element contains goals, policies, and actions to reduce the risks associated with environmental hazards. The proposed goals, policies, and actions focus on building the resilience of the community and the built environment against hazards, including geologic and seismic hazards, flooding, wildfire, poor air quality, and climate change effects, hazardous materials, and aviation hazards from the San Carlos Airport. The proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element also address crime prevention and police services, fire prevention and suppression services, and disaster preparedness and evacuation. It also includes proposed implementation programs consist of procedures, permits, agreements, and ordinances; special projects; outreach and education programs; and interagency and other organizations consultation. A summary of the new goals (with related policies and actions) is contained in section 3.3.3, below. Appendix B presents the Draft Environmental Safety and Public Services Element.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 191
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

3.1.4 Other Updates for Consistency
The proposed updated Housing Element and Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Updates require updates to other General Plan elements and Title 18, Zoning of the Municipal Code. The following items require minor edits to maintain consistency with the proposed Housing and Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Updates:
• Land Use Element, including General Plan land use designations map and land use designations;
• Circulation and Scenic Highway Element;
• Environmental Management Element;
• Noise Element; and
• Title 18, Zoning and Zoning Map.

3.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The City of San Carlos is located in the central-east portion of San Mateo County on the San Francisco Peninsula, approximately halfway between San Francisco and San Jose. San Carlos’ city limit extends to the City of Belmont to the northwest, the San Francisco Bay to the northeast, the City of Redwood City to the southeast, and unincorporated San Mateo County to the southwest (see Figure 3-1 Regional Location).

The project area includes lands within the City’s corporate limits and lands within the City’s sphere of influence (SOI). The term “sphere of influence” applies to the area designated by the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission (also known as LAFCO) as the probable, future physical boundary or service area of the City.

The City of San Carlos encompasses approximately eight square miles, nearly all of which are developed with urban land uses. San Carlos’ sphere of influence (project area) includes three areas of unincorporated San Mateo County – the Devonshire Area (including two non-adjacent areas:

Devonshire Canyon and a nearby 17-acre area adjacent to Club Drive, Cranfield Avenue, and the City of Belmont), Palomar Park, and Pulgas Ridge (formally known as the Hassler Area). The City’s project area consists of 10,348 parcels encompassing 3,570 gross acres (Figure 3-2 Project Area).

3.2.1 Land Use
Residential land uses represent the predominant existing land use type in San Carlos (1,970 gross acres), which account for more than half (55 percent) of the total land area. Single-unit residential uses—generally consisting of one house per lot—make up over 50 percent of the residential

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 192
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-7
October 2022
category. Multi-unit residential uses make up less than five percent of residential uses. Mixed – Use land uses total eight acres (less than one percent).

Commercial and light industrial land uses total 488 acres (14 percent). Public Facilities and Institutions makes up 311 gross acres (nine percent). Park and open space uses encompass 668 gross acres (19 percent). Parking uses total 20 acres or less than one percent, while vacant land makes up 106 acres and three percent of the Planning Area. Figure 3-3 shows the existing land uses within the City and Figure 3-4 presents the existing General Plan Land Use Map. Figure 3-5 presents the City’s existing Zoning Map

3.3 PROPOSED PROJECT

3.3.1 Purpose and Objectives
The project establishes the objectives listed below for the long-term growth and enhancement of the community.

1. Promote the preservation and improvement of the quality of existing housing and neighborhoods.

2. Encourage housing development located close to transit, Downtown, and along El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue with high quality, higher density, multi-family housing.

3. Assist in the development of new housing that is affordable at all income levels.

4. Remove and/or mitigate potential governmental constraints to the provision of adequate, affordable housing.

5. Provide adequate housing for special needs populations.

6. Eliminate discrimination in the provision of housing.

7. Reduce the potential loss of life, injury, and property damage due to seismic and geologic hazards.

8. Reduce hazards associated with flooding or inundation from inland flooding and Sea Level Rise. Protect lives and property from risks associated with wildfire-related emergencies.

9. Protect the community from the harmful effects of hazardous materials.

10. Combat housing discrimination, lessen racial bias, lessen historic patterns of segregation, and lift barriers that restrict access to foster inclusive communities and achieve racial equity.

11. Continue effective emergency response procedures to ensure public safety in the event of natural or man-made disasters.

12. Identify communities most vulnerable to climate change impacts and establish new goals, policies, and programs for equitable public safety, emergency preparedness, response, and recovery.
.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 193
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2020; MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 3-1 Regional Location
Legend
~
City of Sa n Carlos Bounda ry
) • - • - - - - • Sphere of Influence
Augu st 2010
Highways
Waterbodies
Parks and Open Spaces
Santa Cla ra County
Source, United States Census Bureau, 1019.

Oty of San Carlos, County of San Mate(I Urban Footprin~ 101Q San Francisco Bay
San Carlos
2 alo Alto
Mile
4 8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 194
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2020; MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 3-2 Project Area
Legend
City of San Carlos Boundary
Sphe re of Influence
Major Streets
Streets
Caltrain Ra ilroad and Stations
Surro unding Jurisdictio ns
Parks and Open Spaces
Waterbodies
San Carlos Airport
'!;,,:;"'
r
T
,/ .. ,
.. ~ ..
..
\
'\ .. , .. ,
Crystal .,
Springs
,<' ,, .. ,,' ' ~ r--'
\ \ , '
,,,'
. ' .. f Pu/ gas Ri dge '\
' '
' ,' ' ' ' •-~ I
.--
\ Pulgas Ridge Open Space
' • '
1 ' ' ' • ' ,,.,. • I \,---; ,. ' ,.,. ,. ' _____ ,_ .. ,, August 2020
Sou1Ces: United States Census Bu,eau, 2019.

City of San Ca,los, County of San Mateo, U1ban Footp1int, 2020.

Edgewood Park and
Natural Preserve
,JU lo P .k
Burton~ r
¼
I
{_
½
'----,
Bair
Island
Smith Slough
Mile
1 8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 195
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2020; MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 3-3 Existing Land Uses
Existing Land Uses
Single-Family Residential
L-__ _. Multi-Family Residential
Mixed-Use
Retail
Office/Commercial
Industrial
Warehousing
Civic
Base Map Features
-+-fl--+
City of San Ca rlos Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Major Streets
Streets
Caltrain Ra ilroad and Stations
Surrounding Jurisd ictions
Parks and Open Space
Waterbodies
August2020
Sources:UnitcdStatesCensusBureau, 2019.CityofSanCarlos, CountyofSanMateo, UrbanFootprint,2020.

Edgewood Park and
Natural Preserve

SAN MATEO COUNTY
¼
, l I~
ta
, ! los l j rt I
\
\
\
'
½
Bair
I sland
Smith Slough
Mile
1 8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 196
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2020; MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 3-4 Existing General Plan Land Use
Existing General Plan Designations
Single-Family, Low Density (3 DUs/ Ac)
Single-Family (6 DUs/Ac)
■
■
Multi-Family, Low Density (10-20 DUs/Ac)
Multi-Family, Medium Density (21-59 DUs/Ac)
Mixed Use, Low Density (10-20 DUs/Ac)
■ Mixed Use, Medium Density (21-50 DUs/Ac)
■
■
■
■
■
Mixed Use, Medium High Density (21 -59 DUs/Ac)
Neighborhood Retail/Mixed Use (21-50 DUs/Ac) ~---
Neighborhood Retail •
■
■
■
■
Planned Industrial
General Commercial - Industrial
Public
Park
Open Space
Open Space - Schools
Airport
Base Map Features
---6---+
City of San Carlos Boundary
Sphere of Influence
Major Streets
Streets
Caltrain Railroad and Stations
Surrounding Jurisdictions
Pa rks and Open Space
Waterbodies
August2020
Sources:UnitedStatesCensusBureau,2019.CityofSanCarlos,
CountyofSanMateo,UrbanFootprint,2020.

SAN MATEO COUNTY
Bair
ls /and
Smith Slough
y
Mile
1 8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 197
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2020; MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 3-5 Existing Zoning
Existing Zoning Designations
RS-3: Single-Family, Low Density
RS-6: Single-Family
RM-20: Multi-Family, Low Density
RM-59: Multi-Family, Medium Density
MU-NB: Mixed Use North Boulevard
MU-SB: Mixed Use South Boulevard
MU-D: Mixed Use Downtown
MU-DC: Mixed Use Down town Core
MU-N: Neighborhood Mixed Use
MU-SA: Mixed Use Station Area
MU-SC: Mixed Use San Carlos Ave
IL: Light Industrial
IH: Heavy Industrial
IA: Industrial Arts
- IP: Industrial Professional
GCI: General Commercial/Industrial
- LC: Landmark Commercial
- NR: Neighborhood Retail
PD: Planned Development
A:Airport
P: Public
PK: Park
OS: Open Space
Neighborhood Hub Overlay
8 Gateway Overlay District
,,'
.
'
,,<' ,,,' ,,
• .
) \
: Pu/gas Ridg
' :'
• ~--.
...
•
-7 ,/,. .... ___ ,_,.
,
August2020
Sources:UnitedStatesCensusBureau,2019.CityofSanCarlos,
CountyofSanMateo,UrbanFootprint,2020.
,,
Palomar Park
\ .... , _,,··,<!? '---_\ .. --------------------- /

SAN MATEO COUNTY
Bair
Island
Smith Slough

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 198
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-13
October 2022

3.3.2 Housing Element Update
The City of San Carlos has been assigned a RHNA of 2,735 new housing units for the 2023-2031 planning period. This is broken down into 739 extremely-low/very low-income units, 425 low income units, 438 moderate income units, and 1,133 above moderate income units. The RHNA assignment represents 22 percent of the existing housing units within the City limits. Because the Housing Element must plan for or have policies in place to accommodate the RHNA assignment in any given planning period, jurisdictions typically plan for a slightly higher number of housing units than the actual RHNA assignment. This allows for some market variation and demand. In addition, as HCD completes their review of the Housing Element, some of these sites may be removed. For the purposes of this CEQA document, the City is planning for and evaluating a total of 3,576 units (2,735 RHNA + 841 buffer units).

Housing elements identify possible sites where future homes can be built, called “opportunity sites”, and identify the potential number of homes that can be built on these sites. The opportunity sites identified in the updated Housing Element consist of the following categories and potential numbers of units in Table 3-2:

Table 3-2: Comparison of Sites, Pipeline Projects, and RHNA Extremely/
Very LowIncome (0-
50% AMI*)
LowIncome
(50-80%
AMI)
ModerateIncome (0-
120%
AMI)
AboveModerate
Income
(+120%) Total
2023 – 2031 RHNA 739 425 438 1,133 2,735
Approved/Proposed Projects 3 63 7 279 352
Projected ADU Construction 10 61 102 30 203
Projected SB 9 Duplex Construction - - - 160 160
Vacant/Underutilized Residential Sites 49 0 159 184 392 Vacant/Underutilized Mixed-Use Sites 1,490 0 470 509 2,469 Total 1,552 124 738 1,162 3,576
*AMI = Area Median Income
San Carlos anticipates accommodating the new housing by increasing the allowed housing density (units/net acre) in certain zoning designations and certain areas within the project area. In addition to approved and proposed projects in the pipeline, the City proposes to meet the RHNA through accessory dwelling unit (ADU) projections, SB 9 duplex construction projections, and vacant and underutilized sites in residential and mixed-use areas (see Figure 3-6).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 199
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2020; MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 3-6 Opportunity Sites Inventory
Vacant Sites by Zones
-- Residential/Mixed-Use Zones (35 sites)
Res./MU Zones between 0.5 and 10 Acres
Nonresidential Zones (5 sites)
--Planned Development Zones (4 sites)
Base Map Features
- - - · City of San Carlos Boundary
Sphere of Influence
---- Major Streets
Streets
---t:J+---+ Caltrain Ra ilroad and Stations
Surrounding Jurisdictions
Parks and Open Space
Waterbodies
September2020
Sources: llnitedStates(ensusBu1eau,2019.CityofSan(ar1~, (ountyofSanMateo,llrbanfootp1int,GoogleMaps,2020
Pu/gas Ridge
¼ ½
Mile
1 8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 200
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-15
October 2022
Approved/Proposed Projects
The “projection period” is the time period for which the RHNA is calculated (Government Code Section 65588(f)(2)). Projects that have been approved, permitted, or received a certificate of occupancy since the beginning of the RHNA projected period may be credited toward meeting the RHNA allocation based on the affordability and unit count of the development. ABAG’s sixth cycle RHNA projection period is June 30, 2022 through December 15, 2030.3 Proposed and approved residential development projects credited toward the 2023-2031 include a variety of affordable and market rate projects, as outlined in Table 3-3.

SB 9 Duplexes
In September 2021, Governor Newsom signed California Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) into law, with an effective date of January 1, 2022. SB 9 mandates ministerial approval of duplexes on lots zoned for a single-family residence and requires ministerial approval of subdivisions of a single-family lot into two lots, creating the theoretical possibility of four units on each single-family parcel in the state (with some exceptions). SB 9 construction is limited to single-family zones.

Table 3-3: Approved and Proposed Projects
Project Project Status
Extremely/ Very
Low-Income (0-
50% AMI)
LowIncome
(50-80%
AMI)
ModerateIncome (0-
120%
AMI)
AboveModerate
Income
(+120%) Total
626 Walnut Planning Approval1 0 3 1 35 39
782 Elm Planning Approval 0 0 0 4 4
1257 Magnolia Planning Approval 0 0 0 9 9
560 El Camino Real Under Construction 0 1 2 21 24
616 Cedar Under Construction 0 0 0 4 4
1525 San Carlos Ave Under Construction 0 1 2 15 18
1240 El Camino Real Under Construction 0 0 1 7 8
1232 Cherry City Project/Design
Phase2 0 35 0 0 35
155-160 Vista Del
Grande
Application has been
submitted to City for
review
0 11 0 78 89
308 Phelps Application has been
submitted to City for
review
1 2 1 10 14
806 Alameda de las
Pulgas
Application has been
submitted to City for
review
0 10 0 77 87
3 The RHNA projection period varies slightly from the Housing Element planning period, which refers to the date the Housing Element is due to be adopted and the duration of the eight-year term. The Housing Element planning period for the sixth cycle in the ABAG region is January 31, 2023 through January 31, 2031.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 201
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-16 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 3-3: Approved and Proposed Projects
Project Project Status
Extremely/ Very
Low-Income (0-
50% AMI)
LowIncome
(50-80%
AMI)
ModerateIncome (0-
120%
AMI)
AboveModerate
Income
(+120%) Total
1360 Cherry Application has been
submitted to City for
review
0 0 0 6 6
1383 Laurel Application has been
submitted to City for
review
2 0 0 13 15
Total 3 63 7 279 352
Remaining RHNA 736 362 431 854 2,383
1 Planning Approval means the project has received Planning entitlement. 2 City Project/Design Phase means that the project’s design is underway and City staff may be working with the tentative project applicant or designer; a formal application has not yet been submitted to City of San Carlos.

As part of the analysis completed to support the Housing Element update, the City’s consultant team identified 2,136 parcels in single-family zones that are greater than or equal to 0.2 acres (greater than the average lot size for the RS-3 and RS-6 zones of 0.18 acres). When specific parcels are removed from the count, 1,068 parcels remain.4 Using a conservative estimate that 15 percent of the 1,068 parcels may be developed with SB9 units in the next eight years, this would result in 160 additional housing units.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
Since 2017, the California State Legislature passed a series of laws increasing the potential for new ADUs and Junior ADUs (JADUs) development. The laws remove development barriers, allow ADUs to be processed with ministerial permits, and require jurisdictions to include programs in their housing element to incentivize ADU development. The recent past has shown that San Carlos property owners have a high interest in constructing ADUs and the interest continues to grow. Table 3-4 shows recent ADU construction interest.

Table 3-4: Recent ADU Construction Interest
Calendar Year
ADUs Constructed
(Building Permits Issued)
2018 19
2019 14
2020 29
2021 33
Total 95
4 Parcels are removed because they contain a use other than a single-unit home (and are thus unlikely to redevelop via SB 9 allowances) or are vacant, or the parcel is located in a very high fire severity zone.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 202
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-17
October 2022
Given an average of recent historical trends, a total of 203 ADUs can be predicted to be constructed during the planning period (approximately 24 ADUs per year). ADUs are permitted in all zones that allow residential uses.

Vacant and Underutilized Opportunity Sites
Consistent with HCD guidelines, methodology for determining realistic capacity on each identified opportunity site must account for land use controls and site improvements. The Housing Element opportunity sites inventory surveyed large-scale residential and mixed-use development projects approved since 2015 to establish estimates related to potential development. Combined, all approved residential and mixed-use projects since 2015 had an average density of 86 percent of the maximum allowable density. Residential zones had a lower average of 53 percent of allowed capacity. Mixed use zones had an actual density of 107 percent of allowed density, due to extensive use of the State Density Bonus law. In multi-unit residential and mixed-use zones, a minimum density requirement is being implemented as part of Zoning Ordinance amendments proposed by the project and planned for early 2023. As such, for the opportunity sites’ realistic capacity, the minimum required density is used.

To consider the potential for nonresidential development, the City reviewed all projects (residential and nonresidential) in mixed-use zones since 2015. During that time, 23 projects were developed, of which three (or 13 percent) were nonresidential. The remaining 20 projects (87 percent) were residential or mixed-use. To provide a conservative estimate of realistic capacity for the sites inventory, an 85 percent multiplier is applied in mixed-use zones to account for potential redevelopment with nonresidential uses.

The Housing Element contains goals, policies, and implementation programs to address housing needs in the community, reduce/remove constraints to housing development, identify resources available to address housing needs, and promote equal housing opportunities for all people.

Appendix B contains the proposed Housing Element.

3.3.3 Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Update As noted previously, recent State legislation is in effect since the City’s Community Safety and Services Element was last updated and adopted in 2009. The San Carlos Community Safety and Services Element, now being renamed the Environmental Safety and Public Services Element under the project, is being updated as necessary as part of the project to address climate adaptation and resiliency strategies and ensure consistency with the 2021 San Mateo County MultiJurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The wildfire policies will be reviewed and approved by CALFIRE.

The Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Update contains goals, policies, and actions to reduce the risks associated with environmental hazards. The proposed goals, policies, and actions focus on building the resilience of the community and the built environment against hazards, including geologic and seismic hazards, flooding and sea level rise, wildfire, poor air quality and climate change effects, including extreme weather events, hazardous materials, and

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 203
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-18 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
aviation hazards from the San Carlos Airport. The Environmental Safety and Public Services Element also address crime prevention and police services, fire prevention and suppression services, and disaster preparedness and evacuation. The Environmental Safety and Public Services Element’s proposed implementation programs consist of procedures, permits, agreements, and ordinances; special projects; outreach and education programs; and interagency and other organizations consultation.

New goals contained in the proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element include:
• Goal ESPS-3 Agency Coordination: A resilient San Carlos is well prepared to minimize risks associated with wildfire.
• Goal ESPS-4 Develop a community that proactively prevents wildfires and protects life, property, and infrastructure from urban and wildfire impacts. • Goal ESPS-8 A community that is resilient against changing climate conditions. • Goal ESPS-9: The City of San Carlos has a sustainable and resilient water supply despite potential for more frequent and severe drought conditions. • Goal ESPS 10 A community that is resilient during and after extreme heat and severe weather events.
• Goal ESPS 11 A community that is protected against sea level rise and safeguards the natural and built environment from inundation due to rising sea levels. • Goal ESPS 12 A community protected against rising groundwater levels caused by sea level rise.

Full text of the proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element Update with proposed policies and action items as well as minor edits related to flooding and hazardous materials and waste can be found in Appendix B.

