Exhibit D – Initial Study/MND for the Alviso Hotel Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Alviso Hotel Project
File Numbers: PD19-031
October 2021
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 3rd FL San José, CA 95113 tel (408) 535-3555 www.sanjoseca.gov/pbce Planning, Building and Code Enforcement
CHRISTOPHER BURTON, DIRECTOR
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement has reviewed the proposed project described below to determine whether it could have a significant effect on the environment as a result of project completion. “Significant effect on the environment” means a substantial or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance.
PROJECT NAME: Alviso Hotel Project
PROJECT FILE NUMBER: PD19-031
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Planned Development (PD) Permit to allow the construction of an approximately 112,463-square foot, 214-room hotel in a five-story building. The northeast and northwest sections of the site would include surface parking with 21 parking spaces, and a four-story parking garage with 213 spaces, for a total of 234 parking spaces.
PROJECT LOCATION: The project is located at an undeveloped approximately 6.23-acre lot located south of North First Street and north of Highway 237 in the Alviso area of San José.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 015-48-006 COUNCIL DISTRICT: 4
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION: Trang Tu-Nguyen, TNT Dev Services Inc. for the Shops@Terra, LLC, 1566 Davis Street, San Jose, CA 95126, (408)-857-4731
FINDING
The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement finds the project described above would not have a significant effect on the environment if certain mitigation measures are incorporated into the project. The attached Initial Study identifies one or more potentially significant effects on the environment for which the project applicant, before public release of this Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), has made or agrees to make project revisions that will clearly mitigate the potentially significant effects to a less than significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT TO REDUCE POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
A. AESTHETICS – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
B. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 2 of 10 C. AIR QUALITY - The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Impact BIO-1: The project could result in impacts from construction activities to special status plant species such as Congdon’s tarplant and San Joaquin spearscale.
MM-BIO-1: Protocol-level surveys, as defined by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during the documented bloom period of Congdon’s tarplant (May to November) and San Joaquin spearscale (April to October) to determine the presence of these species in areas to be disturbed. Survey timing may fluctuate based on blooming periods of appropriate reference site locations. The biologist shall submit a report indicating the results of the survey to the City’s Director of PBCE or the Director’s designee for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permit.
If special-status plant surveys result in negative findings, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation would be required. Similarly, if special-status plant surveys find either species are observed within the project area but can be avoided, these plants would not be impacted, and no mitigation would be required. However, if either species is found to be present, the implementation of following measures would reduce project impact on special-status plants to less than significant:
• If a population of Congdon’s tarplant or San Joaquin spearscale is identified in the project footprint and cannot be avoided, mitigation for loss of individuals shall be completed.
Mitigation shall be achieved by establishing a new population in the seasonal wetland and ruderal herbaceous vegetation that occur within the Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer on the project site. This area shall not be developed by the project, and shall contain suitable habitat types for establishing a new population. Mitigation shall be a 1:1 ratio of plant establishment, on an acreage basis.
A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be completed by a qualified biologist or botanist prior to removal of the individuals. The HMMP shall include a detailed explanation of how the new population would be established, as well as an explanation of what metrics shall be used to measure the success criteria of the new population. The HMMP shall include details for monitoring criteria to quantitatively sample the Congdon’s tarplant or San Joaquin spearscale population and determine the number of germinated/surviving plants. This monitoring shall continue annually or until the success criteria described in the HMMP has been met; once annual monitoring has documented that a self-sustaining population has been successfully established on site, this mitigation measure shall be determined to have been met. If after five years of implementation of the new population the success criteria has not been met, adaptive management measures created by a qualified biologist or botanist shall be implemented. The HMMP shall be submitted to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permit.
MM BIO-1.2: For the protection of special-status birds and native nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), future project activities shall occur from September 1 – January 31 (inclusive) outside of the nesting season, to the extent feasible.
If work cannot be scheduled to occur outside of the nesting season, and project activities (grading, staging, etc.,) are initiated during the nesting season (February 1 – August 31, inclusive), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 14 days Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 3 of 10 prior to the start of project activities, such as grading or staging, and prior to issuance of any grading permit. If no active nests are identified during the surveys, no impacts will occur to birds and work shall progress without restriction. If active nests are identified, a no-disturbance buffer around the nest shall be implemented to avoid impacts to nesting birds. Buffers shall be determined by a qualified biologist, and typically range from 25 feet to 500 feet depending on the species, nest location, and protection status of that species. After an active nest is determined to no longer be active, because of young fledging or predation, the buffer around the nest shall be removed and work shall progress without restriction.