3.3.4 Land Use Element Update
The Land Use Element would be updated to ensure consistency with the Housing and the Environmental Safety and Public Services Elements Updates. This includes updating the General Plan map (see Figure 3-7 for proposed land use) and zoning designations (see Figure 3-8 for proposed zoning) to reflect the up-zoning required to implement the Housing Element, ensuring mixed-use development is sensitively designed as residential development, and requiring new and substantially remodeled development in the Very High and High Fire Susceptibility Zones are improved in accordance with Building Codes in place at the time of construction.

The following describes the proposed land use designations for the General Plan Update (new text shown in underline and deleted text shown in strikeout):
• Single-Family, Low Density 3 du/ac permits single-family homes at densities of up to three dwelling units per acre.
• Single-Family, 6 du/ac permits single-family homes at densities of up to six dwelling units per acre.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 204
San Carlos Housing and Safety Elements
Figure 3-7 Proposed Land Use
Single-Family, 3 DUs/Ac
Single-Family, 6 DUs/Ac
■ Multi-Family,15-20 DUs/Ac
■ Multi-Family, 45-59 DUs/Ac
■ Multi-Family, 75-100 DUs/Ac
■ Multi-Family,60-120DUs/Ac
Mixed Use, 30-40 DUs/Ac
■ Mixed Use, 38-50 DUs/Ac
■ Mixed Use, 75-l00DUs/Ac
■ Mixed Use, 90-120 DUs/Ac /•
■ Neighborhood Retail/Mixed Use, 21-50 DUs/Ac ( '•
■ Neighborhood Retail
■ Planned Industrial
■ General commercial - Industrial
■ Public
■ Park
■ Open Space
■ Open Space - Schools
■ Airport
Base Map Features
___ , CityofSanCarlos Boundary
Sphere of Influence
---- Major Streets
- -- Streets
~ cattrain Railroad and Stations
Surrounding Jurisdictions
Parks and Open Space
Waterbodies
October2022
Sour~s: Un iledStatesCtnsus Bi.nilu, 2079.CityofSanCarlos, CountyofSanMiltr:o, Urban Footirint,2020.
'" ------.,, ·,,
-
~ -,
,y
l
"' "' '--' " ,·
"•,~ ,( •...._ '
• ' >- 'v
Bair
Is land
Smith Slough
--------.-------• ¼ ½ , Mile

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 205
San Carlos Housing and Safety Elements
Figure 3-8 Proposed Zoning
Zoning
-- A GCI
- IA - IH -IL - IP - LC - MU-D-1 20
- PD-13
- PD-14
- PD-16
- PD-1 7
- PD-18
- PD-19
- PD-2
- PD-20
- MU·DC·lOO - PD·21
- MU-N - PD-22
- MU-N-120 - PD-23
- MU-N-40 - PD-25
- MU-N-50 - PD-3
- MU-NB - PD-4
- MU-NB-1 20 - PD-5
- MU-SA - PD-6
- MU-SB - PD-7
- MU·SB-100 - PD-8
- MU-SB- 120 - PD-9
- MU-SC - PK
- MU-SC- 120 - RM-100
- NR - RM-20
- OS - RM-59 -p - RS-3
- PD- 10 RS-6
- PD-12 - Undesignated
Octobtr2022
Sources: UnitdStatesCensus Bi,eau,2019.CityofSanCarlos, CountyofSanMateo, Urbanfootprint,2020.
:,
,, ,,
' I
'
,' ' ,,
t
' ' ,
' ,' '
' I
,,
Pu I gas
-~ I • , ,. \ "·.-~-- - ¼ y,
Bair
Is land
Smith Slough

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 206
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-21
October 2022
• Multiple-Family, Low Density 15- 20 du/ac permits multi-family dwellings at densities of 10 15to 20 dwelling units per acre.
• Multiple-Family, Medium Density 46- 59 du/ac permits multi- family dwellings at densities of 46-59 dwelling units per acre.
• Multiple-Family, 75- 100 du/ac permits multi-family dwellings at densities of 75- 100 dwelling units per acre.
• Multiple Family, 90-120 du/ac permits multi-family dwellings at densities of 90 to 120 dwelling units per acre.
• Mixed Use, 30-40 du/ac permits both commercial and multi-family residential uses at residential densities of 30-40 dwellings units per acre. • Mixed Use, Low Density 38-50 du/ac permits both commercial and multi-family residential uses at residential densities of 10 to 20 38-50 dwellings units per acre. • Mixed Use, Medium Density 75-100 du/ac permits both commercial and multi-family residential uses at residential densities of 50 75-100 dwellings units per acre. • Mixed Use, Medium High Density 90-120 du/ac permits both commercial and multi-family residential uses at residential densities of 59 90-120 dwellings units per acre Land Use Element Table 3-2 General Plan Land Use Designations shall be revised as follows:

Updated Land Use Element Table 3-2
Designation Acres Percent
Single Family, 3 du/ac 158.3 5.7%
Single Family, 6 du/ac 1,416.4 50.6%
Multi-Family, 15-20 du/ac 126.8 4.5%
Multi-Family, 46-59 du/ac 7.1 Less than 1%
Multi-Family, 75-100 du/ac 42.1 1.5%
Multi-Family, 90-120 du/ac 2.0 Less than 1%
Mixed Use, 30-40 du/ac 20.6 Less than 1%
Mixed Use, 38-50 du/ac 18.1 Less than 1%
Mixed Use, 75-100 du/ac 32.6 1.2%
Mixed Use, 90-120 du/ac 43.1 1.5%
Neighborhood Retail & Mixed
Use, 21-50 du/ac

6.1 Less than 1%
Neighborhood Retail 0.8 Less than 1%
Planned Industrial 307.1 11%
General Commercial – Industrial 118.7 4.2%
Public 13.6 Less than 1%
Park 143.3 Less than 1%
Open Space 186.1 6.7%
Open Space – Schools 71.0 2.5%
Airport 85.4 3.1%
Total1 2.799 100%
The 19 different land use designations in this Element establish a range of densities and intensities of use to provide flexibility for development while still maintaining San Carlos’ existing character.

The development levels listed here do not create entitlements to a specific number of dwelling

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 207
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-22 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
units or amount of floor area ratio. Densities on individual parcels may be lower due to site constraints or other City regulations.

The following are the proposed changes to the current General Plan Land Use Element policies and actions text (proposed new text is shown in underline while deleted text is shown with strikethrough):
• Policy LU-1.6 Consider reduced parking requirements for multi-family residential and mixed-use projects within the TOD corridor. Reduced parking requirements may be permitted only if a parking study is submitted demonstrating that the reduced parking is adequate to accommodate on-site parking demand associated with the project. • Action LU-1.8 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to address the new multiple family and mixed-use designations.
• Policy LU-8.2 Ensure that new development is sensitive sensitively transitions to the character of adjacent structures and the immediate neighborhood. • Policy LU-8.7 Encourage Require new residential development to provide outdoor areas and landscaping or native vegetation, or tree canopy to enhance the surroundings. • Policy LU-8.19 Residential and mixed-use structures shall be designed to be compatible with existing structures in the vicinity, avoid minimize obstructing views from adjacent structures or views of community importance, avoid minimize interference with the right or ability to use solar energy and be consistent with the community design principles. • Policy LU-8.20 Require all new residential multi-family residential, commercial, and industrial projects subject to design review by the appropriate decision- making body for compliance with site planning, architecture, signing, and landscaping criteria prior to approval, as permitted by State law.
• Action LU-8.3Amend the Zoning Ordinance to limit the height of building walls at the street-facing property line to two stories on the 600, 700 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street.

Additional stories may be permitted if they are stepped back a minimum distance from the ground-level building wall.
• Action LU-8.45 Develop objective design standards consistent with State law and amend the Zoning Ordinance and Planning Division Department application submittal checklist to require information and materials that accurately and sufficiently demonstrate a project’s compliance with new objective design standards architectural facade and design policies. • Action 8-6 changed to 8-5 due to removal of Policy 8.3. • Policy LU-9.5 Require buffering, screening, setbacks transitional standard, or other measures for new and expanded multi-family residential, mixed use, and/or commercial/industrial developments adjacent to single-family residential neighborhoods to minimize impacts.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 208
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-23
October 2022
• Policy LU-9.10 In the event of closure of a school, the primary planned use of these sites remains for school and associated recreation purposes, or housing. The school site should be considered for acquisition by the City.
• Policy LU-9.14 Legally nonconforming multi-family residential structures located within multi-family residential zoning districts may be replaced, restored, rebuilt, or repaired and used consistent with the Zoning Ordinance in effect at the time the structure was originally constructed only upon issuance of a conditional use permit approved by the Planning Commission.at the time of the replacement, restoring, rebuilding, or repairing. • Action LU-9.2 Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include objective design standards, transitional design standards for multi-family residential buildings and commercial uses adjacent to single-family homes, as appropriate. Standards may include height limitations, increased setbacks, landscaping requirements and density limitations. • Action LU-9.3 Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to require courtesy notification of nearby residents for any multi- family residential use or commercial use proposed in immediate proximity to a single-family residential neighborhood • Policy LU-10.6 Require all new development and significantly modified development in the High and Very High Fire Susceptibility Zones to install and maintain fire prevention design and materials in accordance with Building Codes at the time of the construction/reconstruction.

Other text edits in the Land Use Element acknowledge the renamed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element, 2023 Focused General Plan Update, adding new single-family residences as ADUs (in addition to on vacant parcels and as rebuilt or remodeled homes in existing single-family neighborhoods), updating the number of housing units in the City, and accommodating growth in the mixed-use land use.

3.3.5 Circulation and Scenic Highway Element Update
The Circulation and Scenic Highway Element is updated to ensure consistency with the Housing and the Environmental Safety and Public Services Elements. Two policies are updated as follows (new text shown in underline text):
• Policy CSH-1.1. Widths of streets and highways should be sufficient to address existing and projected traffic volumes, emergency access requirements, while providing positive pedestrian and bicycle experiences.
• Policy CSH-3.5. Street and right-of-way widths should be designed and constructed in accordance with the street standards established in this plan, the City Subdivision Ordinance and Standard Details. However, flexibility for street widths should be permitted with sensitivity to slope, neighborhood character, traffic volume, emergency access requirements, and pedestrian/bicycle needs.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 209
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-24 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022

3.3.6 Environmental Management Element Update
One action is updated to ensure consistency with the Housing and the Environmental Safety and Public Services Elements.
• Action EM-11.3. Design streets to accommodate all modes of transportation, including emergency vehicles, and provide for a safe and attractive pedestrian experience.

3.3.7 Noise Element Update
One policy is updated to ensure consistency with the Housing and the Environmental Safety and Public Services Elements.
• Policy NOI-1.5B. For new multi-family residential development maintain a standard of 65 Ldn in community outdoor recreation areas. Noise standards are not applied to private decks and balconies and shall be considered on a case-by-case basis in the downtown core.

3.3.8 Title 18 (Zoning) and General Plan Land Use Amendments Amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code) would be initiated to allow for fulfilment of the City’s RHNA by increasing the residential density within certain zoning designations, as well as by creating new zoning designations. The proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments are anticipated to include single-family residential (e.g., in response to SB-9), multi-family residential and mixed-use categories, which would provide for development of some lower-level commercial/retail, and office. New zoning designations would include MultiFamily and Mixed-Use designations that would allow up to 120 dwelling units per acre. The new, higher density residential and mixed-use zoning designations would occur primarily along the El Camino Real corridor, San Carlos Avenue corridor, and in the Downtown area west of El Camino Real. In addition to the proposed density increases, the City proposes to revise required Development Standards for residential and mixed-use zoning districts such as setbacks, FAR, parking, landscaping, private open space, and other development related requirements. The Land Use and Zoning Maps will also be updated to reflect these changes (see Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8).

As discussed above, the Land Use Element would be updated to ensure consistency with the Housing and the Environmental Safety and Public Services Elements. These updates would ensure consistency between the General Plan and Title 18, Zoning as required by State law. New MultiFamily and Mixed-Use General Plan Land Use designations would be created along the El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue corridors and the Downtown area west of El Camino Real. Zoning districts would be updated to correspond to the new General Plan land use designations. The proposed Title 18 and Zoning Map amendments are necessary to support the Housing Element update, and include creating a new multiple family residential zone (RM-100), and increasing residential densities in certain mixed use zones as shown in Table 3-5.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 210
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-25
October 2022
Table 3-5: Proposed Zones and Densities
Existing Zone Renamed Zone
Existing Density
(units/acre)
Proposed Density
(units/acre)
MU-N MU-N-40 20 40
MU-N MU-N-50 20 50
MU-N MU-N-120 20 120
MU-DC MU-DC-100 50 100
MU-D MU-D-100 50 100
MU-D MU-D-120 50 120
MU-SC MU-SC-120 50 120
MU-NB MU-NB-120 50 120
MU-SB MU-SB-100 50 100
MU-SB MU-SB-120 50 120
The updated/revised General Plan designations and corresponding zones are provided in Table 3-6, below.

Table 3-6: Revised General Plan Land Use Designations and Corresponding Zones
Name*
*The lower density # =
75% of the max density
Description of Change Corresponding Zones
Multi-Family Low
Density (15-20)
Existing
Designation/Range
Change
RM-20
Multi-Family, Medium
Density (-45-59)
Existing
Designation/Range
Change
RM-59
Multi-Family, Medium
High Density (75-100)
New RM-100
Mixed Use, Low Density
(30-40)
New MU-N-40
Mixed Use, Medium
Density (38-50)
Existing
Designation/Range
Change
MU-N-50
Mixed Use, Medium High
Density (75-100)
Existing
Designation/Range
Change
MU-DC-100
MU-D-100
MU-SB-100
Mixed Use, High (90-
120)
New MU-D-120
MU-SC-120
MU-NB-120
MU-SB-120
MU-N-120

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 211
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-26 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
The proposed amendments also include updating the development/design standards to remove housing development constraints (such as setbacks, height, and parking) and reflect recent changes in State law, and to better reflect current development practices and the new density changes. These proposed amendments reflect the City’s planning for additional single units (e.g., anticipated units from SB9 and ADUs), and additional multi-unit housing types in the multi-unit zones and in the mixed-use zones. New and amended zoning designations would include Multi-Unit and MixedUse designations that would allow up to 120 dwelling units per acre along El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue.

The project includes goals, policies, and actions with amendments to the Title 18 of the Municipal Code to be enacted after adoption of the Focused General Plan Update project; however, this EIR contemplates these actions as implementing programs and activities of the project. The purpose of the amendments is to make Title 18 consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the project.

Amendments to Title 18 necessary to implement these programs will be adopted for the "opportunity sites,” to implement the Housing and Safety Elements, and as necessary to meet the RHNA.

3.4 INTENDED USES OF THE PROGRAM EIR
As the Lead Agency, the City intends this Program EIR to serve as the CEQA-required environmental documentation for consideration by other Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies (defined the CEQA Guidelines Sections 15381 and 15386) that may have limited discretionary authority over future projects affected by the General Plan. Following certification of this Program EIR and adoption of the General Plan by the City of San Carlos (Lead Agency), other agencies may use this Program EIR in the approval of subsequent implementation activities.

These agencies may include, but are not limited, to those listed below.

Local Agencies
• San Mateo County
Regional and State Agencies
• San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) • Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
• Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
• California Department of Conservation
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
• California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) • California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
• California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
• Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 212
Chapter 3 Project Description
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 3-27
October 2022
• San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) • Silicon Valley Clean Water (SVCW)
Federal Agencies
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS)

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 213
Chapter 3 Project Description
3-28 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
This page intentionally left blank.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 214
Chapter 4 Impact Analysis
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4-1
October 2022
CHAPTER 4.0: IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section presents the discussion of impacts related to the following subjects in their respective subsections:

4.1 Aesthetics

4.2 Air Quality

4.3 Biological Resources

4.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

4.5 Energy

4.6 Geology and Soils

4.7 Greenhouse Gases

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality

4.10 Land Use

4.11 Noise

4.12 Population and Housing

4.13 Public Services and Recreation

4.14 Transportation

4.15 Utilities and Services

4.16 Wildfire
The discussion for each environmental subject includes the following subsections:

Environmental Setting – This subsection describes the existing, physical environmental conditions in the project area and in the surrounding area, as relevant.

Regulatory Setting - This subsection provides a brief overview of relevant laws, plans, policies, and regulations that compose the regulatory framework for the project.

Significance Thresholds - This subsection includes the recommended checklist questions from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines to assess impacts.

Impact Discussion – This subsection 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). Each impact is numbered to correspond to the checklist question being answered. For example, Impact BIO-1 answers the first checklist question in the Biological Resources section.

References – This subsection provides a list of references and persons consulted in the preparation of the subsection.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 215
Chapter 4 Impact Analysis
4-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
This page intentionally left blank.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 216
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-1
October 2022

4.1 AESTHETICS
This EIR Chapter addresses the project’s potential impacts on scenic vistas and scenic resources, the potential of the project to degrade the visual character or quality of the project area, and the potential of the Focused General Plan Update (Focused GPU) to create substantial and adverse light and glare.

4.1.1 Environmental Setting
The City of San Carlos encompasses approximately eight square miles, nearly all of which are developed with urban land uses. San Carlos’ sphere of influence includes three areas of unincorporated San Mateo County:
• Devonshire Area, which includes two non-adjacent areas: Devonshire Canyon (a County island) and a nearby 17-acre area adjacent to Club Drive, Cranfield Avenue, and the City of Belmont
• Palomar Park, a neighborhood south of the San Carlos city limit • Pulgas Ridge (formally known as the Hassler Area), consisting of Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve and several San Mateo County institutional facilities Scenic Resources
Scenic vistas are defined in this document as natural landscapes that provide views of unique flora, geologic or other natural features that are generally free from urban intrusions. Typical scenic vistas include views of mountains and hills, large, uninterrupted open spaces and waterbodies.

Scenic vistas generally play a large role in the way a community defines itself and also affects development patterns as projects are designed to take advantage of viewsheds. Scenic vistas can be impacted by development in two ways. First, a structure may be constructed that blocks the view of the vista. Second, the vista itself may be altered (i.e., development on a scenic hillside).

San Carlos has varied topography which ranges from land at sea level in the eastern portion to the hilly western portion of the City with elevations up to 900 feet. Views of the surrounding open space west of I-280 and San Francisco Bay can be accessed in many areas west of Alameda de las Pulgas, including from City parks and open space and existing residential neighborhoods. For example, the parks located in the hilly areas near the western edge of the City (Eaton Park, Big Canyon Park, Upper Creek Trailhead, Hidden Canyon Park) provide expansive views of the Bay to the east and of the Pulgas Ridge and Edgewood Open Space Preserves and undeveloped hills west of the I-280 corridor to the west from the hiking and bicycle trails within these parks. Views of the Bay and western hills are less prominent from the flatter terrain areas in the central and eastern parts of the City, as intervening residential, commercial, and industrial development obstructs the views from these areas.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 217
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
The City does not have any formally recognized scenic vistas but residents enjoy and highly value views of San Francisco Bay on the eastern side of the city and the Santa Cruz Mountains west of the city.

Gateways to the City
Gateways are an important component of land use planning and community design that contribute to a city’s character and sense of place. Gateways are locations that announce to a visitor or resident that they are entering the city or a unique neighborhood within the city. Features associated with gateways can include natural features such as a row of trees, or urban features such as signs, structural elements such as towers, fences, walls, signs, landscaping, architecturally significant buildings, or landmark structures. A landmark is defined in the City’s general plan as an element by which people orient themselves and can help create a unique identity for an area. Examples of visual landmarks include statues, major works of public art, historic buildings, water towers, significant landscaping or land forms and other easily identifiable features.