MM BIO-1.3: Prior to issuance of any grading, building, or demolition permits, the project applicant shall implement Condition 15 of the Habitat Plan and pay burrowing owl impact fees to the Habitat Agency. Pursuant to Condition 15, a qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys in all suitable habitat areas. To maximize the likelihood of detecting owls, the preconstruction survey shall last a minimum of three hours. The survey shall begin one hour before sunrise and continue until two hours after sunrise (for three hours total) or begin two hours before sunset and continue until one hour after sunset. Additional time may be required for large project sites. A minimum of two surveys shall be conducted (if owls are detected on the first survey, a second survey is not needed). All owls observed shall be counted and their locations mapped. Surveys shall conclude no more than two calendar days prior to the start of any construction. Therefore, the project applicant must begin surveys no more than four days prior to construction (two days of surveying plus up to two days between surveys and construction). To avoid last-minute changes in schedule or contracting that may occur if burrowing owls are found, the project applicant may also conduct a preliminary survey up to fourteen (14) days before start of any construction. This preliminary survey may count as the first of the two required surveys as long as the second survey concludes no more than two calendar days in advance of construction.
If evidence of western burrowing owls is found during the breeding season (February 1–August 31, inclusive), the project applicant shall avoid all nest sites that could be disturbed by project construction during the remainder of the breeding season or while the nest is occupied by adults or young. Avoidance shall include establishment of a 250-foot non-disturbance buffer zone around nests. Construction may occur outside of the 250-foot non-disturbance buffer zone.
Construction may occur inside of the 250-foot non-disturbance buffer during the breeding season if:
the nest is not disturbed, and
the project applicant develops an avoidance, minimization, and monitoring plan is approved by the Habitat Agency and the Wildlife Agencies prior to project construction.
If evidence of western burrowing owls is found during the non-breeding season (September 1– January 31, inclusive), the project applicant shall establish a 250-foot non-disturbance buffer around occupied burrows as determined by a qualified biologist. Construction activities outside of this 250-foot buffer are allowed. Construction activities within the non-disturbance buffer are allowed if the certain criteria are met, as outlined in the Habitat Plan Conditions Implementation Guide, in order to prevent owls from abandoning important overwintering sites.
The project applicant shall submit a report disclosing evidence of compliance with the Habitat Plan to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee prior to issuance of any grading, building, or demolition permits.
Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 4 of 10 Impact BIO-2: The project could have a substantial adverse effect on a riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS due to the introduction and/or spread of invasive weeds.
MM BIO-2.1: All seeds and straw materials used on site shall be composed of weed-free rice (or similar acceptable material) straw, and all gravel and fill material shall be certified weed-free.
Proof of certification, in the form of a California Department of Food and Agriculture Form 66- 079 “Certificate of Quarantine Compliance,” or equivalent certification from a qualified biologist, shall be submitted to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee prior to issuance of any grading, building or demolition permits.
During construction, vehicles and equipment shall be washed (including wheels, undercarriages, and bumpers) before leaving and after entering the project footprint. Vehicles shall be cleaned at existing construction yards or legal operating car washes. This measure shall be printed on all construction documents, contracts, and project plans.
Following construction, temporary impact zones or any disturbed ground that will not be under hardscape, landscaped, or maintained, shall be reseeded with a native seed mixture as verified by a qualified biologist.
Seed mixtures applied for erosion control shall be composed of native species appropriate for the site in order to provide long-term erosion control and slow colonization by invasive non-native plants. The project applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape plan identifying the areas to be reseeded and the native seed mixture to be used and submit the plan to the Director of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee for review and approval.
Impact BIO-3: The project could have a substantial adverse effect on adjacent wetland and nonwetland waters through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
MM BIO-3.1: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the project applicant shall establish a Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer at least 50 feet from the edge of the wetland or non-wetland water features and at least 100 feet from the edge of the riparian area, and all grading and construction activities shall occur outside of this area. The Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer shall be temporarily staked prior to grading and construction activities, using orange construction fencing, lathe and flagging or its equivalent, by a qualified biologist to ensure that construction equipment and personnel avoid these features. Fencing shall be erected along the outer edge of the site, between the site and any adjacent wetland, pond, or riparian area, for the duration of project construction. Photo documentation shall be submitted to the Director of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee.