Gateways in San Carlos have been classified into two categories: primary and secondary. Primary gateways are the major regional entry points into the City on roadways or transportation routes.

Secondary gateways are more local entry points into San Carlos from nearby cities including Belmont and Redwood City. The best example of a primary gateway is at San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real. This gateway is characterized by the Caltrain transit hub and historic Train Depot and the architecturally unique and historic Drake Building. This gateway has a prominent architectural signage feature that indicates the entrance to Downtown San Carlos. Combined, these features give the visitor a sense of arrival into Downtown, however, the majority of primary and secondary gateways in the City do little to announce arrival to a unique area. Holly Street at US 101 and Industrial Road, for example, is the primary access route from US 101 to San Carlos. High traffic volumes and a mixture of land uses, including residential, industrial and commercial in this area do not effectively announce to visitors their arrival in San Carlos, even though a small monument feature is installed.

The primary and secondary gateways are identified in Table 4.1-1. The location of each gateway is shown in Figure 4.1-1.

Table 4.1-1: Primary and Secondary Gateways
Primary Gateways
Map ID # Gateway
1 Holly Street east of El Camino Real
2 San Carlos Avenue at El Camino Real
3 North El Camino Real
4 South El Camino Real
5 Brittan Avenue at US 101
Secondary Gateways
6 Industrial Road at the San Carlos/Redwood City limit
7 Industrial Road at the San Carlos/Belmont city limit
8 North Alameda de las Pulgas
9 South Alameda de las Pulgas
10 North Crestview Drive

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 218
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-3
October 2022
Table 4.1-1: Primary and Secondary Gateways
Primary Gateways
Map ID # Gateway
11 South Crestview Drive
State Scenic Highways
Junipero Serra Freeway (Interstate 280). This state freeway is a designated State Scenic Highway under the State Scenic Highway Program managed by Caltrans and from the San Mateo– Santa Clara county line to the San Bruno city limits, is officially designated as a scenic highway by Caltrans meaning that it is a substantial section of highway passing through a "memorable landscape" with no "visual intrusions", where the potential designation has gained popular favor with the community. Interstate 280 (I-280) extends the entire length of San Mateo County from Daly City to Menlo Park (28.5 miles), traversing the foothills of the San Francisco Peninsula between San Francisco and San Jose. The freeway was designed to blend with its natural surroundings and two of its bridges have won national awards for excellence in design. It runs west of the San Carlos city limits, passing within approximately 1,000 feet at its closest point.

Sweeping panoramic views of the Bay and of the undeveloped hillsides to the west are visible from vista points adjacent to the roadway. However, due to the intervening topography, the freeway is not directly visible from most locations within the city limits, and views of the City from the freeway are similarly blocked by the surrounding hills. Views of I-280 are visible from the upper portions of Crestview Avenues and streets coming off of Crestview.

County Scenic Corridors
The following roadways are described as County Scenic Corridors in the San Carlos General Plan, but are not located entirely within the city limits.

Edgewood Road. Edgewood Road is located immediately adjacent to the San Carlos planning area connecting Alameda de las Pulgas with Cañada Road and I-280. The rural nature of the area through which this road passes, its scenic views and surrounding land use warrant inclusion as a scenic road. Edgewood Road passes the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct right-of-way, the Pulgas Ridge Regional Open Space and the Edgewood County Park site.

Cañada Road. Cañada Road is located westerly of the San Carlos planning area and within the limits of the San Francisco Watershed lands. These lands are dedicated to permanent open space providing a pleasant drive between Edgewood Road and State Route 92 to the north. It is also used extensively by bicyclists.

I
I

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 219
Source: San Carlos General Plan 2009
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 4.1-1 Gateways
D City limit
11111 Sphere of Influence Areas
- Downtown
- El Camino Real
- Laurel Street (South of Arroyo Street)
- East Side Area
- Harbor Industrial Area
Residential Neighborhoods West of El Camino Real
Bair Island
Belmont
\ ... ~
r.,<- ~ # :,p'>~ ~ \ . -<l' ,}"'~
'o~
<§-
0 0.25 0.5 Miles

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 220
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-5
October 2022
City Scenic Roads
Alameda de las Pulgas. Alameda de las Pulgas is an arterial city street traversing north to south from San Carlos Avenue to Eaton Avenue and is lined with residential uses. The street is characterized by trees, landscaping and low- to medium-density residential development. Within San Carlos, special landscape treatment has been implemented at points along the road to enhance the corridor.

San Carlos Avenue. San Carlos Avenue is an arterial, urban city street traversing east to northwest between El Camino Real and Cranfield Avenue and is lined with commercial and residential uses.

Some locations afford urban landscape views of hills or the San Francisco Bay. Within San Carlos, special landscape treatment has been implemented at points along the route to enhance the corridor.

Tree-lined stretches of San Carlos Avenue along the Pulgas Creek open space corridor that were planted by early settler Timothy Guy Phelps in 1863 provide scenic riparian habitat. Descending into downtown San Carlos, San Carlos Avenue provides a view corridor of the historic Romanesque train station completed in 1888 and City Hall Park. Continued maintenance of the residential and commercial land uses adjacent to this route is anticipated.

Brittan Avenue. Brittan Avenue is an arterial street located to the south of Holly Street extending the length of the city in an east/west direction from U.S. 101 to Crestview Drive. Brittan Avenue is considered a primary entry and access to San Carlos. Street improvements have included a grade separation and landscaping. Brittan Avenue from Alameda de las Pulgas to Crestview Drive extends through a canyon representative of the natural interior coast range woodland. Single family homes front on Brittan Avenue with a backdrop of hillside open space retained in permanent City ownership. A portion of the northern side of the canyon is permanently protected by the existence of Big Canyon Park.

Club Drive. Club Drive extends from San Carlos Avenue to Crestview Drive. The route climbs a major ridge where significant panoramic views are available. Club Drive is generally lined with single-family residential uses with open space uses existing in the canyon below.

Crestview Drive. Crestview Drive extends along the major ridge in the western portion of San Carlos. The route extends from the Belmont city limit southerly to connect with Edgewood Road at the lower elevations near the headwaters of Cordilleras Creek. The route offers views of the San Francisco Bay and the undeveloped hillside areas to the west.

El Camino Real. El Camino Real is a State Highway paralleling the railroad extending from Redwood City on the south to Belmont on the north. Beautification efforts have included landscaped medians with left turn pockets and landscaping along the east and westsides.

Holly Street. Holly Street is an arterial street extending east to west from US 101 to Elm Street.

Holly Street is considered a primary entry and access to San Carlos. Street improvements have included entryway decorative features, a grade separation and landscaping.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 221
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Light and Glare
The project area is primarily urbanized, with substantial sources of existing light and glare, including streetlights along roadways, parking lots, service stations, lighted recreation facilities, and residential and non-residential buildings. The existing light and glare within the plan area is generally consistent with light and glare sources within the neighboring cities of a similar size.

Structures containing glass, metal, or polished exteriors or roofing materials throughout the plan area also reflect the natural sunlight and man-made light sources that create localized daytime glare. Light pollution is created by the developed uses in the plan area. Light pollution also is referred to as “sky glow,” which is a result of outdoor lighting that is directed to or reflected in the sky. Light pollution creates a visual haze of light that obscures night-sky views of celestial bodies.

In areas near astronomical telescopes, such as Mt. Hamilton near San Jose and Mt. Palomar in San Diego County, light pollution is a critical concern for the continued utility of observatories.

Communities near these facilities enforce stringent controls to limit the spread of light pollution.

Although the plan area is not within the area of influence of the observatory at Mt. Hamilton, nor any other major research telescope, light pollution remains a concern.

4.1.2 Regulatory Setting
State
California Streets and Highways Code (Section 260)
This code preserves and protects scenic highway corridors from changes that would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. A California highway may be designated as scenic highway depending on how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes on the traveler’s enjoyment of the view. When a city (or county) nominates an eligible scenic highway for official designation, it must identify and define the scenic corridor of the highway, as defined by the motorist’s line of vision (a reasonable boundary is selected when the view extends to a distant horizon). The city (or county) must also adopt ordinances to preserve the scenic quality of the corridor, including: 1) regulation of land use and density of development; 2) detailed land and site planning; 3) control of outdoor advertising (including a ban on billboards); 4) careful attention to and control of earthmoving and landscaping; and 5) careful attention to design and appearance of structures and equipment. There are no designated State scenic highways within the City of San Carlos, however I-280 immediately west of the city is a designated Scenic Highway from the San Mateo–Santa Clara county line to the San Bruno city limits. The next nearest Scenic Highway is State Route 92, between I-280 (approximately two miles northwest of the City boundary) and State Route 1 in Half Moon Bay and is not near the city. .

Title 24: Building Energy Efficiency Standards
In 2001, the California Legislature passed a bill requiring the California Energy Commission (CEC) to adopt energy efficient standards for outdoor lighting for both the public and private sector. In November 2003, the CEC adopted changes to the Building Energy Efficient Standards

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 222
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-7
October 2022
within Title 24. These standards became effective on October 1, 2005, and specify outdoor lighting requirements for residential and nonresidential development. The intent of the new standards is to improve the quality of outdoor lighting and help reduce the impacts of light pollution, light trespass, and glare. The standards regulate lighting characteristics, such as maximum power and brightness, shielding, and sensor controls to turn lighting on and off. Different lighting standards are set by classifying areas by lighting zone. The classification is based on population figures in the 2003 Census and the areas can be designated as LZ1 (dark), LZ2 (low), LZ3 (medium), or LZ4 (high). Lighting requirements for dark and rural areas are stricter in order to protect the areas from new sources of light pollution and light trespass. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the entire plan area is defined as an urban area and is therefore designated as LZ3 per the CEC classification standards.

Regional and Local
San Francisco Bay Plan
The San Francisco Bay Plan (Bay Plan) is a policy tool that allows the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development District (BCDC) to “exercise its authority to issue or deny permit applications for placing fill, extracting materials, or changing the use of any land, water, or structures within the area of its jurisdiction,” which includes the San Francisco Bay and lands within 100 feet of its shoreline (BCDC 2020). The City of San Carlos has a small section of Bay front development near the San Carlos Airport and Pico Boulevard that would be subject to BCDC policies.

The Bay Plan serves as the guide for BCDC and includes policies applicable to visual and aesthetic resources within the City. The Bay Plan recommends that urban development be clustered, so as to maximize views of the San Francisco Bay and to conserve natural landscape features and maximize shoreline access.

The Appearance, Design and Scenic Views Chapter of the Bay Plan contain several policies pertaining to visual quality and aesthetic character, including:

Policy 1 - To enhance the visual quality of development around the Bay and to take maximum advantage of the attractive setting it provides, the shore of the Bay should be developed in accordance with the Public Access Design Guidelines.

Policy 2 - All Bayfront development should be designed to enhance the pleasure of the user or viewer of the Bay. Maximum efforts should be made to provide, enhance, or preserve views of the Bay and shoreline, especially from public areas, from the Bay itself, and from the opposite shore. To this end, planning of waterfront development should include participation by professionals who are knowledgeable of the Commissions’ concerns, such as landscape architects, urban designers, or architects, working in conjunction with engineers and professionals in other fields.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 223
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-8 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Policy 4 - Structures and facilities that do not take advantage of or visually complement the Bay should be located and designed so as not to impact visually on the Bay and shoreline.

Policy 8 - Shoreline developments should be built in clusters, leaving open area around them to permit more frequent views of the Bay. Developments along the shores of tributary waters should be Bay-related and should be designed to preserve and enhance views along the waterway, so as to provide maximum visual contact with the Bay.

Policy 9 - “Unnatural” debris should be removed from sloughs, marshes, and mudflats that are retained as part of the ecological system. Sloughs, marshes, and mudflats should be restored to their former natural state if they have been despoiled by human activities.

Policy 14 - Views of the Bay from vista points and from roads should be maintained by appropriate arrangements of heights of all development and landscaping between the view areas and the water. In this regard, particular attention should be given to all waterfront locations, areas below vista points, and areas along roads that provide good views of the Bay for travelers, particularly areas below roads coming over ridges and providing a “first view” of the Bay.

San Francisco Bay Trail Plan
The San Francisco Bay Trail Plan, adopted in 1989 by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), proposes the development of a regional hiking and bicycling trail around the perimeter of San Francisco and San Pablo bays. A segment of the planned Redwood Shores trail segment would be within the city’s jurisdiction by the San Carlos airport. The Bay Trail Plan includes several visual policies that call for the creation and/or preservation of views along the San Francisco Bay and the recognition of exceptional landscapes.

San Mateo County General Plan
Within the project area, several unincorporated San Mateo County neighborhoods (Devonshire Area, which includes two non-adjacent areas: Devonshire Canyon (a County island) and a nearby 17-acre area adjacent to Club Drive, Cranfield Avenue, and the City of Belmont, Palomar Park, a neighborhood south of the San Carlos city limit, and Pulgas Ridge (formally known as the Hassler Area), consisting of Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve and several San Mateo County institutional facilities1) are under the jurisdiction of San Mateo County but are within the City’s SOI.

Development in these areas is subject to the San Mateo County General Plan, which includes a Visual Quality element and a Conservation and Open Space element that set forth goals and policies relevant to the visual quality of the plan area. In particular, the County General Plan includes a Design Review Overlay district, which imposes more stringent design and development standards for new construction and remodels.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 224
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-9
October 2022
City of San Carlos General Plan
The following text from the City of San Carlos General Plan, Land Use Element pertains to views within the City:
“San Carlos has varied topography which ranges from land at sea level to the hilly western portion of the city with elevations up to 900 feet. The hillsides and ridgelines that comprise the city’s diverse landscape provide a rich array of scenic resources and afford numerous vantage points from which scenic vistas can be enjoyed.

Views of the surrounding open space and San Francisco Bay can be accessed in many areas west of Alameda de las Pulgas, including City parks and open space and existing residential neighborhoods.”
The Land Use and Environmental Management Elements in the City’s General Plan contain goals and policies to protect visual resources relevant to the proposed project. Relevant goals and policies include:

Goal LU-8 - Ensure excellence in all development design.

Policy LU-8.1 - Require all development to feature high quality design that enhances the visual character of San Carlos.

Policy LU-8.2 - Ensure that new development is sensitive to the character of adjacent structures and the immediate neighborhood.

Policy LU-8.3 - Encourage design features and amenities in new development and redevelopment, including, but not limited to:
• Interconnected street layout
• Clustering of buildings
• Landscaping on each lot
• Visual buffers
• Facilitation of pedestrian activity
• Distinctiveness and variety in architectural design
Policy LU-8.15 - Require the undergrounding of all utilities, or a deferred improvement agreement, in conjunction with new construction and encourage the undergrounding of existing utilities where feasible.

Policy LU-8.17 - Require telecommunications and utility facilities to be sensitively placed, shielded, screened or lessened from view to the greatest extent possible through design review.

Goal LU-9 - Protect and enhance all residential neighborhoods.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 225
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-10 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
Policy LU-9.9 - Encourage the design of development to minimize the obstruction of significant views of the San Francisco Bay, the western hills, or other significant natural vistas to the greatest extent possible.

Policy LU-9.12 - Ensure that development in residential areas is compatible with neighborhood character.

Goal LU-10 - Minimize the impacts of development in hillside areas.

Policy LU-10.2 - Require development in hillside areas to be designed into the natural features of the hillside including topography, trees, vegetation, landforms and drainage channels.

Policy LU-10.4 - Design and locate roads, utilities and other infrastructure to reasonably minimize impacts on the hillside environment. Design should respect the natural topography, produce the least visual impact and require the least grading while remaining consistent with public health and safety standards.

Policy LU-10.5 - Minimize grading and removal of earth material in hillside areas to the greatest extent possible.

Policy EM-1.4 - Protect and preserve the circadian cycle (the cycle of night and day) by limiting sources of light during nighttime hours.

Goal CSH-8 - To develop a system of scenic highways and roads that reflects the aesthetic and visual qualities of the existing and developing San Carlos landscape and the surrounding region.

Policy CSH-8.1 - The City shall continue its program of protecting and enhancing local scenic roads through right-of-way protection and appropriate architectural and landscape controls and requirements.

Policy CSH-8.4 - The City shall continue architectural and site plan review of all signage, structures and site developments proposed in the scenic corridors to ensure appropriateness of design and materials and proper placement of structures and vegetative screening where necessary.

CEQA does not establish the definition of a scenic vista. Communities can define and identify scenic vistas in a general plan or afford protection to scenic vistas through other land use planning documents. The San Carlos General Plan does not discuss or identify any officially designated scenic vistas within the City, but refers to “significant views of the San Francisco Bay, the western hills, or other significant natural vistas,” without specifically defining a “significant view.” For the purposes of this CEQA document, the City has defined a scenic vista as a highly valued landscape that the public can view from public vantage points; a viewpoint that is accessible only from private property is not considered a scenic vista.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 226
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-11 October 2022
City of San Carlos Municipal Code
City of San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29 specifies the City’s design review process.

Chapter 18.29.060 specifies that to obtain design review approval, projects must satisfy these criteria to the extent they apply:

B. The project design is appropriate to the function of the project and will provide an attractive and comfortable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community.

C. Project details, materials, signage, and landscaping are internally consistent, fully integrated with one another, and used in a manner that is visually consistent with the proposed architectural design.

E. The project contributes to the creation of an attractive and visually interesting built environment that includes a variety of building styles and designs with well-articulated structures that present varied building facades, roof lines, and building heights within a unifying context that encourages increased pedestrian activity and promotes compatibility among neighboring land uses within the same or different districts.

F. The design of streetscapes, including street trees, lighting, and pedestrian furniture, is consistent with the character of activity centers, commercial districts and nearby residential neighborhoods.

G. The proposed design is compatible with the historical or visual character of any area recognized by the City as having such unified character.

H. The project design preserves major public views and vistas from major public streets and open spaces and enhances them by providing areas to stroll, benches to rest and enjoy views, and similar amenities.

I. Parking areas are designed and developed to buffer surrounding land uses; complement pedestrian-oriented development; enhance the environmental quality of the site, including minimizing stormwater run-off and the heat-island effect; and achieve a safe, efficient, and harmonious development.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 227
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-12 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
J. Lighting and lighting fixtures are designed to complement buildings, be of appropriate scale, provide adequate light over walkways and parking areas to create a sense of pedestrian safety, and avoid creating glare.

K. The proposed building design and landscaping supports public safety and security by allowing for surveillance of the street by people inside buildings and elsewhere on the site.

L. Landscaping is designed to be compatible with and enhance the architectural character and features of the buildings on site and help relate the building to the surrounding landscape.

Proposed planting materials avoid conflicts with views, lighting, infrastructure, utilities, and signage.

4.1.3 Thresholds of Significance
The project would have a significant impact to visual and design factors if it would:

A. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

B. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

C. Substantially degrade the view from a scenic highway, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings.

D. Expose people to substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Note: Future development projects located within designated Transit Priority Areas would not need to evaluate aesthetics for purposes of CEQA impacts (Public Resources Code Section 21099 (d)(1)), although they would remain subject to the City’s standard architectural review requirements as specified in the City of San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29.060, listed above.

4.1.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section describes potential impacts related to aesthetics which could result from the implementation of the proposed Focused GPU and mitigation measures that would reduce significant impacts. Unless otherwise noted, impact discussions apply to both the Housing Element and Environmental Safety and Public Services Element aspects of the project.

Impact AES-1 – The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. (Less Than Significant Impact)
The San Carlos hills to the west of the Downtown area are part of a developed hillside setting that is visible from the lower elevations in San Carlos and along the El Camino Real and US 101, as well as from neighboring cities (Redwood City, Belmont). Although the area is developed, the San Carlos hills still comprise a visually pleasing backdrop to broad community views because of the

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 228
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-13 October 2022
varying topography and mature vegetation and development that is visible from a distance. The General Plan Land Use Element states that the hillsides and ridgelines afford numerous vantage points from which scenic vistas can be enjoyed.

Goals, Policies and Actions
Provided below are the applicable goals, policies and actions from the proposed new Housing and Land Use Element updates related to aesthetic quality of new and redevelopment projects in the City.

Housing Element
Goal HOU-1 - Preservation And Improvement of the Quality Of Existing Housing And Neighborhoods.

Policy HOU-1.1: Established Residential Neighborhoods - Preserve and improve the existing character and livability of established residential neighborhoods through neighborhood improvements and rehabilitation programs.

Goal HOU-2 - High Quality, Higher-Density, Multi-Family Housing Located Close to Transit, in Downtown, and Along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real Policy HOU-2.1 - Design Quality. Promote well-designed multi-family housing and mixeduse projects in the Downtown area and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real.

Land Use Element
Goal LU-1 - Ensure a sustainable land use pattern.

Policy LU-1.10 - Require that development within the Pulgas, Brittan and Cordilleras Creek watersheds shall preserve watershed integrity, including natural vegetation, soil and slope stability, water quality, scenic values and potential archaeological resources.

Policy LU-1.11 - Preserve existing open space by supporting urban infill.

Policy LU-1.12 - Promote the development of publicly accessible urban trails throughout the city to provide access to the natural environment and facilitate non- motorized transportation options.

Action LU-1.5 - Consider adoption of a lighting ordinance that restricts the type, intensity and placement of outdoor lighting fixtures in development. New lighting should illuminate properties appropriately and help keep them safe and se- cure, but shall not cause glare or spillover into surrounding properties or negatively affect the night sky.

Goal LU-8 - Ensure excellence in all development design.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 229
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-14 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
Policy LU-8.1 - Require all development to feature high quality design that enhances the visual character of San Carlos.

Policy LU-8.2 Ensure that new development is sensitively transitions to the character of adjacent structures and the immediate neighborhood.

Policy LU-8.3 Encourage design features and amenities in new development and redevelopment, including, but not limited to:
a. Interconnected street layout
b. Clustering of buildings
c. Landscaping on each lot
d. Visual buffers
e. Facilitation of pedestrian activity
f. Distinctiveness and variety in architectural design
Policy LU-8.4 - Promote pedestrian-scaled design through site planning, building design, finish details and landscaping for all types of development by requiring height and locational transitions between buildings of varied levels that are sensitive to the interrelationships of surrounding uses and structures, especially residential.

Policy LU-8.9 - Encourage the design of attractive outdoor pedestrian spaces that encourage impromptu public gathering places with features such as plazas, interior walkways and paseos, ornamental gates, trellises, lighting, trees and landscaping, seating and fountains.

Policy LU-8.10 - On all sides of buildings, require the incorporation of quality architectural design elements for all building façades and stepping back upper floors in order to reduce bulk and mass and to break up monotonous wall lines.

Policy LU-8.11 - Discourage abrupt changes in building scale. A gradual transition between low-rise to mid-rise buildings should be achieved by using the low-rise buildings at the edge of the project site. Consider the relationship of buildings to the street, to one another and to adjacent structures and land uses, especially single-family residential.

Policy LU-8.13 - Require parking areas associated with development to be located and designed to minimize visual impact to the greatest extent feasible. This may include locating parking behind buildings street frontage, below grade, or screening through the use of natural landscaping.

Policy LU-8.17 - Require telecommunications and utility facilities to be sensitively placed, shielded, screened or lessened from view to the greatest extent possible through design review.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 230
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-15 October 2022
Policy LU-8.19 - Residential and mixed use structures shall be designed to be compatible with existing structures in the vicinity, avoid minimize obstructing views from adjacent structures or views of community importance, avoid minimize interference with the right or ability to use solar energy and be consistent with the community design principles.

Goal LU-9 - Protect and enhance all residential neighborhoods.

Policy LU-9.9 - Encourage the design of development to minimize the obstruction of significant views of the San Francisco Bay, the western hills, or other significant natural vistas to the greatest extent possible.

Policy LU-9.13 - Require appropriate transitions of building scale, massing and height to adjacent single-family homes.

Goal LU-10 - Minimize the impacts of development in hillside areas.

Policy LU-10.2 - Require development in hillside areas to be designed into the natural features of the hillside including topography, trees, vegetation, landforms and drain- age channels.

Policy LU-10.3 - In hillside areas, encourage houses to be oriented to the natural topography of the site.

Action LU-10.1 - Consider the development of Hillside Development Guidelines, including the development of lot size and cross slope standards.

Goal LU-11 - Provide for attractive and functional gateways.

Policy LU-11.1 - Require high quality design for buildings at visually significant locations in gateway areas.

Policy LU-11.2 - Encourage design features, such as landscaping, art and displays in gateway areas that are welcoming, attractive and contribute to a unique sense of place.

Policy LU-11.3 - Encourage distinctive architectural features, such as tower elements or a plaza at building entry, for buildings located at visually significant locations within gateway areas.

Policy LU-11.4- Ensure that building placement, frontage treatments and landscaping enhance the pedestrian experience and increase accessibility within gateway areas.

Policy LU-11.5 - Limit the visibility of surface parking within gateway areas through landscaping and architectural treatments such as low decorative walls or trellises.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 231
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-16 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
Policy LU-11.6 - Discourage the use of sound walls within gateway areas. If sound walls cannot be avoided, ensure that soundwalls are designed to be attractive and well landscaped.

Policy LU-11.7 - Require roadway improvements in gateway areas that enhance automotive, bicycle and pedestrian circulation.

Policy LU-11.8 - Place a special emphasis on the preservation of architecturally significant buildings within gateway areas.

Policy LU-11.9 - Ensure that new development on the Landmark sites at the northeast and southeast corners of Holly Street and Industrial Road function as the primary gateway features for the Holly Street Gateway area. Site planning, building treatments, pedestrian improvements and landscape features shall exhibit exceptional design and respect integrity of adjacent uses including nearby residential properties.

Policy LU-11.10 - Consider placing street enhancements, such as welcome signage, at major entrances to the city and residential areas.

Policy LU-11.11 - Ensure that new development or redevelopment on the northwest and southwest corners of Holly Street and Industrial Road complies with the policies set forth in Land Use Goal 5.

Policy LU-11.12 - Develop welcoming gateway areas that emphasize the unique qualities of San Carlos.

Policy LU-11.13 - Study and evaluate options for im- proving circulation on Holly Street between Industrial Road and El Camino Real, working with the public, in particular the residents of Holly Street.

Action LU-11.1 - Develop design guidelines for development and improvements within gateway areas to enhance community character. These guidelines should promote architectural styles, landscape, street furniture, public art and signage that are in keeping with the aesthetic values of San Carlos.

These various goals and policies demonstrate the City’s commitment to preserving visual resources and open space, as well as providing quality urban design in future development. They will encourage future development that contributes to a high quality of life for its residents, employees, and visitors including the protection of visual resources. Although the proposed Focused GPU will over time result in somewhat more intensive and higher density uses, visual impacts, if any, on scenic vistas would be minimal given that these views are already affected by the existing built environment, and the City is already largely built out. Additionally, most of the housing proposed in the Housing Element is located in the flat portions of the city and are not near scenic vistas. Therefore, potential Focused GPU impacts with respect to scenic vistas would be less than significant.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 232
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-17 October 2022
Impact AES-2 – The project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. (Less Than Significant Impact)
The General Plan Land Use Element describes scenic resources in the City as being provided by hillsides and ridgelines that comprise the City’s diverse landscape. The San Carlos hills, which are located throughout the western portion of the City, could therefore be considered a scenic resource.

The San Carlos hills are visible from other parts of the City, although the views are partially obstructed by intervening buildings and structures in the more developed parts of the City. From the El Camino Real corridor, westward views to the hills are least obstructed along major eastwest thoroughfares such as Brittan Avenue, San Carlos Avenue, and Holly Street. Conformance with the Land Use policies listed under Goals LU-1 and LU-10, above, would ensure that future development resulting from implementation of the proposed Focused GPU would preserve sustainable land use patterns in the City, and minimize impacts of development in hillside areas.

This would result in a less than significant impact related to aesthetics and visual impacts.

There are no designated state scenic highways within the City limits or in the immediate vicinity of the City that could be impacted by the project, therefore there would be no impact. Conformance with the Land Use goals and policies listed above relating to gateways would result in improvement and enhancement of gateway areas throughout the City with the new development allowed under the proposed Focused GPU, thereby making the impact to gateways of the new development less than significant.

Impact AES-3 – Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point. The project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings or conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. (Less Than Significant Impact) As stated in Section 4.1.2 Regulatory Setting above, the San Carlos General Plan contains goals and policies to protect aesthetics and visual resources. Additional protection is provided by the City of San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, which contains specific criteria of the City’s design review process to ensure that new and modified uses and development will be compatible with the existing and potential development of the surrounding area.

The design review process is intended to regulate the design of new buildings in order to ensure that new development supports the General Plan goals of creating a vibrant pedestrian- and transitoriented core and distinctive neighborhoods and districts with a diversity of building types that provide continuity in scale and character with appropriate transitions, where needed. Specific design review criteria are currently provided in the Zoning Code (Municipal Code Chapter

18.29.060). However, the project will revise Land Use Element Actions LU-8.5 and LU-9.2 of the General Plan to specifically include objective design standards and transitional design standards for multi-family residential buildings and commercial uses adjacent to single-family homes among the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments. As such, the proposed GPU would not result in

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 233
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-18 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
significant impacts that would degrade the existing visual character or quality of the area and its surroundings.

ACTION LU-8.5: Develop objective design standards consistent with State law and amend Amend the Zoning Ordinance and Planning Department application submittal checklist to require information and materials that accurately and sufficiently demonstrate a project’s compliance with architectural façade and design policies new objective design standards ACTION LU-9.2: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to include objective design standards, transitional design standards for multi-family residential buildings and commercial uses adjacent to singlefamily homes, as appropriate. Standards may include height limitations, increased setbacks, landscaping requirements and density limitations.

In addition, the project includes two revised polices in the Land Use Element pertaining to views and building height for new development (adopted/original general plan text shown with proposed new text in underline and removed text as strikeout):
• Policy LU-8.2 Ensure that new development is sensitive sensitively transitions to the character of adjacent structures and the immediate neighborhood. • Policy LU-8.19 Residential and mixed use structures shall be designed to be compatible with existing structures in the vicinity, avoid minimize obstructing views from adjacent structures or views of community importance, avoid minimize interference with the right or ability to use solar energy and be consistent with the community design principles.

Conformance with the new Land Use Element policies would ensure that new development under the proposed Focused GPU would not adversely affect views, and would address compatibility with existing structures. This would be a less than significant impact.

Buildout of the General Plan Update is anticipated to occur over a period of approximately 20 years, although the housing and safety elements must be updated every eight years. Temporary impacts to the visual character and quality of the area could occur during construction activities, although they would be limited and temporary in nature. Typical construction activities would include site preparation, grading, installation of public and private utilities, building construction, application of architectural coatings, paving of surface parking areas, public improvements, and installation of landscaping, and roadway improvements. Construction equipment including, but not limited to, backhoes, excavators, graders, rubber-tired dozers, crushing machines for concrete and asphalt, and hauling trucks and materials may be present during construction activities. During future construction activities, project sites within the project area, which is primarily urban in nature, would undergo temporary transformations in visual character. For example, at the onset of construction, structures and asphalt parking lots would be demolished and sites would be graded.

During future construction, vacant graded sites could represent a temporary negative visual effect to adjacent property owners and passers-by, as could the constructed building foundations and framing elements of building. This characterization would also be temporary until building construction, paving, site improvements and landscaping are completed. Visual changes to project

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 234
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.1-19 October 2022
sites within the project area would be experienced temporarily and project sites would progressively transition from active construction zones to finished development. Due to the temporary nature of construction, the visual changes anticipated during construction of future projects within the project area would not be permanent and would not substantially degrade its visual character or the visual character of surrounding areas. Therefore, construction impacts on visual character would be less than significant.

Zoning Ordinance Amendments
The project includes rezoning of certain areas to allow for fulfilment of the City’s RHNA by increasing the density in certain zoning designations. The possible Zoning Ordinance amendments are anticipated to include single-family residential, multi-family residential, and mixed-use land use categories, which would provide for development of some lower level commercial/retail, office, and potentially live/work uses. The Land Use Element (including the Land Use Map) would be updated to ensure consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance as required by State law.

The Zoning revisions retain transitional setbacks between multi-family residential zones and/or mixed-use designations and the adjacent single-family residential designation. Existing zoning allows a maximum height of four stories while proposed zoning will allow the highest density zones (up to 120 units/acre) a maximum height of six stories (see Table 4.4-5 in the Housing Element in Appendix B) with additional height restrictions in certain areas and sites within 50 feet of an Residential, Single-Family (RS) district. Future development projects resulting from the project would comply with the General Plan policies listed under the Land Use Element discussion above. Conformance with Policy LU-8.2, which seeks to ensure that new development sensitively transitions to the character of adjacent structures and the immediate neighborhood, would ensure that new development projects respect the scale and character of adjacent residential uses to promote neighborhood compatibility. Existing non-residential building heights along El Camino Real are typically two stories, with an occasional single-story building or three-story residential building. Heights of existing non-residential buildings adjacent to existing single-family neighborhoods east of El Camino Real are typically two-stories. In addition to density increases, the City may also revise required development standards for residential and mixed-use zoning districts such as setbacks, FAR, parking, landscaping, public open space, and other development related requirements. All of the proposed revisions would be consistent with General Plan goals and policies intended to protect scenic quality by providing for more open space and limiting obstruction of views resulting from new and redeveloped housing sites in the City. The impacts from proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments would therefore be less than significant.

Impact AES-4 – The project would not result in new sources of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. (Less Than Significant Impact) The project would result in the intensification of residential densities and FARs on properties in the City’s core – primarily along the El Camino Real corridor and in the Downtown area. This would likely increase the amount of light and glare in this area.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 235
Chapter 4.1 Aesthetics

4.1-20 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
Existing lighting within the project area is typical for urbanized areas during nighttime hours and includes streetlights, traffic signals, security lighting around businesses and homes, auto headlights and illuminated business signs.

Goals, Policies and Actions
Provided below are the applicable goals, policies and actions from the proposed Land Use Element update related to lighting that would be applicable to future development in the City.

Goal LU-1. - Ensure a sustainable land use pattern.

Action LU-1.5 - Consider adoption of a lighting ordinance that restricts the type, intensity and placement of outdoor lighting fixtures in development. New lighting should illuminate properties appropriately and help keep them safe and secure, but shall not cause glare or spillover into surrounding properties or negatively affect the night sky.

Goal LU-8 - Ensure excellence in all development design.

New uses and developments may result in an increase in the number of lighting sources currently within the project area; however, given that it is already developed, such increases are expected to be minimal in nature. Conformance with the above-listed goals, policies and actions would ensure that future development allowed under the proposed Focused GPU would follow good design and not negatively impact surrounding properties or negatively affect the night sky.

4.1.5 References
BCDC. 2020. San Francisco Bay Plan. Accessed August 15, 2022 at https://bcdc.ca.gov/plans/sfbay_plan.html#1.

City of San Carlos. San Carlos 2030 General Plan. October 12, 2009.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 236
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-1
October 2022

4.2 AIR QUALITY
This EIR chapter provides information on the environmental and regulatory air quality setting of the project area and evaluates the potential regulated air pollutant emissionsthat could be generated by the proposed project due to new developments as through proposed changes to the Housing Element. The proposed Environmental Safety and Public Services Element and all other project components not mentioned in this analysis will not have an appreciable effect on air quality.

Information on existing air quality conditions, federal, and State ambient air quality standards, and pollutants of concern was obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and BAAQMD. This EIR air quality analysis has been closely coordinated with the energy and greenhouse gas analyses contained in Chapters 4.6 and

4.8 of this EIR. Please refer to Appendix C for detailed air quality and greenhouse gas emissions estimates (MD 2022).

4.2.1 Environmental Setting
Air quality is a function of pollutant emissions and topographic and meteorological influences.

The physical features and atmospheric conditions of a landscape interact to affect the movement and dispersion of pollutants and determine its air quality.

Bay Area Basin
The project area is located within the western portion of the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (Bay Area Basin), which includes the counties of San Francisco, Santa Clara, San Mateo, Marin, Napa, Contra Costa County, and Alameda, along with the southeast portion of Sonoma County and the southwest portion of Solano County. The local air quality regulatory agency responsible for this basin is the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).

The climate of the project area is characterized by warm, dry summers and cool, moist winters.

The proximity of the San Francisco Bay and Pacific Ocean has a moderating influence on the climate. Air is often condensed into fog or stratus clouds by the cool Pacific Ocean. This condition is typical of the warmer months of the year from roughly May through October. When a strong high pressure develops over the region in late spring and summer, the resulting warm conditions and a weak or non-existent marine inversion create clear skies and relatively dry atmospheric conditions.

In the winter, high pressure over the eastern Pacific weakens and generally shifts south, allowing transitional weather systems associated with the polar jet stream to affect northern California on a regular basis. Low pressure systems produce periods of cloudiness, strong shifting winds, and precipitation. The project area receives about 15 to 20 inches of precipitation annually, with about 90 percent of this rainfall falling from November through April. Fog and haze are also common in the project area during winter, when high-pressure systems influence the weather.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 237
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
During the fall and winter months, the high pressure condition over the interior regions of the western United States (known as the Great Basin High) can produce extended periods of light winds and low-level temperature inversions. This condition is frequently characterized by poor atmospheric mixing resulting in degraded regional air quality. Ozone (O3) pollution typically occurs when this condition occurs during the warmer months of the year.

Regulated Air Pollutants
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common air pollutants: ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM), which consists of “inhalable coarse” PM (particles with an aerodynamic diameter between

2.5 and 10 microns in diameter, or PM10) and “fine” PM (particles with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2.5 microns, or PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. The U.S. EPA refers to these six common pollutants as “criteria” pollutants because the agency regulates the pollutants on the basis of human health and/or environmentallybased criteria and because they are known to cause adverse human health effects and/or adverse effects on the environment (U.S. EPA 2020a and 2020b).

The California Air Resource Board (CARB) has established California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for the six criteria air pollutants regulated by the federal Clean Air Act (the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS), plus the following additional air pollutants due to their known adverse effects on human health or the environment (CARB 2020a): hydrogen sulfide (H2S), sulfates (SOX), vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles.