Typical avoidance and minimization measures, such as those listed in Table 6-2 of the Habitat Plan or measures deemed appropriate by a qualified biologist, shall be implemented during construction. To this end, all personnel working adjacent to the Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer shall be trained by a qualified biologist in the avoidance and minimization measures outlined in Table 6-2 of the Habitat Plan. Training materials shall be submitted to the Director of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee upon request.
Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 5 of 10 MM BIO-3.2: The following measures shall be implemented to ensure avoidance of erosion or pollution to wetlands during construction activity:
• Appropriate erosion control measures (e.g., fiber rolls, filter fences, vegetative buffer strips) shall be used on site to reduce siltation and runoff of contaminants into wetlands or nonwetland waters. Filter fences, if used, shall be of material that will not trap reptiles and amphibians (i.e., no mesh, woven, or netted material and no high density plastic fencing).
Erosion control blankets shall be used as a last resort because of their tendency to biodegrade slowly and trap reptiles and amphibians.
• Erosion-control measures shall be placed between the wetland or pond and the outer edge of the Project site. Fiber rolls used for erosion control shall be certified as free of noxious weed seed.
• Vehicles and equipment shall be parked on pavement, existing roads, and previously disturbed area.
• No construction or maintenance vehicles shall be refueled within 200 feet of avoided wetlands and non-wetland waters unless a bermed and lined refueling area is constructed and hazardous material absorbent pads are available in the case of a spill.
Used cleaning materials (e.g., liquids) shall be disposed of safely, and if necessary, taken off site for proper disposal. Used disposable globes should be retained for safe disposal in sealed bags.
Impact BIO-4: The project could interfere substantially with the movement of native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites due to bird collisions.
MM BIO-4.1: Façade Treatments. Prior to issuance of any building permits, ,the project applicant shall ensure that all glazing on the southern façade of the building facing identified wetland areas and the Guadalupe River is treated with bird-friendly glazing treatments. Examples of bird-friendly glazing treatments include the use of opaque glass, the covering of clear glass surface with patterns, the use of paned glass with fenestration patterns, and the use of external screens over non-reflective glass. For the remaining building façades, no more than 10 percent of the surface area of façades between the ground and 60 feet above ground shall have untreated glazing. The final building design shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist for compliance, and the results of the review provided to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.
Landscaping. Any trees used in landscaping that are adjacent to areas of untreated glazing shall have heights that do not exceed the first story of the building. This can be achieved through selection of species and/or through pruning. In these areas, tree species shall be selected that do not provide valuable resources for birds (e.g., food such as berries or other fruits, or cavities for nesting in their adult state) and that are not known to grow exceptionally tall (avoid oaks, redwoods, and eucalyptus trees). The final landscape plan shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist for compliance, and the results of the review provided to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee, prior to issuance of any building permits.
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Impact CUL-2: Ground disturbing activities associated with project construction may result in impacts to unrecorded archaeological resources.
MM CUL-2.1: Treatment Plan: Prior to issuance of any grading permit, a project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with a Native American representative registered with the NAHC for the City of San Jose. The Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall reflect permit-level detail pertaining to depths and Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 6 of 10 locations of all ground disturbing activities. The Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee prior to approval of any grading permit. The Treatment Plan shall contain, at a minimum:
• Identification of the scope of work and range of subsurface effects (including location map and development plan), including requirements for preliminary field investigations. • Description of the environmental setting (past and present) and the historic/prehistoric background of the parcel (potential range of what might be found). • Development of research questions and goals to be addressed by the investigation (what is significant vs. what is redundant information).
• Detailed field strategy used to record, recover, or avoid the finds and address research goals. • Analytical methods.
• Report structure and outline of document contents.
• Disposition of the artifacts.
• Appendices: all site records, correspondence, and consultation with Native Americans, etc.
MM CUL-2.2: Investigation: Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the project applicant shall complete a preliminary field investigation program in conformance with the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan required under Mitigation Measure MM CUL2.1. The locations of subsurface testing and exploratory trenching shall be determined prior to issuance of any grading permit based on the Cultural Resources Treatment Plan recommendations. A qualified archaeologist and a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, shall complete a presence/absence exploration. Results of the investigation shall be provided to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee prior to issuance of any grading permit.
If any finds were discovered during the preliminary field investigation, the project shall implement MM CUL-2.4 for evaluation and recovery methodologies. The results of the preliminary field investigation and program shall be submitted to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permit.