A description of the air pollutants associated with the project area and its vicinity is provided below. Air pollutants not commonly associated with the existing or proposed sources in the project area, such as hydrogen sulfide and visibility reducing particles, are not described below. • Ground-level Ozone, commonly referred to as smog, is not emitted directly into the atmosphere. It is created from chemical reactions between NOX and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), also called reactive organic gases (ROG), in the presence of sunlight (U.S. EPA 2017a). Thus, ozone formation is typically highest on hot sunny days in urban areas with NOX and ROG pollution. Ozone irritates the nose, throat, and air pathways and can cause or aggravate shortness of breath, coughing, asthma attacks, and lung diseases such as emphysema and bronchitis.
o ROG is a CARB term defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, and includes several low-reactive organic compounds which have been exempted by the U.S. EPA (CARB 2004).
o VOCs is a U.S. EPA term defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions. The

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 238
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-3
October 2022
term exempts organic compounds of carbon which have been determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity such as: methane, ethane, and methylene chloride (CARB 2004).
• Particulate Matter, also known as particle pollution, is a mixture of extremely small solid and liquid particles made up of a variety of components such as organic chemicals, metals, and soil and dust particles (U.S. EPA 2016a).
o PM10, also known as inhalable coarse, respirable, or suspended PM, consists of particles less than or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter (approximately 1/7th the thickness of a human hair). These particles can be inhaled deep into the lungs and possibly enter the blood stream, causing health effects that include, but are not limited to, increased respiratory symptoms (e.g., irritation, coughing), decreased lung capacity, aggravated asthma, irregular heartbeats, heart attacks, and premature death in people with heart or lung disease (U.S. EPA 2016a).
o PM2.5, also known as fine PM, consists of particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter (approximately 1/30th the thickness of a human hair). These particles pose an increased risk because they can penetrate the deepest parts of the lung, leading to and exacerbating heart and lung health effects (U.S. EPA 2016a). • Carbon Monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless gas that is formed by the incomplete combustion of fuels. Motor vehicles are the single largest source of carbon monoxide in the Bay Area Basin. At high concentrations, CO reduces the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood and can aggravate cardiovascular disease and cause headaches, dizziness, unconsciousness, and even death (U.S. EPA 2016b).
• Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is a by-product of combustion. NO2 is not directly emitted, but is formed through a reaction between nitric oxide (NO) and atmospheric oxygen. NO and NO2 are collectively referred to as NOX and are major contributors to ozone formation.

NO2 also contributes to the formation of particulate matter. NO2 can cause breathing difficulties at high concentrations (U.S. EPA 2016c).
• Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is one of a group of highly reactive gases known as SOX. Fossil fuel combustion in power plants and industrial facilities are the largest emitters of SO2. Shortterm effects of SO2 exposure can include adverse respiratory effects such as asthma symptoms. SO2 and other SOX can react to form PM (U.S. EPA 2016d). • Sulfates (SO4
2-
) are the fully oxidized ionic form of sulfur. SO4
2-
are primarily produced
from fuel combustion. Sulfur compounds in the fuel are oxidized to SO2 during the combustion process and subsequently converted to sulfate compounds in the atmosphere.

Sulfate exposure can increase risks of respiratory disease (CARB 2022).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 239
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-4 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
• Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as in manufactured products.

Mobile sources used to be the main contributor to ambient lead concentrations in the air.

In the early 1970s, the U.S. EPA established national regulations to gradually reduce the lead content in gasoline, and in 1996, lead was banned from gasoline. As a result of these efforts, emissions of lead from the transportation sector and levels of lead in the air decreased dramatically. Lead can adversely affect multiple organ systems of the body and people of every age group. Lead poisoning in young children can cause brain damage, behavioral problems, and liver or kidney damage. Lead poisoning to adults can cause reproductive problems, muscle and joint pain, nerve disorders and kidney disease (CARB 2016a).

Common criteria air pollutants, such as ozone precursors, SO2, and PM, are emitted by a large number of sources and have effects on a regional basis (i.e., throughout the Bay Area Basin). Other pollutants, such as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs; described in more detail below under “Toxic Air Contaminants”), toxic air contaminants (TACs; described in more detail below), and fugitive dust, are generally not as prevalent and/or emitted by fewer and more specific sources. As such, these pollutants have much greater effects on local air quality conditions and local receptors.

Ambient Air Quality Standards and Basin Attainment Status In general, the NAAQS and CAAQS define “clean” air, and are established at levels designed to protect the health of the most sensitive groups in our communities by defining the maximum amount of a pollutant (averaged over a specified period of time) that can be present in outdoor air without any harmful effects on people or the environment. Air pollutant levels are typically described in terms of concentration, which refers to the amount of pollutant material per volumetric unit of air. Concentrations are typically measured in parts per million (ppm) or micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).

The U.S. EPA, CARB, and regional air agencies assess the air quality of an area by measuring and monitoring the amount of pollutants in the ambient air and comparing pollutant levels against NAAQS and CAAQS. Table 4.2-1 (Ambient Air Quality Standards) lists the NAAQS and CAAQS.

Table 4.2-1: Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging
Time(A)
California
Standards(B) National Standards(B)
Ozone
1-Hour (1979) -- 240 µg/m3
1-Hour (Current) 180 µg/m3--
8-Hour (1997) -- 160 µg/m3
8-Hour (2008) -- 147 µg/m3
8-Hour (Current) 137 µg/m3 137 µg/m3
PM10
24-Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Annual Average 20 µg/m3--
PM2.5
24-Hour -- 35 µg/m3
Annual Average
(1997) -- 15 µg/m3

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 240
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-5
October 2022
Table 4.2-1: Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Averaging
Time(A)
California
Standards(B) National Standards(B)
Annual Average
(Current) 12 µg/m3 12 µg/m3
Carbon
Monoxide
1-Hour 23,000 µg/m3 40,000 µg/m3
8-Hour 10,000 µg/m3 10,000 µg/m3
Nitrogen
Dioxide
1-Hour 339 µg/m3 188 µg/m3
Annual Average 57 µg/m3 100 µg/m3
Sulfur
Dioxide
1-Hour 655 µg/m3 196 µg/m3
24-Hour 105 µg/m3 367 µg/m3
Annual Average -- 79 µg/m3
Lead 3-Months Rolling -- 0.15 µg/m3
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1-Hour 42 µg/m3
--
Sulfates 24-Hour 25 µg/m3--
Vinyl
Chloride 24-Hour 26 µg/m3
--
Source: CARB 2016b
Ambient air standards have changed over time. This table presents information on the standards previously used by the U.S. EPA for which the Bay Area Basin does not meet attainment.

This table summarizes the CAAQS and NAAQS and the Bay Area Basin’s attainments status. This table does not present comprehensive information regarding the CAAQS and NAAQS. Each CAAQS and NAAQS has its own averaging time, standard unit of measurement, measurement method, and statistical test for determining if a specific standard has been exceeded. Standards are not presented for visibility reducing particles, which are not concentration-based. The Bay Area Basin is unclassified for visibility reducing particles.

Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to criteria air pollutants, the U.S. EPA and CARB have classified certain pollutants as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or toxic air contaminants (TACs), respectively. The U.S. EPA has identified 187 HAPs, including substances such as benzene and formaldehyde; CARB also considers particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines and other substances to be TACs. Since CARB’s list of TACs references and includes U.S. EPA’s list of HAPs, this EIR uses the term TAC when referring to HAPs and TACs.

TACs can cause severe health effects at very low concentrations (non-cancer effects), and many are suspected or confirmed carcinogens (i.e., can cause cancer) (U.S. EPA 2020b, CARB 2020b).

People exposed to TACs at sufficient concentrations and durations may have an increased chance of getting cancer or experiencing other serious health effects such as, but not limited to, reduced immune system, as well as neurological, reproductive (e.g., reduced fertility), developmental, respiratory, and/or other health problems (U.S. EPA 2020b, CARB 2020b).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 241
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
A description of the TACs within the project area and its vicinity is provided below. • Gasoline-Powered Mobile Sources. According to the BAAQMD’s Community Air Risk Evaluation Program (BAAQMD 2014), or CARE, gasoline-powered vehicles emit TACs, such as benzene, which can have adverse health risks. Gasoline-powered sources emit TACs in much smaller amounts than diesel-powered vehicles. The CARE 2014 Improving Air Quality and Health in Bay Area Communities report identifies that diesel emissions account for approximately 70% of the total air toxics and cancer risk in the Bay Area Basin, while Benzene, 1,3-Butadiene, and Carbonyls make up approximately 90 percent of the cancer risk.
• Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM). Diesel engines emit both gaseous and solid material; the solid material is known as DPM. Almost all DPM is less than 1 µm in diameter, and thus is a subset of PM2.5. DPM is typically composed of carbon particles and numerous organic compounds. Diesel exhaust also contains gaseous pollutants including VOCs and NOx. The primary sources of diesel emissions are ships, trains, trucks, rail yards and heavily traveled roadways. These sources are often located near highly populated areas, resulting in greater DPM related health consequences in urban areas. The majority of DPM is small enough to be inhaled into the lungs and what particles are not exhaled can be deposited on the lung surfaces and in the deepest regions of the lungs where they are most susceptible to injury. In 1998, CARB identified DPM as a toxic air contaminant based on evidence of a relationship between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer and other adverse health effects. DPM also contributes to the same non-cancer health effects as PM2.5 exposure (CARB 2016c).
• PM from Wheel-Rail Interactions. PM may also be generated from friction between rail and locomotive wheels (wheel-rail interaction). This abrasion process can suspend metals such as iron, chromium, manganese, and copper in the form of PM (CARB 2020b; Loxham et al., 2013); however, the potential for PM to be generated is dependent on the weight of the train and the conditions of the wheels and track on which the train rides. The Caltrain is a commuter rail that consists of a traditional diesel locomotive commuter rail system; the rail line is also shared by freight trains. Thus, while the Caltrain may generate PM from wheel-rail interaction, this contribution is anticipated be minimal (i.e., would not have an appreciable effect on mass emission or health risk estimates) and this issue is not discussed further in this EIR.
• Toxic elements and pollutants such as butadiene, benzene, perchloroethylene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, arsenic, cadmium, and lead are found in the Bay Area Basin (BAAQMD 2017). Many toxins such as benzene, butadiene, and lead, are associated with refinery operations such as those that exist in the Bay Area Basin.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 242
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-7
October 2022
Local Air Quality Conditions
The BAAQMD monitors air quality within the Bay Area Basin. Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends within the project area are best documented by measurements taken by the BAAQMD. Air quality monitoring stations usually measure pollutant concentrations at varying heights above ground level depending on the monitoring site and the pollutants being monitored. Therefore, air quality is often referred to in terms of ground-level concentrations. Air quality data for O3, NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 from Redwood City, the closest city with available data, are provided in Table 4.2-2 (Local Air Quality Conditions (2017-2019)).

Table 4.2-2: Local Air Quality Conditions 2017-2019
Pollutant
Ambient Air
Standard
Year(A)
2017 2018 2019
Ozone (O3)
Maximum 1-hr Concentration (ppm) 0.115 0.067 0.083
Maximum 8-hr Concentration (ppm) 0.086 0.049 0.077
Number of Days Exceeding State 1-hr Standard >180 µg/m3 2 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding State 8-hr Standard >137 µg/m3 2 0 2 Days Exceeding Federal 1-hr Standard >0.124 ppm 2 0 0
Days Exceeding Federal 8-hr Standard >0.070 ppm 2 0 2
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Maximum 1-hr Concentration (ppm) 2.8 2.5 2.0
Maximum 8-hr Concentration (ppm) 1.4 1.7 1.1
Days Exceeding State 1-hr Standard >23,000 µg/m3 0 0 0
Days Exceeding Federal/State 8-hr Standard >10,000 µg/m3 0 0 0 Days Exceeding Federal 1-hr Standard >40,000 µg/m3 0 0 0 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Maximum 1-hr Concentration (ppb) 67 77 55
Annual Arithmetic Mean Concentration (ppb) 11 11 9
Days Exceeding State 1-hr Standard >180 µg/m3 0 0 0
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) *
Maximum 24-hr Concentration (µg/m3) -- -- --
Annual Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) -- -- --
Samples Exceeding State 24-hr Standard >50 µg/m3-- -- -- Samples Exceeding Federal 24-hr Standard >150 µg/m3-- -- -- Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Maximum 24-hr Concentration (µg/m3) 60.8 120.9 29.5
Annual Arithmetic Mean (µg/m3) 9.1 10.3 7.0
Samples Exceeding Federal 24-hr Standard >35 µg/m3 6 0 0 Source: BAAQMD Air Quality Summary Reports
“--“ indicates data are not available.
* There is no PM10 data for Redwood City.

Sensitive Receptors
Some people are more affected by air pollution than others. Sensitive air quality receptors include specific subsets of the general population that are susceptible to poor air quality and the potential adverse health effects associated with poor air quality. Both CARB and the BAAQMD consider residences, schools, parks and playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long-term health

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 243
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-8 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes to be sensitive air quality land uses and receptors (BAAQMD 2017; CARB, 2005).

The potentially serious detrimental effects caused by even the most common pollutants are of widespread concern. O3, PM, CO and other pollutants pose a very real threat to health and property in the Bay Area Basin. The region’s high median age implies that major portions of residents are particularly susceptible to respiratory distress from O3 and PM10. In general, the sensitive air quality receptors within the City of San Carlos include, but are not limited to:
• Existing low- and medium-density residential receptors within the City; • Existing elementary and intermediate schools, and education or institutional facilities; • Existing medical facilities, such as the San Carlos Center; • Existing public facilities;
• Existing parks and recreational facilities, including, but not limited to, Arguello Park and Burton Park.

Existing Air Pollution-Related Health Risks
Sensitive air quality receptors are usually most affected by local sources of air pollution. US-101 and State Route 82 run through the middle of the project area and I-280 is immediately to the west.

All of these major roadways carry trucks that emit DPM as they operate and cause localized areas of DPM concentrations. Emissions of TACs from stationary sources in the project area can be found in the most recent version of BAAQMD's annual Toxic Contaminant Control Report.1 The majority of these sources are dry cleaning facilities, which emit perchloroethylene. However, the most prevalent toxic contaminants in the project area and San Mateo County (excluding diesel particulate matter) are benzene and 1,3-Butadiene from mobile sources and formaldehyde that comes from a variety of sources.

CalEnviroScreen is a mapping tool that helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution, and where people are often especially vulnerable to pollution’s effects. While CalEnviroScreen was originally developed as part of Senate Bill (SB) 535 and used to identify disadvantaged communities for the purposes of allocating funding from the State’s Cap-and-Trade regulation, its application and scope have expanded over the years. The tool uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic information to produce scores for every census tract in the state. The CalEnviroScreen model is made up of four components – two pollution burden components (exposures and environmental effects) and two population characteristics components (sensitive populations and socioeconomic factors). The four components are further divided into 20 indicators. An indicator is a measure of either environmental conditions, in the 1 Toxic Contaminant Control Report, Report available at: https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/research-anddata/emission-inventory/toxic-air-contaminants

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 244
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-9
October 2022
case of pollution burden indicators, or health and vulnerability factors, in the case of population characteristic indicators.
• Exposure indicators are based on the measurements of different types of pollution that people may come into contact with. Exposure indicators include:
o Air Quality: Ozone
o Air Quality: PM2.5
o Children’s Lead Risk from Housing
o Diesel Particular Matter
o Drinking Water Contaminants
o Pesticide Use
o Toxic Releases from Facilities
o Traffic Density
• Sensitive population indicators measure the number of people in a community who may be more severely affected by pollution because of their age or health. Sensitive population indicators include:
o Asthma
o Cardiovascular Disease
o Low Birth Weight Infants
• Environmental effects indicators are based on the locations of toxic chemicals in or near communities. Environmental effects indicators include:
o Cleanup Sites
o Groundwater Threats
o Hazardous Waste Generators and Facilities
o Impaired Water Bodies
o Solid Waste Sites and Facilities

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 245
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-10 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
• Socioeconomic factor indicators are conditions that may increase people’s stress or make healthy living difficult and cause them to be more sensitive to pollution’s effects (OEHHA 2017). Socioeconomic factors include:
o Educational Attainment
o Housing Burden
o Linguistic Isolation
o Poverty
o Unemployment
Each census tract receives scores for as many of the 20 indicators as possible, and the scores are then mapped so that different communities can be compared. Percentiles are assigned to each census tract based on the census tract’s score in relation to the rest of the state. An area with a high percentile is one that experiences a much higher pollution burden than areas with low scores. For example, if a census tract has an indicator in the 40th percentile, it means that indicator’s percentile is higher than 40 percent of the census tracts in the state. CalEnviroScreen also provides a total (or cumulative) score, which is the product of multiplying the 10 pollution burden components by the 10 population characteristics. This total / cumulative score helps contextualize how multiple contaminants from multiple sources affect people, while taking into account their living conditions (e.g., nonchemical factors such as socioeconomic and health status). Communities that are within the top 25th percentile for total CalEnviroScreen scores (i.e., scoring in the 75th percentile or higher for the cumulative score) are considered disadvantaged communities (DAC) pursuant to SB 535 (OEHHA 2017).

According to the OEHHA CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Map, the census tracts that are generally located in the central eastern portions of the project area have higher CalEnviroScreen scores than the census tracts located in the western and southern portions of the project area.

CalEnvironscreen 4.0. shows no areas within San Carlos as a DAC.

4.2.2 Regulatory Framework
Federal
Federal Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended, provides the overarching basis for both Federal and State air pollution prevention, control, and regulation. The CAA establishes the U.S. EPA’s responsibilities for protecting and improving the nation’s air quality. The U.S. EPA oversees Federal programs for setting air quality standards and designating attainment status, permitting new and modified stationary sources of pollutants, controlling emissions of hazardous air pollutants, and reducing emissions from motor vehicles and other mobile sources. In 1971, to

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 246
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-11 October 2022
achieve the purposes of Section 109 of the CAA, the U.S. EPA developed primary and secondary NAAQS. Primary standards are designed to protect human health with an adequate margin of safety. Secondary standards are designed to protect property and public welfare from air pollutants in the atmosphere.

State
California Clean Air Act
In addition to being subject to Federal requirements, air quality in the state is also governed by more stringent regulations under the California Clean Air Act, which was enacted in 1988 to develop plans and strategies for attaining the CAAQS. As discussed above, in California, both the Federal and State Clean Air acts are administered by CARB. CARB oversees the functions of local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts, which in turn administer air quality activities at the regional level.

In-Use Off-Road Diesel Equipment Program
CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Equipment regulation is intended to reduce emissions of NOx and PM from off-road diesel vehicles, including construction equipment, operating within California. The regulation imposes limits on idling; requires reporting equipment and engine information and labeling all vehicles reported; restricts adding older vehicles to fleets; and requires fleets to reduce their emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines or installing exhaust retrofits for PM. The requirements and compliance dates of the off-road regulation vary by fleet size, and large fleets (fleets with more than 5,000 horsepower) must meet average targets or comply with Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements beginning in 2014.

CARB has off-road anti-idling regulations affecting self-propelled diesel-fueled vehicles of 25 horsepower and up. The off-road anti-idling regulations limit idling on applicable equipment to no more than five minutes, unless exempted due to safety, operation, or maintenance requirements.

On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (In-Use) Regulation
CARB’s On-Road Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (In-Use) regulation (also known as the Truck and Bus Regulation) is intended to reduce emission of NOX, PM, and other criteria pollutants generated from existing on-road diesel vehicles operating in California. The regulation applies to nearly all diesel-fueled trucks and buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) greater than 14,000 pounds that are privately or federally owned, and for privately and publicly owned school buses.

Heavier trucks and buses with a GVWR greater than 26,000 pounds must comply with a schedule by engine model year or owners can report to show compliance with more flexible options. Fleets complying with the heavier trucks and buses schedule must install the best available PM filter on 1996 model year and newer engines, and replace the vehicle 8 years later. Trucks with 1995 model year and older engines had to be replaced starting in 2015. Replacements with a 2010 model year or newer engine meet the final requirements, but owners can also replace the equipment with used

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 247
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-12 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
trucks that have a future compliance date (as specified in regulation). By 2023, all trucks and buses must have at least 2010 model year engines with few exceptions.

CARB Stationary Diesel Engines – Emission Regulations
In 1998, CARB identified DPM as a TAC. In 2000, to reduce public exposure to DPM, the Board approved the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles (Risk Reduction Plan) (CARB 2000). Integral to this plan is the implementation of control measures to reduce DPM such as the control measures for stationary diesel-fueled engines. As such, diesel generators must comply with regulations under CARB’s amendments to Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Stationary Compression Ignition Engines and be permitted by BAAQMD.

CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook
In 1998, CARB identified particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC. CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook is intended to serve as a general reference guide for evaluating and reducing air pollution impacts associated with new projects that go through the land use decision-making process (CARB 2005). The CARB Handbook recommends that planning agencies consider proximity to air pollution sources when considering new locations for “sensitive” land uses, such as residences, medical facilities, daycare centers, schools, and playgrounds. Air pollution sources of concern include freeways, rail yards, ports, refineries, distribution centers, chrome plating facilities, dry cleaners, and large gasoline service stations. Key recommendations in the Handbook relative to the project area include taking steps to consider or avoid siting new, sensitive land uses:
• Within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day;
• Within 300 feet of gasoline fueling stations; or
• Within 300 feet of dry-cleaning operations (dry cleaning with TACs is being phased out and will be prohibited in 2023).

CARB prepared a technical supplement to the Handbook, a Technical Advisory on Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High Volume Roadways (CARB 2017), that provides recommendations for strategies to minimize exposure of the public to air pollutants due to proximity to high volume roadways, such as reducing traffic emissions and removing pollution from the air.

Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program
State requirements specifically address emissions of air toxics through Assembly Bill (AB) 1807 (known as the Tanner Bill) that established the State Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588) (California Health and

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 248
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-13 October 2022
Safety Code Section 44300 et seq.). Under the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (or Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Act) and Air Toxics Hot Spots Program, the State (CARB) must collect data on toxic emissions from stationary sources (facilities) throughout the State and ascertain potential health risks that these emissions pose to members of community for developing cancer or for resulting in non-cancer health effects. California’s Children’s Environmental Health Protection Act of 1999 (California Health and Safety Code Section 39606), also requires explicit consideration of infants and children in assessing risks from air toxics.

Substances regulated under California’s Air Toxics Hot Spots Program are defined in statute and include a list of substances developed by the following sources:
• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC);
• U.S. EPA;
• U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP);
• CARB Toxic Air Contaminant Identification Program List; • Hazard Evaluation System and Information Service (HESIS) (State of California); • Proposition 65 (Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986) list of carcinogens and reproductive toxicants (State of California); and • Any additional substance recognized by the State Board as presenting a chronic or acute threat to public health when present in the ambient air.

When locating receptors near large generators of TAC emissions, the BAAQMD recommends conducting CO hot spot analyses and analyzing health risk for these new developments.

Regional
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
The BAAQMD is primarily responsible for assuring that the national and state ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the Bay Area. BAAQMD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for and inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, conducting public education campaigns, as well as many other activities. BAAQMD has jurisdiction over much of the nine Bay Area counties, including San Mateo County, in which the project area is located. Much of BAAQMD’s regulatory authority is the control of stationary air pollution sources.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 249
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-14 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
The BAAQMD develops CEQA guidelines for local jurisdictions to use in evaluating air quality impacts from projects and plans reviewed through the CEQA process. The District has no regulatory authority to enforce this guidance; however, most lead agencies use the guidance to evaluate air quality impacts.

Air Quality Plans
The BAAQMD develops air quality plans addressing the California Clean Air Act and updates them approximately every three years toward meeting the CAAQS.

Bay Area Clean Air Plan, 1991
The Bay Area Clean Air Plan was prepared in 1991 to address the more stringent requirements of the California Clean Air Act with respect to O3. This plan includes a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions from stationary, area, and mobile sources. The plan objective is to indicate how the Bay Area Basin would make progress toward attaining the stricter state air quality standards, as mandated by the California Clean Air Act. The plan was designed to achieve a region-wide reduction of O3 precursor pollutants through the expeditious implementation of all feasible measures. Air quality plans addressing the California Clean Air Act are developed on a triennial basis, with the latest approved update to the plan developed in 2017 (i.e., 2017 Bay Area Ozone Strategy, described below).
2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy
In early 2006, BAAQMD adopted the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy, which includes a comprehensive strategy to reduce ozone precursor emissions from stationary, area, and mobile sources. This plan implements transportation control measures to address the 1- hour NAAQS for O3 and achieve basin-wide reductions in ozone precursor pollutants. The clean air planning efforts for ozone also will reduce PM10 and PM2.5, as a substantial amount of particulate matter comes from combustion emissions such as vehicle exhaust.

The Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy proposes expanded implementation of Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) and programs such as Spare the Air, a public outreach program designed to educate the public about air pollution in the Bay Area and promote individual behavior changes that improve air quality. Some of these measures or programs rely on local governments for implementation.

The BAAQMD is currently in the process of updating this plan, as required by the California Clean Air Act. In addition to implementing all feasible measures to reduce ozone, the plan will consider impacts of ozone control measures on particulate matter, TACs, and greenhouse gases in a single integrated plan.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 250
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-15 October 2022
2017 Bay Area Clean Air Plan
In April 2017, the BAAQMD adopted the 2017 Bay Area Clean Air Plan (CAP). This will be the latest update to the 1991 Bay Area Clean Air Plan that is required to include all feasible measures to reduce emissions of ozone precursors. The 2017 Plan provides a regional strategy to protect public health and protect the climate. To protect public health, the plan describes how the Air District will continue our progress toward attaining all state and federal air quality standards and eliminating health risk disparities from exposure to air pollution among Bay Area communities.

To protect the climate, the plan defines a vision for transitioning the region to a post-carbon economy needed to achieve ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets for 2030 and 2050 and provides a regional climate protection strategy that will put the Bay Area on a pathway to achieve those GHG reduction targets.

Regulation 6, Rule 3: Wood Burning Devices
BAAQMD adopts and enforces rules to reduce particulate matter emissions and develops public outreach programs to educate the public to reduce PM10 and PM2.5emissions (e.g., Spare the Night Program). On July 9, 2008, the BAAQMD Board adopted Regulation 6, Rule 3: Wood-Burning Devices, which is intended to reduce emissions that come from residential wood burning. This new rule restricts wood burning when air quality is unhealthy and a wintertime Spare the Air Advisory is issued. The rule also requires that only cleaner burning EPA-certified stoves and inserts be installed in new construction or remodels, including natural gas fireplaces. The rule applies to new woodstove and fireplace inserts. The regulation also places limits on excessive smoke, prohibits the burning of garbage and other harmful materials, and also requires the labeling of firewood and solid fuels sold within the Bay Area.

BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines
BAAQMD has prepared CEQA Guidelines to assist lead agencies, analysts, project proponents, and other interested parties in evaluating potential air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed in the Bay Area. The guidelines recommend procedures for evaluating projects or plans and thresholds to determine whether the impacts are significant; the guidelines are used in this analysis (see Section 4.3.3) to establish thresholds of significance for environmental impacts.

These guidelines also provide direction for identifying measures to mitigate impacts related to air quality. BAAQMD’s current CEQA guidelines were adopted in 2017. These guidelines include emission-based thresholds for project-level analysis, new procedures and thresholds for evaluating community risk, and greenhouse gas thresholds.

4.2.3 Significance Thresholds
Per the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the project would have a significant impact related to air quality if it would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan;

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 251
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-16 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
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) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people; or e) Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to air quality.

Regional Significance Thresholds
The significance thresholds in the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines were used for evaluating the impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project. The BAAQMD does not have plan-level mass thresholds, but rather requires consistency with the current air quality plan control measures and projected VMT or vehicle trip increase to be less than or equal to projected population increase. The guidelines also require overlay zones around existing and planned sources of TACs, at least 500 feet from all freeways and high-volume roadways as well as identifying the location and including policies to reduce the impacts of existing or planned sources of odors.

Carbon Monoxide “Hot Spot” Thresholds
Historically, to determine whether a project poses the potential for a CO hotspot, the quantitative CO screening procedures provided in the Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (the Protocol) were used (UCD ITS, 1997). The Protocol determines a project may worsen air quality if the project increases the percentage of vehicles in cold start modes by two percent or more; significantly increases traffic volumes by five percent or more; or worsen traffic flow, defined for signalized intersections as increasing average delay at intersections operating at level of service (LOS) E or F or causing an intersection that would operate at LOS D or better without the project, to operate at LOS E or F. With new vehicles and improvements in fuels resulting in fewer emissions, the retirement of older polluting vehicles, and new controls and programs, CO concentrations have declined dramatically in California. As a result of emissions controls on new vehicles, the number of vehicles that can idle and the length of time that vehicles can idle before emissions would trigger a CO impact has increased, so the use of LOS as an indicator is no longer applicable for determining CO impacts.

BAAQMD developed a screening-level analysis for CO hotspots in 2010 which finds that projects that are consistent with the applicable congestion management program, and that do not cause traffic volumes at affected intersections to increase to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour, would not result in a CO hotspot that could exceed State or Federal air quality standards (BAAQMD 2017; pg. 3-4). Therefore, for purposes of this EIR, the project would pose the potential for a CO hotspot if it would exceed the BAAQMD’s screening traffic level for peak hour intersection traffic volumes (44,000 vehicles per hour) (thereby having the potential to result in CO concentrations that exceed 1-hour State [20 ppm], 1-hour Federal [35 ppm], and/or State and Federal 8-hour [9 ppm] ambient air quality standards for CO).

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 252
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-17 October 2022

4.2.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This evaluates potential air quality impacts and recommends mitigation measures, as needed, to reduce significant impacts.

Impact AIR-1 – The project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions to a level that is below the BAAQMDrecommended threshold of significance. However, it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all future development projects occurring under implementation of the proposed project would be able to reduce potential criteria air pollutant emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures. (Significant and Unavoidable Impact) Analysis of Impacts
As described in Section 4.3.1, the proposed project is within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD. Pursuant to the methodology provided in Chapter 9 of the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, consistency with the Air Quality Plan (AQP) is affirmed if the following occurs:

1. Does the project support the primary goals of the AQP?;

2. Does the project include applicable control measures from the AQP?; and

3. Does the project disrupt or hinder implementation of any AQP control measures? Consistency Criterion 1 refers to the goals of the 2010 Bay Area Clean Air Plan (CAP): attain air quality standards, reduce population exposure and protecting public health in the Bay Area, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the climate. The 2017 AQP was designed to achieve attainment for all criteria air pollutants within the Bay Area Basin while still accommodating growth in the region.

Consistency Criterion 2 refers to the control measures included in the CAP. The BAAQMD’s most recent Clean Air Plan (2017), includes 23 transportation control measures, two energy control measures, four building control measures, and four waste management control measures. To be consistent with the 2017 Clean Air Plan the City’s General Plan policies should include all those measures that are consistent with the City’s responsibility. The City would support programs that increase ridesharing, reduce pollutants generated by vehicle use, and meet the transportation control measures recommended by BAAQMD in the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The following measures require action by the city and will be required to be implemented in future development projects.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 253
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-18 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
Transportation Control Measures
TR2 Trip Reduction Programs: Implement the regional Commuter Benefits Program (Rule 14-1) that requires employers with 50 or more Bay Area employees to provide commuter benefits.

Encourage trip reduction policies and programs in local plans, e.g., general and specific plans while providing grants to support trip reduction efforts. Encourage local governments to require mitigation of vehicle travel as part of new development approval, to adopt transit benefits ordinances in order to reduce transit costs to employees, and to develop innovative ways to encourage rideshare, transit, cycling, and walking for work trips. Fund various employer-based trip reduction programs.

TR3 Local and Regional Bus Service: Fund local and regional bus projects, including operations and maintenance.

TR4 Local and Regional Rail Service: Fund local and regional rail service projects, including operations and maintenance.

TR5 Transit Efficiency and Use: Improve transit efficiency and make transit more convenient for riders through continued operation of 511 Transit, full implementation of Clipper® fare payment system and the Transit Hub Signage Program.

TR6 Freeway and Arterial Systems: Fund Improve the performance and efficiency of freeway and arterial systems through operational improvements, such as implementing the Freeway Performance Initiative, the Freeway Service Patrol and the Arterial Management Program.

TR7 Safe Routes to Schools and Safe Routes to Transit: Provide funds for the regional Safe Routes to School and Safe Routes to Transit Programs.

TR8 Ridesharing, Last-Mile Connection: Promote carpooling and vanpooling by providing funding to continue regional and local ridesharing programs, and support the expansion of carsharing programs. Provide incentive funding for pilot projects to evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of innovative ridesharing and other last-mile solution trip reduction strategies.

Encourage employers to promote ridesharing and carsharing to their employees.

Energy Control Measures
EN2 Decrease Electricity Demand: Work with local governments to adopt additional energy efficiency policies and programs. Support local government energy efficiency program via best practices, model ordinances, and technical support. Work with partners to develop messaging to decrease electricity demand during peak times.

Building Control Measures
BL2 Decarbonize Buildings: Explore potential Air District rulemaking options regarding the sale of fossil fuel-based space and water heating systems for both residential and commercial use.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 254
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-19 October 2022
Explore incentives for property owners to replace their furnace, water heater or natural-gas powered appliances with zero-carbon alternatives. Update Air District guidance documents to recommend that commercial and multi-family developments install ground source heat pumps and solar hot water heaters.

BL4 Urban Heat Islands Mitigations: Develop and urge adoption of a model ordinance for “cool parking” that promotes the use of cool surface treatments for new parking facilities, as well existing surface lots undergoing resurfacing. Develop and promote adoption of model building code requirements for new construction or re-roofing/roofing upgrades for commercial and residential multi-family housing. Collaborate with expert partners to perform outreach to cities and counties to make them aware of cool roofing and cool paving techniques, and of new tools available.

Waste Management Control Measures
WA3 Green Waste Diversion: Develop model policies to facilitate local adoption of ordinances and programs to reduce the amount of green waste going to landfills.

WA4 Recycling and Waste Reduction: Develop or identify and promote model ordinances on community-wide zero waste goals and recycling of construction and demolition materials in commercial and public construction projects.

Additionally, the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines require evaluation of growth of vehicle miles travelled (VMT). Table 4.6-3 in the Energy Section estimates 2,345,830 daily VMT for the new development compared to 2,028,575 daily VMT for existing uses, or 50.1 VMT per service population at project buildout and 59.8 daily VMT per service population for existing uses.

Therefore, the project will have a VMT increase less than the projected population growth.

Summary and Conclusions
The proposed project would not result in operational emissions that exceed BAAQMD regional CEQA thresholds (described in Impact AIR-2, below) and would comply with all relevant AQP control measures. However, since the proposed Focused GPU could result in construction emissions that exceed the BAAQMD regional CEQA thresholds (as discussed in Impact AIR-2), the proposed project could increase the frequency and/or severity of air quality violations in the Basin or otherwise impede attainment of air quality standards, particularly national and state ozone standards. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

As discussed under Impact AIR-2, the incorporation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions to a level that is below the BAAQMD-recommended threshold of significance. However, given the speculative nature of construction activities that could occur under implementation of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to accurately assess the level of emissions that would be generated by future development and redevelopment activities in the City. Because it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that construction emissions would be able to be mitigated such that all construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions would be below BAAQMD8.b January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 255
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-20 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
recommended thresholds of significance, implementation of the proposed Focused GPU could still increase the frequency and/or severity of air quality violations in the Basin or otherwise impede attainment of air quality standards in the Basin. For this reason, the proposed Focused GPU would be inconsistent with the AQP. This impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Impact AIR-2 – The project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions to a level that is below the BAAQMD-recommended threshold of significance. However, it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all future development projects occurring under implementation of the proposed project would be able to reduce potential criteria air pollutant emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures. (Significant and Unavoidable Impact)
Analysis of Impacts
Criteria Pollutants
The proposed project sets forth the City’s vision for the types of development that would occur over the next approximately eight years. The Focused GPU proposed zoning and land use changes permit higher housing development intensity within the City boundaries than compared to the existing General Plan. Criteria air pollutant and other emissions would result from construction activities, and from the operation of residences, businesses, and other land uses within the City.

Project implementation would generate short-term construction and long-term operational emissions of regulated air pollutants (i.e., criteria air pollutants and TACs). These emissions would be released to the ambient air and disperse according to the topographic and meteorological influences that prevail near the project area and in the greater Bay Area Basin (see Section 4.3.1).

The BAAQMD has no plan-level significance thresholds; however, in developing its CEQA significance thresholds, the BAAQMD considered the emission levels at which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable (BAAQMD 2017). The BAAQMD considers projects that result in emissions that exceed its CEQA significance thresholds to result in individual impacts that are cumulatively considerable and significant. The BAAQMD maintains project-level significance thresholds to assess how individual projects may affect air quality on large and small geographic scales. The potential for construction and operational emissions associated with project implementation to impact air quality on a regional and local level is discussed below.

Construction Emissions
The proposed project would not directly result in construction of any development or infrastructure; however, future development supported by the project would result in short-term

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 256
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-21 October 2022
construction-related criteria pollutant emissions that have the potential to have an adverse effect on air quality. Short-term criteria air pollutant emissions would occur during demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating activities associated with specific, new development projects. Emissions would occur from use of equipment, worker, vendor and hauling trips, and disturbance of onsite soils (fugitive dust). ROG and NOX emissions are primarily associated with gas and diesel equipment exhaust and the application of architectural coatings. Fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) are primarily associated with site preparation and vary as a function of such parameters as soil silt content, soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and VMT by construction vehicles on- and off-site. Typical construction equipment associated with development and redevelopment projects includes, but is not limited to, dozers, graders, excavators, loaders, and trucks.

Although it is not possible to know the exact type, number, location, or duration of future construction projects, future development activities would generally entail demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and painting. Since San Carlos is generally a built-out city, many new projects in the City will likely require the demolition of existing structures to make room for newer ones. Fugitive dust (PM10) emissions would typically be greatest during building demolition, site preparation, and grading due to the disturbance of soils and transport of material. NOX emissions would also result from the combustion of diesel fuels used to power offroad heavy-duty pieces of equipment (e.g., backhoes, bulldozers, excavators, etc.). ROG emissions would generally be greatest during architectural coating activities. The types and quantity of equipment, as well as duration of construction activities, would be dependent on project-specific conditions. Larger projects would require more equipment over a longer timeframe than that required for redevelopment of a single, residential home or small residential or mixed-use project.

Given the speculative nature of construction activities that could occur under implementation of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to accurately assess the level of emissions that would be generated by future development and redevelopment activities in the City. It is possible that either no construction could be occurring within the City at any given time, or multiple projects could be occurring simultaneously. Despite these unknowns, it is plausible that one or more projects developed under implementation of the proposed project could have the potential to exceed one or more of the BAAQMD’s construction criteria air pollutant threshold of significance (e.g., NOx for a project involving a substantial amount of earthwork during grading, ROG during architectural coating activities, etc.). Therefore, this impact is potentially significant and requires mitigation.

Operational Emissions
If adopted, the proposed project would accommodate new residential land uses, some of which would involve replace existing development. Overall, project implementation would increase residential dwelling units in the City under the project buildout scenario.

Growth associated with implementation of the project would result in long-term regional emissions of criteria air pollutants associated with the operation of area sources, energy sources, and mobile

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 257
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-22 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
sources. Area source emissions, which are widely distributed and made of many small emissions sources (e.g., landscaping equipment, consumer products, painting operations, etc.), were modeled according to the size and type of land uses proposed. Energy sources were also modeled based on the size and type of land uses included in the project’s 2040 growth forecast. Mobile-source emissions were modeled based on the daily vehicle trips that would result from the proposed project.

The net change in emissions of regulated air pollutants that would occur with implementation of the project was modeled using CalEEMod, V. 2020.4.0. The net change in operational emissions for the project was modeled based on the project’s 2040 growth projection, using default data assumptions provided by CalEEMod, with the following project-specific modifications:
• Land Use Development: The default acreage and square footage for proposed development intensities within the project area was adjusted to reflect proposed development conditions (considering allowable floor-to-area ratio, acreage in the project area, etc.).
• Mobile Sources
o Trip Generation and Distance: An average trip distance of approximately 8.17 miles was derived from a default CalEEMod run. This trip distance was used in conjunction with the average, daily trip generation estimate prepared by Kittelson & Associates for the proposed land uses (28,957 trips per day) which is presented in the Transportation Chapter.
o Emission Factors: Vehicle emission factors were updated based on derived EMFAC20201 (version 1.0.1) emission rates for San Mateo County (Bay Area) in the Year 2040, consistent with the methodology described in the CalEEMod User’s Guide Appendix A (CAPCOA 2017b).