MM CUL-2.3: Construction Monitoring and Protection Measures: Although the data recovery and treatment program would be expected to recover potentially significant materials and information from the areas impacted by the project prior to grading, it is possible that additional resources could remain on- site. Therefore, all ground-disturbing activities (e.g., grading and excavation) shall be completed under the observation of a qualified archaeologist and a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area.
The qualified archaeologist or a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, shall have authority to halt construction activities temporarily in the immediate vicinity of an unanticipated find. If, for any reasons, the qualified archaeologist or a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, is not present, but construction crews encounter a cultural resource, all work shall stop temporarily within 50 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 7 of 10 in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, has been contacted to determine the proper course of action.
The City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee and the Historic Preservation Officer shall be notified of any finds during the grading or other construction activities. Any human remains encountered during construction shall be treated according to the protocol identified in MM CUL-2.5.
MM CUL-2.4: Evaluation and Data Recovery: The City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee and the Historic Preservation Officer shall be notified of any finds during the preliminary field investigation, grading, or other construction activities.
Any historic or prehistoric material identified in the project area during the preliminary field investigation and during grading or other construction activities shall be evaluated for eligibility for listing as a Candidate City Landmark and/or in the California Register of Historic Resources.
Data recovery methods may include, but are not limited to, backhoe trenching, shovel test units, hand auguring, and hand-excavation.
The techniques used for data recovery shall follow the protocols identified in the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan. Data recovery shall include excavation and exposure of features, field documentation, and recordation.
MM CUL-2.5: Human Remains: Native American coordination shall follow the protocols established under Assembly Bill 52, State of California Code, and applicable City of San José procedures.
If any human remains are found during any field investigations, grading, or other construction activities, all provisions of California Health and Safety Code Sections 7054 and 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.9 through 5097.99, as amended per Assembly Bill 2641, shall be followed. In the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The project applicant or qualified archaeologist shall immediately notify the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee who will then notify the Santa Clara County Coroner. The Coroner shall make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American.
If the remains are believed to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC shall then designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall inspect the remains and make a recommendation on the treatment of the remains and associated artifacts.
If one of the following conditions occurs, the landowner or his authorized representative shall work with the Coroner, in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, to reinter the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
• The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission.
• The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation; or • The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 8 of 10 MM CUL-2.6: Site Security: At the discretion of the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee and the Historic Preservation Officer, site fencing shall be installed on-site during the investigation, grading, building, or other construction activities to avoid destruction and/or theft of potential cultural resources. The responsible qualified archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, shall advise the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee and the Historic Preservation Officer as to the necessity for a guard.
The purpose of the security guard shall be to ensure the safety of any potential cultural resources (including human remains) that are left exposed overnight. The Director of PBCE shall have the final discretion to authorize the use of a security guard at the project site.
MM CUL-2.7: Final Reporting: Once all analyses and studies required by the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan have been completed, the project applicant, or representative, shall prepare a final report summarizing the results of the field investigation, data recovery activities and results, and compliance with the Cultural Resources Treatment Plan during all demolition, grading, building, and other construction activities. The report shall document the results of field and laboratory investigations and shall meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeological Documentation. The contents of the report shall be consistent with the protocol included in the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan.
The report shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for review and approval prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy (temporary or final). Once approved, the final documentation shall be submitted to the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University, as appropriate.
MM CUL-2.8: Curation: Upon completion of the final report required by the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan, all recovered archaeological materials not identified as tribal cultural resources by the Native American monitor, shall be transferred to a long-term curation facility. Any curation facility used shall meet the standards outlined in the National Park Services’ Curation of Federally Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections (36 CFR 79). The project applicant shall notify the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee of the selected curation facility prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy (temporary or final). To the extent feasible, and in consultation with the Native American representative, all recovered Native American/tribal cultural resources and artifacts shall be reburied on-site in an area that is unlikely to be disturbed again.
Treatment of materials to be curated shall be consistent with the protocols included in the projectspecific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan.
All archaeological materials recovered during the data recovery efforts shall be cleaned, sorted, catalogued, and analyzed following standard archaeological procedures, and shall be documented in a report submitted to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement and the NWIC.
MM CUL-2.9: Dignified and Respectful Treatment – Cultural Sensitivity Training Prior to Construction: An important aspect of the consultation process is a dignified and respectful treatment of Tribal Cultural Resources. Prior to issuance of the Grading Permit, the project shall be required to submit evidence that an Archaeological Monitoring Contractor Awareness Training was held prior to ground disturbance. The training shall be facilitated by the project archaeologist in coordination with a Native American representative registered with the Native American Heritage Commissions for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 9 of 10 with the geographic area as described in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.
F. ENERGY – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Impact HAZ-1: Residual soil and groundwater contamination could expose construction workers and members of the public, including the surrounding residential uses and elementary school, to hazardous materials during construction activities.
MM HAZ-1: Prior to the issuance of any grading, demolition, or building permits, the project applicant shall implement the approved Soil Management Plan prepared for the site under the oversight of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
K. LAND USE AND PLANNING – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
L. MINERAL RESOURCES – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
M. NOISE - The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required
N. POPULATION AND HOUSING – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
O. PUBLIC SERVICES – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
P. RECREATION – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
Q. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC - The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
R. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES - The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
S. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
T. WILDFIRE – The project would not have a significant impact on this resource, therefore no mitigation is required.
U. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Cumulative impacts would be less than significant. The proposed Project would implement the identified mitigation measures and would have either have no impacts or less-than-significant impacts on air quality, biological resources, noise, and transportation. Therefore, the proposed Project would not contribute to any cumulative impact for these resources. The Project would not cause changes in the environment that have any potential to cause substantial adverse direct or indirect effects on human beings.
Mitigated Negative Declaration for PD19-031; Alviso Hotel Project Page 10 of 10
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD
Before 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 10, 2021 any person may:
1. Review the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) as an informational document only; or
2. Submit written comments regarding the information and analysis in the Draft MND. Before the MND is adopted, Planning staff will prepare written responses to any comments, and revise the Draft MND, if necessary, to reflect any concerns raised during the public review period. All written comments will be included as part of the Final MND.
Christopher Burton, Director
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement
10/7/2021
Date Deputy
Maira Blanco
Environmental Project Manager
Circulation period: October 12, 2021 to November 10, 2021 Alviso Hotel i Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1.0 Introduction and Purpose ................................................................................................1 Project Background ................................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Initial Study ....................................................................................................1 Public Review Period .............................................................................................................1 Consideration of the Initial Study and Project........................................................................2 Notice of Determination .........................................................................................................2 Section 2.0 Project Information .........................................................................................................3 Project Title ............................................................................................................................3 Lead Agency Contact .............................................................................................................3 Project Applicant ....................................................................................................................3 Project Location......................................................................................................................3 Assessor’s Parcel Number......................................................................................................3 General Plan Designation and Zoning District.......................................................................3 Habitat Plan Designation ........................................................................................................4 Project-Related Approvals, Agreements, and Permits............................................................4 Section 3.0 Project Description..........................................................................................................8 Existing Setting.......................................................................................................................8 Proposed Development...........................................................................................................8 Section 4.0 Environmental Setting, Checklist, and Impact Discussion ...........................................16 Aesthetics..............................................................................................................................17 Agriculture and Forestry Resources .....................................................................................31 Air Quality............................................................................................................................34 Biological Resources............................................................................................................48 Cultural Resources................................................................................................................70 Energy...................................................................................................................................79 Geology and Soils.................................................................................................................84 Greenhouse Gas Emissions...................................................................................................94 Hazards and Hazardous Materials......................................................................................105 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................121 Land Use and Planning.......................................................................................................130 Mineral Resources..............................................................................................................134 Noise...................................................................................................................................136 Population and Housing......................................................................................................147 Alviso Hotel ii Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Public Services ...................................................................................................................150 Recreation...........................................................................................................................155 Transportation.....................................................................................................................157 Tribal Cultural Resources...................................................................................................171 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................174 Wildfire...............................................................................................................................181 Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................................................182 Section 5.0 References...................................................................................................................185 Section 6.0 Lead Agency and Consultants.....................................................................................189 Lead Agency.......................................................................................................................189 Consultants .........................................................................................................................189 Section 7.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations......................................................................................191 Figures