The net change in long-term operational emissions that would be generated by project growth is shown in Table 4.2-3. The net change in emissions evaluated in this EIR is based on the difference between the existing land uses under project buildout conditions and the proposed project land uses under existing conditions, which estimates 2040 emissions for the existing conditions. Table

4.2-3 shows the project would reduce emissions per capita of all calculated pollutants due to increased housing density and would therefore not have a significant impact.

Table 4.2-3: 2040 Project Growth Forecast Operational Emissions Emissions
Scenario
Maximum Daily Pollutant Emissions (Pounds per Day)(A)
ROG NOX CO SO2
PM10 PM2.5
Dust Exhaust Total Dust Exhaust Total
Project Buildout Scenario
Area Sources 1,618.50 37.02 2,306.20 3.88 0.00 286.09 286.09 0.00 286.09 286.09 Energy Sources 1.22 10.40 4.43 0.07 0.00 0.84 0.84 0.00 0.84 0.84

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 258
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-23 October 2022
Table 4.2-3: 2040 Project Growth Forecast Operational Emissions Emissions
Scenario
Maximum Daily Pollutant Emissions (Pounds per Day)(A)
ROG NOX CO SO2
PM10 PM2.5
Dust Exhaust Total Dust Exhaust Total
Mobile Source 55.05 44.97 530.18 1.01 140.70 0.45 141.15 37.47 0.42 37.89 Total(B) 1,674.76 92.39 2,840.81 4.95 140.70 287.38 428.08 37.47 287.35 324.83 Residents 13,480
Emissions per
Resident 0.124 0.007 0.211 0.000 0.010 0.021 0.032 0.003 0.021 0.024 Existing Scenario
Area Sources 1,413.00 30.45 1,953.82 3.35 0.00 248.78 248.78 0.00 248.78 248.78 Energy Sources 1.73 14.76 6.28 0.09 0.00 1.19 1.19 0.00 1.19 1.19 Mobile Source 56.05 45.80 539.85 1.03 143.27 0.46 143.72 38.16 0.43 38.58 Total(B) 1,470.78 91.00 2,499.95 4.47 143.27 250.42 393.69 38.16 250.39 288.55 Residents 10,682
Emissions per
Resident 0.138 0.009 0.234 0.000 0.013 0.023 0.037 0.004 0.023 0.027 Net Change in Emissions Levels
Emissions per
Resident -0.013 -0.002 -0.023 0.000 -0.0030 -0.002 -0.005 -0.001 -0.002 -0.003 Percent Change
per Resident -9.8% -19.5% -10.0% -12.2% -22.2% -9.1% -13.8% -22.2% -9.1% -10.8% Source: MD Acoustics, 2022 (see Appendix C)
Emissions estimated using CalEEMod, V 2020.4.0. Estimates are based on default model assumptions unless otherwise noted in this document. Maximum daily ROG, CO, SOX emissions occur during the summer. Maximum daily NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions occur during the winter.

Totals may not equal due to rounding.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Construction Emissions. As discussed above, construction emissions associated with future development activities facilitated under implementation of the proposed project could exceed BAAQMD-recommended CEQA significance thresholds for regional criteria air pollutant emissions. This is considered a potentially significant impact, therefore Mitigation Measure AIR2 is proposed, see below.

Operational Emissions. As shown in Table 4.2-3, the modeled, maximum daily operational emission associated with potential project growth would overall decrease per capita and would not have a significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Require a Project-level Construction Assessment for New Discretionary Development Projects. The City shall require applicants to submit a quantitative project-level construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions analysis for future discretionary development projects that are not exempt under CEQA and do not meet the

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 259
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-24 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
BAAQMD screening criteria. The estimated construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions shall be compared against the thresholds of significance maintained by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and, if emissions are shown to be above BAAQMD thresholds, the City shall require the imposition and implementation of mitigation measures to reduce emissions below the thresholds that have been exceeded. Mitigation measures to reduce emissions could include, but are not limited to:
• Selection of specific construction equipment (e.g., specialized pieces of equipment with smaller engines or equipment that will be more efficient and reduce engine runtime); • Requiring equipment to use alternative fuel sources (e.g., electric-powered and liquefied or compressed natural gas), meet cleaner emission standards (e.g., U.S. EPA Tier IV Final emissions standards for equipment greater than 50-horsepower), and/or utilizing added exhaust devices (e.g., Level 3 Diesel Particular Filter); • Minimizing the idling time of diesel-powered construction equipment to two minutes; and • Application of Low-VOC paints to interior and/or exterior surfaces (e.g., paints that meet BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 3 requirements).

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Construction Emissions. As described in the preceding analysis, there is uncertainty regarding the specific nature of construction activities that would be facilitated under implementation of the proposed project. Despite the implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2, which requires the preparation of project-specific air quality analysis prior to the construction of any new development and incorporation of mitigation measures if emissions levels are shown to be above BAAQMD-recommended thresholds of significance, it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all future development projects occurring under implementation of the proposed project would be able to reduce potential criteria air pollutant emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. Therefore, with regard to criteria air pollutant emissions generated during construction activities, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures.

Operational Emissions. Not applicable.

Impact AIR-3 – The project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would reduce construction criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions to a level that is below the BAAQMDrecommended threshold of significance. However, with regard to localized criteria air pollutant and TAC emissions generated during future construction activities it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all future development projects occurring under implementation of the proposed project would be able to reduce potential criteria air pollutant and TAC emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. This impact would be

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 260
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-25 October 2022
considered significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures. (Significant and Unavoidable Impact)
Analysis of Impacts
Sensitive Receptors
Growth projected to occur under the project could expose existing and new sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of criteria air pollutants and TAC emissions that pose adverse health effects. The potential for the proposed project to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations is evaluated below.

CO Hotspots
Based on the TIA prepared for the proposed project (see Appendix E), the maximum number of vehicles moving through the study analysis zone under the project’s 2040 growth projection would be 28,957 vehicles per day. This level of traffic is below the screening threshold of 44,000 vehicles per hour for a CO hotspot analysis at a single intersection (See Section 4.3.3). Therefore, the project would not cause or significantly contribute to CO concentrations that exceed State or Federal ambient air quality standards for CO. This impact would be less than significant.

Construction Emissions
As discussed under Impact AIR-2, future development activities facilitated under implementation of the proposed project would generate emissions, including emissions of DPM (a TAC), during construction activities. These emissions would occur intermittently over the approximately 18- year growth period associated with the project. Although specific details regarding project development within the Project Area are not known at this time, it is possible that one or more projects developed under implementation of the proposed project could have the potential to exceed BAAQMD LSTs and thresholds of significance for cancerogenic and non-cancerogenic health risks.

Operational Emissions
As shown in Table 4.2-3, implementation of the proposed project would generally reduce the quantity of criteria air pollutants emitted per capita within the City. As discussed previously, the BAAQMD’s CEQA thresholds were developed to attain the CAAQS and NAAQS. In developing the CAAQS and NAAQS, the U.S. EPA and CARB considered scientific evidence linking exposure to air pollutants to health risks. Although each individual’s health characteristics, environment, and pre-disposition to adverse respiratory health effects is different, compliance with the CAAQS and NAAQS is intended to protect the most sensitive individuals. As described under Impact -AIR-2, the proposed project would not generate operational emissions such that receptor exposure to substantial pollutant concentrations would occur. Even if operational emissions were to have exceeded the BAAQMD’s thresholds, a significant impact would likely have not occurred.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 261
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-26 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
In the amicus brief filed by the SCAQMD on the California Supreme Court’s decision in Sierra Club versus County of Fresno, the SCAQMD noted that, “[it] takes a large amount of additional precursor emissions [e.g., NOx] to cause a modeled increase in ambient ozone levels… a project emitting only 10 tons per year of NOx or VOC is small enough that its regional impact on ambient ozone levels may not be detected in the regional air quality models used to determine ozone levels…” (SCAQMD 2015).

The proposed project solely focuses on new residential development to increase dwelling unit density and does not reimagine the City in a manner that would substantially increase the quantity of highly polluting land uses (e.g., industrial facilities). Therefore, the changes in land use proposed by the project do not have the potential to alter the city-wide emissions profile in a manner that could exacerbate or contribute to significant health risks at or in proximity of the project area.

Exacerbation of Existing Sources of Pollutants
Project growth would add new residential development in the city and could place new, sensitive receptors in proximity to existing sources of emissions and local stationary sources of emissions.

Per the recent ruling by the California Supreme Court in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 62 Cal.4th 369 (2015), projects are not required to analyze how existing conditions might impact a project’s future users or residents. As such, this analysis does not focus on potential, future receptor exposure to existing emissions from existing sources of pollutants in and near the City. Rather, it focuses on the incremental increase in pollutant concentrations and associated impacts (including adverse health impacts) that could occur if existing operations were to change as a result of project growth.

Under the project growth projection, the proposed project would increase the number of residents in the project area from approximately 10,682 people to approximately 13,480 people, an increase of approximately 2,798 people (21.9% increase). Although this growth would occur throughout the City, it would occur primarily in areas focused for redevelopment. The growth envisioned under the project would generate long-term emissions, primarily associated with area and mobile sources that would combust natural gas or gasoline. As described under Impact AIR-2, emissions of operations-related criteria air pollutants would comply with BAAQMD significance thresholds and would not result in, nor substantially exacerbate, substantial pollutant concentrations at sensitive receptor locations.

Additional Information on Existing Sources of Pollutants The proposed project could result in new sensitive receptors being exposed to significant sources of TAC emissions. The CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook recommends avoiding the siting of new sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, etc.) within:
• 300 feet of large gasoline fueling stations (with a throughput of more than 3.6 million gallons of gasoline per year);

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 262
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-27 October 2022
• Within 300 feet of dry cleaning operations;
• Within 500 feet of freeways, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day; or
• Within 1,000 feet of a major rail service or maintenance yard.

Although the potential exists for the project to result in new sensitive residential receptors near existing sources of emissions, the project would comply with the CEQA guidance and would not exacerbate pollutant concentrations or health risks associated with emissions sources and, therefore, would not materially change the existing environmental risks present in the project area.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
CO Hotspots. The proposed project would not exceed the screening threshold of 44,000 vehicles per hour. Therefore, it would not result in a CO hotspot. This impact would be less than significant.

Construction Emissions. As discussed under the preceding analysis and Impact AIR-2, construction emissions associated with future development activities facilitated under implementation of the proposed project could exceed BAAQMD construction thresholds and cancerogenic and non-cancerogenic threshold maintained and recommended by the BAAQMD.

This is considered a potentially significant impact.

Exacerbation of Existing Sources of Pollutants. Implementation of the proposed project would not exacerbate existing sources of pollutants in and near the project area. This impact would be less than significant.

Additional Information on Existing Sources of Pollutants. This information has been provided for informational purposes and is not considered part of the CEQA analysis.

Mitigation Measures
See Mitigation Measure AIR-2.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
CO Hotspots. Not applicable.

Construction Emissions. There is uncertainty regarding the specific nature of construction activities that would be facilitated under implementation of the proposed project. Despite the implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-2, which requires the preparation of project-specific air quality analysis prior to the construction of any new development and incorporation of mitigation measures if emissions levels are shown to be above BAAQMD-recommended thresholds of significance for cancerogenic and non-cancerogenic risks, as well as BAAQMD criteria thresholds, it cannot be definitively known or stated at this time that all future development

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 263
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-28 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
projects occurring under implementation of the proposed project would be able to reduce potential risks and localized construction air pollutant emissions to levels that are below BAAQMD thresholds. Therefore, with regard to localized criteria air pollutant and TAC emissions generated during future construction activities, this impact would be significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures.

Exacerbation of Existing Sources of Pollutants. Not applicable.

Additional Information on Existing Sources of Pollutants. Not applicable.

Impact AIR-4 – The project would not result in other emissions such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people. (Less Than Significant Impact) According to the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, land uses associated with odor complaints include agricultural operations, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and certain industrial operations (such as manufacturing uses that produce chemicals, paper, etc.). The project does not include these types of sources, and there are no such active sources in or near the project area.

Construction occurring within the project area could produce odors from fuel combustion or solvents/paints used. These odors would be temporary, quickly disperse, and would not affect a substantial number of people.

Under the project growth projection, the project would increase the amount of residential development in the city, including multi-family development that could be located close to retail, restaurant, and other commercial land uses that may generate localized sources of odors that may or may not be objectionable to nearby residential land uses.

The project does not, in and of itself, permit or authorize any new, major sources of potential odors (e.g., wastewater treatment plant), and odor impacts would be less than significant with standard environmental review practices.

Impact AIR-5 –The project could cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to Air Quality. Because future construction activities could result in ozone precursor and PM emissions that exceed BAAQMD thresholds, the project could increase the frequency and/or severity of air quality violations in the Bay Area Basin or otherwise impede attainment of air quality standards. (Significant and Unavoidable Impact) As described in Section 4.3.1, the Bay Area Basin is designated nonattainment for national and State O3 standards, national and State PM2.5 standards, and national PM10 standards. The BAAQMD, in developing its CEQA significance thresholds, considered the emission levels at which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable (BAAQMD 2017).

The BAAQMD considers projects that result in emissions that exceed its CEQA significance thresholds to result in individual impacts that are cumulatively considerable and significant.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 264
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-29 October 2022
The analyses of emissions associated with potential project growth in 2040 under Impact AIR-2 indicates the proposed project would result in increased emissions that do not exceed BAAQMD planning assumptions in the AQMP; however, ozone precursor (e.g., NOx and ROG) and PM emissions during construction activities could exceed applicable BAAQMD thresholds of significance.

The project growth projection and associated construction emissions could result in emissions levels that exceed BAAQMD-recommended CEQA thresholds of significance. This is a potentially significant impact and mitigation measure AIR-2 is proposed.

Mitigation Measure AIR-2 would require applicants to prepare project-specific air quality analyses and incorporate mitigation, as necessary, to reduce exhaust emissions of NOX and other pollutants from construction vehicles; however, since specific development projects are unknown, it cannot be assured that all future development would be able to reduce emissions below BAAQMD thresholds. Nonetheless, because future construction activities could result in ozone precursor and PM emissions that exceed BAAQMD thresholds, the project could increase the frequency and/or severity of air quality violations in the Bay Area Basin or otherwise impede attainment of air quality standards. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

4.2.5 References
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). (2014). Improving Air Quality & Health in Bay Area Communities. April.
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/Files/Planning%20and%20Research/CARE%20Program/ Documents/CARE_Retrospective_April2014.ashx?la=en.
________. (2017). California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. San Francisco, CA. June 2010, updated May 2017.

California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2004). Definitions of VOC and ROG. Sacramento, CA. 2004. Web: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ei/speciate/voc_rog_dfn_11_04.pdf. [Accessed September 2022].
________. (2005). Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.

Sacramento, CA. 2005. Available online at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf ________. (2014). California’s 2000-2012 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Technical Support Document. 2014 Edition. Web:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/doc/methods_00-12/ghg_inventory_00- 12_technical_support_document.pdf [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2016a). “Lead and Health.” Web: https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/dieselhealth.htm. [Accessed September 2022].

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 265
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-30 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
________. (2016b). Ambient Air Quality Standards. Sacramento, CA. Web:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2017). Technical Advisory on Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High Volume Roadways. April, 2017.
________. (2016c). “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Health Effects of Diesel. Available online at: <https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm> ________. (2020a). Common Air Pollutants. Web: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/common-airpollutants. [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2020b). Reducing Toxic Air Pollutants in California’s Communities. Web:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/brochure.pdf. [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2021). CARB Facility Search Engine. Search conducted September 2022. Web:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php?dd= ________. (2022). "Sulfate & Health". California Ambient Air Quality Standards. CARB, Resources. 2022. Web: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/sulfate-and-health. [Accessed October 2022].

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2017a). CalEEMod User Manual Appendix E Technical Source Documentation. Prepared for CAPCOA. Prepared by Trinity Consultants, Dallas TX. October 2017.
_________. (2017b). CalEEMod User Manual Appendix A Calculation Details. Prepared for CAPCOA. Prepared by Trinity Consultants, Dallas TX. October 2017.

California Energy Commission (CEC). (2018). 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Frequently Asked Questions. Sacramento, CA. March 2018
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. C/CAG Model. 2022.

Loxham, M., M.J. Cooper, M.E. Gerlofs-Nijland, F. R. Cassee, D.E. Davies, M.R. Palmer, and D.A.H. Teagle. (2013). Physicochemical characterization of airborne particulate matter at a mainline underground railway station. Environmental Science and Technology, Apr. 16: 47(8):
3614-3622.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). (2017). CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Report. January 2017.
_________. (2021). CalEnviroScreen 4.0. Last updated April 28, 2021. [Accessed September 12, 2022]. Web: https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/draft-calenviroscreen-40

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 266
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.2-31 October 2022
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). (2015). Application of the South Coast Air Quality Management District for Leave to File Brief of Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Part and Proposed Brief of Amicus Curiae (Sierra Club v. County of Fresno 6 Cal. 5th 502 (2018)). Diamond Bar, CA. April 2015.

UC Davis, Institute of Transportation Studies (UCD ITS). (1997). Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol- Revised 1997. USD-ITS-RR-99-21. Davis, CA.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). (2016a). "Particulate Matter (PM) Basics." U.S. EPA, Environmental Topics [Air], Particulate Matter (PM), What is PM, and how does it get into the air?. September 12, 2016. Web: https://www.epa.gov/pmpollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics#PM. [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2016b). "Carbon Monoxide (CO) Pollution in Outdoor Air." U.S. EPA, Environmental Topics [Air], Carbon Monoxide (CO), What is CO? September 12, 2016. Web:
https://www.epa.gov/co-pollution/basic-information-about-carbon-monoxide-co-outdoor-airpollution#What%20is%20CO. [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2016c). "Basic Information About NO2." U.S. EPA, Environmental Topics [Air], Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), What is NO2, and how does it get into the air? September 8, 2016.

Web: https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-no2#What%20is%20NO2. [Accessed September 2022].
________. (2016d). "Sulfur Dioxide Basics." U.S. EPA, Environmental Topics [Air], Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), What is SO2, and how does it get into the air? August 16, 2016. Web:
https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/sulfur-dioxide-basics#what%20is%20so2. [Accessed September 2022].
________. (2016e). Light Duty Vehicles and Light Duty Trucks: Tier 0, Tier 1, National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV), and Clean Fuel Vehicle (CFV) Exhaust Emission Standards. EPA 420-B-16-010. Washington, D.C. March 2016.
________. (2016f). Light Duty Vehicles and Light Duty Trucks: Clean Fuel Fleet Exhaust Emission Standards. EPA 420-B-16-006. Washington, D.C. March 2016. ________. (2017). "Ozone Basics." U.S. EPA, Environmental Topics [Air], Ground Level Ozone, What is “good”” versus “bad” ozone. Web: https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/ozonebasics#what%20where%20how. [Accessed September 2022]. ________. (2020a). Criteria Air Pollutants. Web: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. [Accessed September 2022].
________. (2020b). Health and Environmental Effects of Hazardous Air Pollutants. Web:
https://www.epa.gov/haps/health-and-environmental-effects-hazardous-air-pollutants. [Accessed September 2022].