Figure 2.0-1: Regional Map...................................................................................................................5 Figure 2.0-2: Vicinity Map ....................................................................................................................6 Figure 2.0-3: Aerial Map and Surrounding Land Uses..........................................................................7 Figure 3.1: Site Plan.............................................................................................................................10 Figure 3.2: Building Elevations North and East ..................................................................................11 Figure 3.3: Building Elevations South and West.................................................................................12 Figure 3.4: Stormwater Control Plan ...................................................................................................14 Figure 3.5: Landscaping Plan ..............................................................................................................15 Figure 4.1-1: Exterior Renderings .......................................................................................................29 Figure 4.3-1: Locations of Sensitive Receptors and Nearby TAC Sources.........................................46 Figure 4.4-1: Biological Communities Present within Project Area ...................................................52 Figure 4.13-1: Noise Measurement Locations...................................................................................142 Figure 4.17-1: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities.................................................................162 Figure 4.17-2: Existing Transit Service .............................................................................................163 Photos
Photo One: Project Site Facing Northeast............................................................................................21 Photo Two: Isolated Drainage Feature South of the Project Site.........................................................21 Photo Three: Guadalupe River Southwest of the Project Site .............................................................22 Photo Four: View of Surrounding Land Development North of the Project Site................................22 Alviso Hotel iii Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Photo Five: View of Surrounding Land Use Southeast of the Project Site .........................................23 Photo Six: View down Guadalupe River Trail facing South ...............................................................23 Photo Seven: View of Surrounding Land Use West of the Project Site ..............................................24 Photo Eight: View of Surrounding Residential Land Use Northwest of the Project Site....................24 Tables
Table 4.3-1: Health Effects of Air Pollutants ......................................................................................34 Table 4.3-2: BAAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds............................................................39 Table 4.3-4: Construction Period Emissions........................................................................................42 Table 4.3-6: Construction Risk of Impacts at the Off-site Receptors..................................................47 Table 4.4-1: Habitats on the Project Site .............................................................................................51 Table 4.6-1 Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Development...............................................82 Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist............................98 Table 4.13-1: Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria ......................................................................137 Table 4.13-2: General Plan Land Use Compatibility Guidelines ......................................................140 Table 4.17-1: Trip Generation Estimates...........................................................................................167 Table 4.17-2: Intersection Traffic Operations....................................................................................167 Appendices
Appendix A: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment
Appendix B: Biological Resources Report
Appendix C: Archaeological Survey Report
Appendix D: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 2015
Appendix E: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 2016 Appendix F: Soil Management Plan 2018
Appendix G: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 2021
Appendix H: Noise Report
Appendix I: Transportation Impact Analysis
Appendix J: GHGRS Checklist
Alviso Hotel 1 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The proposed project is located on a 6.23-acre landlocked parcel adjacent to the Topgolf@Terra project (PDC16-013). The Topgolf@Terra project, which was approved in December 2016, is a Planned Development Rezoning from the CIC Combined Industrial Commercial and R-M Multiple Residence Residential Zoning Districts to the CIC (PD) Panned Development Zoning District to allow up to approximately 110,000 square feet of commercial/retail space, a 200 room hotel, approximately 72,000 square feet of indoor/outdoor recreation and entertainment use (Topgolf) and late night use, on an approximately 39.9 gross acre. Along with that project, a Planned Development Permit was filed and approved for “Master Planned Development Permit to demolish existing commercial structures, removal of six ordinance sized trees, and allow the construction of an approximately 72,000-square foot indoor/outdoor entertainment facility (Topgolf) with a late night use and entitle a future phase 110,000-square foot commercial/retail building and a 200-room hotel on an approximately 39.9-gross acre site. As of the date of preparation of this Initial Study, the Topgolf entertainment facility has been constructed, but the remaining development proposed by the Topgolf@Terra project has not yet been constructed.
Although the proposed project would utilize the internal roadways constructed by the Topgolf@Terra project for access to North First Street, the project is not located within the boundaries of the Topgolf@Terra project and was not considered in the environmental review for the Topgolf@Terra project. For this reason, the City of San José has determined that the project requires standalone environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY
The City of San José, as the Lead Agency, has prepared this Initial Study for the Alviso Hotel project in compliance CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations §15000 et. seq.) and the regulations and policies of the City of San José, California.
The project proposes the construction of an approximately 112,463-square foot, 214-room hotel in a five-story building, as well as a surface parking lot, and a four-story, approximately 74,836 square foot parking garage. This Initial Study evaluates the environmental impacts that might reasonably be anticipated to result from implementation of the proposed project.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD
Publication of this Initial Study marks the beginning of a 20-day public review and comment period.
During this period, the Initial Study will be available to local, state, and federal agencies and to interested organizations and individuals for review. Written comments concerning the environmental review contained in this Initial Study during the 20-day public review period should be sent to:
Maira Blanco (Planner II)
City of San José, Department of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3rd Floor
San José, CA 95113
Alviso Hotel 2 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
408.535.7837
[email protected]
CONSIDERATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY AND PROJECT
Following the conclusion of the public review period, the City of San José will consider the adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project at a regularly scheduled meeting via teleconference pursuant to Governor Newsom’s Executive Order N-29-20. The City shall consider the Initial Study/MND together with any comments received during the public review process. Upon adoption of the MND, the City may proceed with project approval actions.
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
If the project is approved, the City of San José will file a Notice of Determination (NOD), which will be available for public inspection and posted within 24 hours of receipt at the County Clerk’s Office for 30 days. The filing of the NOD starts a 30-day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15075(g)).
Alviso Hotel 3 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT TITLE
Alviso Hotel Project
LEAD AGENCY CONTACT
Maira Blanco (Planner II)
City of San José, Department of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3rd Floor
San José, CA 95113
408.535.7837
[email protected]
Alec Atienza
City of San José, Department of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3rd Floor
San José, CA 95113
408.535.7688
[email protected]
PROJECT APPLICANT
Trang Tu-Nguyen
Shops@Terra, LLC
1566 Davis Street
San José, CA 95126
PROJECT LOCATION
The project is located at an undeveloped lot located south of North First Street and north of Highway 237 in the Alviso area of San José. Regional and vicinity maps of the site are shown on Figures 2.0-1 and 2.0-2, and an aerial photograph of the project site and surrounding area is shown on Figure 2.0-3.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER
015-48-0061
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING DISTRICT
The project site is designated as Combined Industrial/Commercial in the Envision San José 2040 General Plan and is zoned as CIC(PD) - Planned Development (Combined Industrial/ Commercial Base District.
1 The site was originally APN 015-39-020, but the site’s APN has been changed to APN 015-48-006.
Alviso Hotel 4 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
HABITAT PLAN DESIGNATION
Land Cover Fee Zone: A Ranchlands and Natural Lands
PROJECT-RELATED APPROVALS, AGREEMENTS, AND PERMITS
Planned Development Permit(s)
Public Works Clearances, including Grading Permit
101
101
101
237
237
880
680
87 85
85 82
82 280
Santa Clara
San Jose
Sunnyvale
Milpitas
REGIONAL MAP FIGURE 2.0-1
Project Site
.5 1 5 Miles
Pacific Ocean
Monterey Bay
San José
Sunnyvale
San Mateo Fremont
Redwood City
Livermore
Oakland
San Francisco
Santa Cruz
Mountain View
Morgan Hill
San Francisco Bay
Project Site
0 237
Sunrise Dr
Channel Dr
Horizon Cir
Gold St
Hope St
El Dorado St
Liberty St
Archer St
Grand Blvd
Syntax Ct
Nortech Pkwy
Wilson Way
N 1st St
N 1st St
Trinity Park Dr
Michigan Ave
Wabash St
State St Essex St
Pacific Ave
Disk Dr
Disk Dr
Moffat St
Hoppe St
N Taylor St
Mill St
Catherine St
Elizabeth St
Gold St
Southbay Fwy
Cursor Ct
Alviso
VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2.0-2
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS
0 100’ 500’ 1000’ 1500’
Project Site
Southbay Freeway
N 1st Street
Wilson Way
Nortech Pwky
Disk Dr
Cursor Ct
Syntax Ct
Guadalupe River
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND SURROUNDING LAND USES FIGURE 2.0-3 Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Feb. 5, 2020 Photo Date: Aug. 9, 2018 0 50’ 300’ 600’ 900’
Project Boundary
Residential
Industrial
Future Commercial
Residential
Residential
Office
School
Office
Office
Alviso Hotel 8 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
EXISTING SETTING
The approximately 6.23-acre project site (APN 015-48-006) is currently an undeveloped lot located south of North First Street and north of Highway 237 in the Alviso area of San José. The site is bound by the Guadalupe River to the south, State-owned open space to the east, and privately-owned parcels to the north and west. The site is within the boundaries of the Alviso Master Plan.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The project proposes construction of an approximately 112,463-square foot, 214-room hotel in a five-story building (See Figure 3.1). The northeast and northwest sections of the site would include surface parking with 21 parking spaces, and a four-story parking garage with 213 spaces, for a total of 234 parking spaces.
3.2.1 Building Heights and Setbacks
The proposed five-story building would reach a maximum height of 65 feet including architectural elements, mechanical equipment screens, and elevator shafts. The four-story parking garage would reach a maximum height of 40 feet (see Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3).