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 267
Chapter 4.2 Air Quality

4.2-32 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR October 2022
This page intentionally left blank.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 268
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.3-1
October 2022

4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.3.1 Environmental Setting
Biological resources in San Carlos are summarized in the sections below. The following information is from the San Carlos General Plan Environmental Management Element, updated with a December 2021 search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and a fine scale vegetation map of San Mateo County recently released by the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy and other public and private partners (GGNPC 2022).

Land Cover and Vegetation Types in San Carlos
A San Mateo County fine scale vegetation map was released on March 3, 2022, by the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy and other public and private partners (GGNPC 2022). The San Mateo County fine scale vegetation map is a 106-class vegetation map of San Mateo County with 97,582 polygons. The fine scale vegetation map represents the state of the landscape in 2018 and adheres to the National Vegetation Classification System. The fine scale vegetation map was created using semi-automated methods that include field work, computer-based machine learning, and manual aerial photo interpretation. The portion of the fine scale vegetation map within the San Carlos SOI was utilized to create Figure 4.3-1 and Table 4.3-1 below. Land cover and vegetation types in the San Carlos SOI are summarized below based on the mapped information.

Table 4.3-1: Land Cover and Vegetation Types in the San Carlos Sphere of Influence Land Cover/ Vegetation Type Acres
Developed and Landscaped 3,110.70
Developed 2,930.22
Major Road 25.16
Non-native Forest 155.32
Forest and Woodland 761.55
Blue oak woodland and forest 602.45
Mixed oak forest and woodland 63.89
California bay forest and woodland 48.39
Forest fragment 17.19
Eucalyptus groves 9.87
Monterey pine plantation 7.10
Valley oak woodland and forest 2.92
Redwood forest and woodland 2.28
Goodding's willow-red willow riparian woodland and forest 1.08 Shrubland 315.2
Chamise chaparral 80.10
Brittle leaf-woolly leaf manzanita chaparral 76.53
California sagebrush scrub 65.50

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 269
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources

4.3-2 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 4.3-1: Land Cover and Vegetation Types in the San Carlos Sphere of Influence Land Cover/ Vegetation Type Acres
Coyote brush scrub 60.76
Non-native shrub 8.97
Poison oak scrub 6.22
Mesic coastal scrub 6.10
Shrub fragment 6.02
Wedge leaf ceanothus chaparral 5.00
Grassland & Herbs 84.92
Californian annual & perennial grassland 84.92
Wetlands and Waterbodies 4.67
Freshwater wet meadow & marsh 1.77
Mudflat/dry pond bottom 1.37
Pickleweed mats 0.95
Water 0.54
Gum plant patches 0.04
Total Area 4,277.04
Source: GGNPC 2022
Developed/Landscaped (3,110.70 acres). Most of the land in the San Carlos SOI (about 72.7 percent) is developed and/or landscaped, particularly within the City limits and on the eastern side of the City. Developed areas include buildings, roads, parking lots, fields, and landscaped areas.

Landscape vegetation consists of street trees, lawns, commercial and public landscaping such as ornamental trees and shrubs, and residential garden plants. Plant species are mostly non-native and are chosen for beauty, edibility, and/or drought tolerance. Urban landscape plants and sometimes buildings do provide habitat for some wildlife such as birds and small mammals commonly found in urban areas.

Forest and Woodland (761.55 acres). About 17.8 percent of land within the San Carlos SOI has forest or woodland vegetation. Forest and woodland vegetation are mostly concentrated in the hills in the western part of the City, and outside of the City limits (but within the SOI) in Pulgas Ridge.

Forest and woodland vegetation mapped in the San Carlos SOI is predominantly oak woodland dominated by coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata), or blue oak (Quercus lobata). Other forest and woodland vegetation types mapped in the San Carlos SOI include California bay (Umbellularia californica) forest and woodland, eucalyptus groves (predominantly blue gum, Eucalyptus globulus), Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), coast redwood (Seqoia sempervirens), and Goodding’s willow (Salix gooddingii)- red willow (Salix laevigata) riparian woodland (in Pulgas Ridge). Eucalyptus, Monterey pine, and coast redwood are not naturally occurring in San Carlos and were planted. Forests and woodlands provide habitat for a variety of native wildlife including invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 270
Source: MIG 2022
Focused General Plan Update
Figure 4.3-1 Vegetation Communities
San Mateo Fine Scale Vegetation Map
--Redwood Forest and Woodland
c:====:J Developed
--California Buckeye Groves
--Madrone Forest
--Mixed Oak Forest and Woodland
--Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest
--Blue Oak Woodland and Forest
--Valley Oak Woodland and Forest
California Bay Forest and Woodland
--Mapping Unit
Californian Annual & Perennial
Grassland Mapping Unit
--Salt Marsh Bulrush Marshes
--Salt Grass Flats
--Gum Plant Patches
Eucalyptus Provisional Semi-Natural
--Assocation
--Monterey Cypress Stands
--Non-native Forest
--Non-native Herbaceous
--Non-native Shrub
--~:;~:~e;.;~~ ~~!~~~:::~~ Provisional
--Barren and Sparsely Vegetated
--Forest Fragment
--~~i~flat/Ory Pond Bottom Mapping
--Water
--Shrub Fragment
Goodding's Wi llow - Red Willow
--Riparian Woodland and Forest
--Arroyo Wi llow Thickets
--Chamise Chaparral
Brittle Leaf - Woolly Leaf Manzanita
--Chaparral
Californi a Sagebrush - (Purple Sage)
--Scrub
--Coyote Brush Scrub
--Buck Brush Chaparral
--Mesic coastal Scrub Mapping Unit
--~~~!nL:a~t ~hee;~o;J~Yi~a~arra l
Poison Oak - (Coyote Brush) Scrub
--Associati on
0 0.25 0.5 Miles
Base Map Features
c::::::::::J City of San Carlos
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Sphere of Influence
----
~
Streets
Railroad
Sources: Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy,
~~~i:~;I ~=~:~:t~/c~~~i~;:~i~~~~~~:~~:n!r~;;:•
Space District, County o~ San M~teo, San Francisco
Public Utilities Commission, Peninsula Open Space
Trust, San Mateo City/County Association of Govfa,
City of San Carlos, Urban Footprint, MIG, 2022

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 271
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources

4.3-4 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Shrubland (315.2 acres). About 7.4 percent of land within the San Carlos SOI has shrubland vegetation. Shrubland vegetation is mostly concentrated in the hills in the western part of the City and outside of the City limits (but within the SOI) in Pulgas Ridge. The most common shrubland vegetation in the San Carlos SOI is mapped as chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) chaparral, brittle leaf (Arctostaphylos crustacea)-woolly manzanita (Arctostaphylos tomentosa) chaparral, California sagebrush (Artemesia californica) scrub, and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) scrub.

Other types of shrublands mapped in the San Carlos SOI include non-native shrubs, poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum) scrub, mesic coastal scrub, and wedge leaf ceanothus (Ceanothus cuneatus) chaparral. Shrublands provide habitat for a variety of native wildlife including invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals.

Grassland (84.92 acres). About 2 percent of land within the San Carlos SOI has grassland vegetation. Grassland vegetation is mostly concentrated in the hills in the western part of the City and outside of the City limits (but within the SOI) in Pulgas Ridge. All grassland vegetation in the San Carlos SOI is mapped as Californian annual and perennial grassland, which mostly consists of non-native annual grasses that have been naturalized, such as wild oats (Avena spp.) and bromes (Bromus spp.). Grasslands provide habitat for a variety of wildlife including invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals, though native perennial grasslands (less common in San Carlos) provide higher quality habitat than non-native annual grasslands (common in urban areas).

Wetlands and Waterbodies (4.67 acres). About 0.1 percent of land in the San Carlos SOI has wetlands or other waterbodies. There is one freshwater meadow or marsh mapped outside the City limits but within the San Carlos SOI near Palomar Park. There are very small areas of mudflats/dry pond bottom, water, pickleweed (Sarcocornia pacifica) mats, and gum plant (Grindelia stricta) patches mapped on the eastern border of San Carlos along the Bayshore. Coastal marsh and wetland habitats support abundant wildlife, including several special-status species, but are mostly outside the San Carlos SOI to the east.

Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species in San Carlos San Carlos’ hilly, densely vegetated open space areas and proximity to the San Francisco Bay provide potential habitat for a variety of special-status plant and wildlife species. As of December 2021, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), an inventory of rare plants and animals in California, identified no occurrences of special-status species in the developed areas of San Carlos. However, known occurrences of special-status species are documented in Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve (OSP), Big Canyon Park, and Eaton Park as well as a suburban area North of Malabar Road and Melendy Drive. Special-status species with known occurrences within five miles of the center of San Carlos were also assessed for the potential to occur in the San Carlos SOI, and those found to have a moderate or high potential to occur are included in Table 4.3-2 below. Special-status species potential to occur in the City of San Carlos or its SOI is based on nearby records and the presence of suitable habitat within the City or its SOI.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 272
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.3-5
October 2022
Table 4.3-2: Special-Status Species with the Potential to Occur in the San Carlos SOI1 Species Status Habitat Potential to Occur in San
Carlos SOI
Plants
Franciscan onion
Allium peninsulare var.
franciscanum
CRPR
1B.2
Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill
grassland. Clay soils; often on serpentine;
sometimes on volcanics. Dry hillsides. 5-
320 m.

Present. Observed in Pulgas
Ridge OSP in 2014 and
Eaton Park in 2015.

Bent-flowered
fiddleneck
Amsinckia lunaris
CRPR
1B.2
Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill
grassland, coastal bluff scrub. 3-795 m.

Moderate. Two occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and there is some
suitable habitat in open space
areas.

San Francisco collinsia
Collinsia multicolor
CRPR
1B.2
Closed-cone coniferous forest, coastal
scrub. On decomposed shale (mudstone)
mixed with humus; sometimes on
serpentine. 10-275 m.

Present. Observed in Big
Canyon Park and Eaton Park
in 2017.

Western leatherwood
Dirca occidentalis
CRPR
1B.2
Broadleafed upland forest, chaparral,
closed-cone coniferous forest, cismontane
woodland, north coast coniferous forest,
riparian forest, riparian woodland. On
brushy slopes, mesic sites; mostly in
mixed evergreen and foothill woodland
communities. 20-640 m.

Present. Observed in Pulgas
Ridge OSP in 2017 and
Eaton Park in 2015.

Arcuate bush mallow
Malacothamnus
arcuatus
CRPR
1B.2
Chaparral, cismontane woodland.

Gravelly alluvium. 1-735 m.

High. Observed in Pulgas
Ridge OSP in 2002.

Woodland
woollythreads
Monolopia gracilens
CRPR
1B.2
Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland,
cismontane woodland, broadleafed upland
forest, North Coast coniferous forest.

Grassy sites, in openings; sandy to rocky
soils. Often seen on serpentine after
burns, but may have only weak affinity to
serpentine. 120-975 m.

High. Observed in San
Carlos North of Malabar Rd.
and Melendy Dr. in 1973.

Choris’ popcorn flower
Plagiobothrys
chorisianus var.
chorisianus
CRPR
1B.2
Chaparral, coastal scrub, coastal prairie.

Mesic sites. 5-705 m.

Moderate. Two occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and there is some
suitable habitat in open space
areas.

Chaparral ragwort
Senecio aphanactis
CRPR
2B.2
Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal
scrub. Drying alkaline flats. 20-1020 m.

High. Observed in San
Carlos North of Malabar Rd.
and Melendy Dr. in 1973.
1 Note that Table 4.3-2 provides a generalized list of special-status species present or with the potential to occur in the San Carlos SOI based on CNDDB records and general habitat types present in San Carlos; no field surveys or sitespecific analysis was performed. Field surveys and/or site-specific analysis could reveal additional species with the potential to occur.

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 273
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources

4.3-6 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
Table 4.3-2: Special-Status Species with the Potential to Occur in the San Carlos SOI1 Species Status Habitat Potential to Occur in San
Carlos SOI
Reptiles & Amphibians
Western pond turtle
Emys marmorata
CSSC A thoroughly aquatic turtle of ponds,
marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation
ditches, usually with aquatic vegetation,
below 6000 ft elevation. Needs basking
sites and suitable (sandy banks or grassy
open fields) upland habitat up to 0.5 km
from water for egg-laying.

Moderate. Five occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and there is some
suitable habitat in creek
areas.

California red-legged
frog
Rana draytonii
FT, CSSC Lowlands and foothills in or near
permanent sources of deep water with
dense, shrubby or emergent riparian
vegetation. Requires 11-20 weeks of
permanent water for larval development.

Must have access to estivation habitat.

Moderate. Twelve
occurrences within five miles
of San Carlos and there is
some suitable habitat in creek
areas.

San Francisco garter
snake

FE, SE,
CFP
Vicinity of freshwater marshes, ponds and
slow-moving streams in San Mateo
County and extreme northern Santa Cruz
County. Prefers dense cover and water
depths of at least one foot. Upland areas
near water are also very important.

Moderate. Six occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and there is some
suitable habitat in open space
areas within the San Carlos
SOI.

Birds
White-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
CFP Rolling foothills and valley margins with
scattered oaks and river bottomlands or
marshes next to deciduous woodland.

Open grasslands, meadows, or marshes
for foraging close to isolated, densetopped trees for nesting and perching.

Moderate. Three
occurrences within five miles
of San Carlos and there is
some suitable habitat in open
space areas.

Mammals
Pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
CSSC Deserts, grasslands, shrublands,
woodlands and forests. Most common in
open, dry habitats with rocky areas for
roosting.

Moderate. Two occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and some suitable
habitat in open space areas.

Hoary bat
Lasiurus cinereus
CNDDB Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics,
with access to trees for cover and open
areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts
in dense foliage of medium to large trees.

Feeds primarily on moths. Requires
water.

Moderate. Four occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and some suitable
habitat in open space areas.

San Francisco duskyfooted woodrat
Neotoma fuscipes
annectens
CSSC Forest habitats of moderate canopy and
moderate to dense understory. May prefer
chaparral and redwood habitats.

Constructs nests of shredded grass, leaves
and other material. May be limited by
availability of nest-building materials.

High. Three occurrences
within five miles of San
Carlos and suitable habitat in
open space areas; this species
is present according to the
San Carlos General Plan
(2009).

Federal:

FE = Listed as endangered under the
Federal Endangered Species Act.

FT = Listed as threatened under the
Federal Endangered Species Act.

California:

California Rare Plant Rank
(CRPR):
1B = Plants Rare, Threatened, or
Endangered in California and
Elsewhere
Potential Occurrence
explanations:

Moderate Potential. The CNDDB
records the occurrence of the
species outside of the San Carlos
SOI, but within a 5-mile radius of
the SOI and there is at least some

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 274
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources
San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR 4.3-7
October 2022
Table 4.3-2: Special-Status Species with the Potential to Occur in the San Carlos SOI1 Species Status Habitat Potential to Occur in San
Carlos SOI
SE = Listed as endangered under the
California Endangered Species Act.

ST = Listed as threatened under the
California Endangered Species Act.

CSSC = Listed as a species of special
concern in California.

CFP = Listed as fully protected in
California
CNDDB = Species tracked by the
CNDDB
2 = Plants Rare, Threatened, or
Endangered in California, But More
Common Elsewhere

0.1- Seriously threatened in
California (over 80% of
occurrences threatened / high
degree and immediacy of threat

0.2- Moderately threatened in
California (20-80% occurrences
threatened / moderate degree and
immediacy of threat)
suitable habitat within the San
Carlos SOI.

High Potential: There are CNDDB
records of the species in the San
Carlos SOI, but not within the past
ten years.

Present: There are recent CNDDB
records (within ten years) of the
species in the San Carlos SOI.

Sources: San Carlos General Plan, 2009; CNDDB, 2021
In addition to the special-status species included in Table 4.3-2 above, several other special-status species are known to occur near the San Carlos SOI to the east on Bair Island and surrounding sloughs and coastal marsh, including:
• Great blue heron, Ardea Herodias (nesting rookeries), CNDDB • Short-eared owl, Asio flammeus, CSSC
• Western snowy plover, Charadrius nivosus nivosus, FT, CSSC • Point Reyes salty bird’s beak, Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre, CRPR 1B.2 • Northern harrier, Circus hudsonius, CSSC
• California black rail, Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus, ST • Alameda song sparrow, Melospiza melodia pusillula, CSSC • California Ridgeway’s rail, Rallus obsoletus obsoletus, FE, SE, CFP • Salt-marsh harvest mouse, Reithrodontomys raviventris, FE, SE, CFP • Salt-marsh wandering shrew, Sorex vagrans halicoetes, CSSC • California least tern, Sternula antillarum browni, FE, SE, CFP There is no suitable coastal marsh habitat for these species within the City of San Carlos or its SOI.

Additional special-status species occur near the San Carlos SOI on the western side in Edgewood County Park, as follows:
• San Mateo thornmint, Acanthomintha duttonii, FE, SE, CRPR 1B.1 • Kings Mountain manzanita, Arctostaphylos regismontana, CRPR 1B.2 • Edgewood blind harvestman, Calicina minor, CNDDB
• Fountain thistle, Cirsium fontinale var. fontinales, FE, SE, CRPR 1B.1 • Bay Checkerspot butterfly, Euphydryas editha bayensis, FT • Fragrant fritillary, Fritillaria liliacea, CRPR 1B.2
• Marin western flax, Hesperolinon congestum, FT, ST, CRPR 1B.1 I I

8.b
January 23, 2023 Packet Pg. 275
Chapter 4.3 Biological Resources

4.3-8 San Carlos Focused General Plan Update Draft EIR
October 2022
• Crystal Springs lessingia, Lessingia arachnoidea, CRPR 1B.2 • Edgewood Park micro-blind harvestman, Microcina edgewoodensis, CNDDB • White-rayed pentachaeta, Pentachaeta bellidiflora, FE, SE, CRPR 1B.1 These species require serpentine soils, high elevations, or other habitat conditions not present within the City of San Carlos or its SOI.

Watersheds and Riparian Corridors
Natural drainage in San Carlos is divided into two main watersheds: Pulgas Creek and Cordilleras Creek. Within the watersheds are Pulgas, Brittan, Belmont, and Cordilleras Creeks, which are the main drainage ways through San Carlos emptying into San Francisco Bay. Salt and brackish marshes are found near the terminus of each of the creeks east of Highway 101. The upper portions of these watersheds are generally undeveloped, the middle sections are primarily residential, and the eastern portions are typically commercial and industrial.

The four creeks in San Carlos are shown in Table 4.3-2. Belmont Creek is located at the northern San Carlos boundary in the East Side area. East of El Camino Real and the Caltrain tracks, the city boundary between the City of San Carlos to the south and the City of Belmont to the north runs down the middle of the creek until the creek reaches the western edge of Shoreway Road and the city boundary turns south. Belmont Creek flows into Belmont Slough and O’Neill Slough. Pulgas and Brittan Creeks are the two main creeks within the City of San Carlos. The creeks have mostly unhardened channels in the upper reaches and hardened channels in the lower flatlands, where Brittan Creek joins Pulgas Creek via an underground conduit (paralleling El Camino Real).

Following the confluence of Pulgas Creek and Brittan Creeks, the combined flow drains into Smith Slough south of Bair Island. Cordilleras Creek, the longest of the four creeks, defines the southern boundary of San Carlos, which is shared with Redwood City. Cordilleras Creek, like the combined Pulgas/Brittan Creek, also flows into San Francisco Bay via Smith Slough. Similar to Pulgas and Brittan Creeks, the upper reaches of the creek are mostly unhardened with hardened channels in the lower flatlands.

San Carlos City CouncilJanuary 23, 2023

San Carlos City Council
January 23, 2023