The proposed structures on the site would be set back at least 60 feet from the northern property line, 126 feet from the southern property line, 36 feet from the eastern property line, and 150 feet from the western property line. The development footprint would be set back at least 50 feet from the seasonal wetland areas and non-wetland waters present in the southern portion of the site, and 100 feet from the Guadalupe River to the southwest. Wetland and riparian avoidance buffers would be established to enforce these setbacks and ensure that no grading or construction activities would occur in biologically sensitive areas (see Section 3.4 Biological Resources).
3.2.2 Site Lighting
The project would install security lighting throughout the site in parking areas, along pathways, and adjacent to buildings. The outdoor lighting would be comparable in brightness to the ambient lighting in the surrounding developments. All lighting would conform to the City’s Outdoor Lighting Policy (4-3) as applicable and be shielded to direct light downwards to ensure that lighting does not spill over onto adjacent residential properties, consistent with City standards.
3.2.3 Building Materials
The proposed building exterior would include use of the following materials:
• Fiber-cement board siding
• Timber post
• Vertical batten board siding
• Wood grained aluminum window frames
Alviso Hotel 9 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• Stainless steel cable guardrails on balconies
• Aluminum window frames
• Aluminum storefront lobby entry
• Garage green screen
• Parking garage mesh panel
3.2.4 Site Access and Parking
Access to the site would be provided by a 26-foot wide roadway on the northwestern boundary of the project site. This roadway would connect with two planned roadways2from an adjacent approved development, both exiting onto North First Street. The access roadway would also connect with two proposed internal roadways within the project site. As described above, a total of 234 parking spaces would be provided, including 24 with electrical vehicle charging stations, and nine ADA parking spaces.
2 These roadways are currently under construction and are anticipated to be completed prior to operation of the proposed project.
36'
26' EVA
50' TYP
26'
20' EVA AND TRAIL
WETLAND (TYP)
WETLAND SETBACK
20' EVA AND TRAIL
26' EVA
EVA
20'
127'
13'
131'
26'
30' TRAIL
EASEMENT
A
3.2 G
3.2 C
3.2 F
3.2 E
3.2 50', TYP
26'
31' 14'
5 STORY HOTEL
±112,463 SF
214 ROOMS
4 STORY
PARKING GARAGE
±74,863 SF
213 SPACES
26'
12'
26' EVA
17'
REMOVABLE BOLLARDS, TYP
GUADALUPE RIVER
31'
8.5' TYP
LANDS OF
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
APN: 015-39-014
VACANT
LANDS OF
SANTA CLARA VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT
APN: 015-39-029
LANDS OF
SANTA CLARA VALLEY
WATER DISTRICT
APN: 015-39-019
LANDS OF SHOPS@TERRA LLC
APN:014-39-026
FUTURE TOPGOLF
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
PD16-034
LANDS OF
237 NORTH FIRST ST HOLDINGS LLC
APN: 015-39-056
VACANT
LANDS OF
CITY OF SANTA CLARA
APN: 015-39-024
12' EXISTING CONNECTION TO GUADALUPE RIVER TRAIL
PROPOSED PUBLIC TRAIL CONNECTION
REMNANT SLOUGH
5 2
4 5
B
3.2 8'
26'
18' TYP.
100' RIPARIAN SETBACK
2 D
3.2 2'
6'
5'
POOL DECK
3 20'
ENLARGED
SITE PLAN
1" = 40'
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE (EXISTING)
EASEMENT
RIGHT-OF-WAY
PROJECT BOUNDARY
LEGEND
1 INCH = 40 FEET
0 20 40 80
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO:
CAD DWG FILE:
CHECKED BY:
DESIGNED BY:
DATE:
SCALE:
C HMH
NO DATE DESCRIPTION PD19-031 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HOTEL ALVISO @ TERRA S:\PROJECTS\458630\PL\PERMIT\458630-03SP.DWG
458630-03SP.DWG
3.1 4586.00
RH/LA
ZJ
OCTOBER 30, 2019
PLOTTED: 2/1/2021 4:25 PM
1570 Oakland Road (408) 487-2200
San Jose, CA 95131 HMHca.com
RH/LA
REE IN GNE L NA
ROFESSIO
P DERETSI GER
CAL I FORN I A
OF ETATS
CIVI L
No. 81168
TNT DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
(408) 857-4731
CORBeL architects
3450 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 1000
Los Angeles
CA 90010
(213) 739-9902
w w w . c o r b e l a r c h i t e c t s . c o m
TERRA VENTURES
1 10/29/20 PER CITY COMMENTS
2 02/01/21 PER CITY COMMENTS
WETLAND
100’ SETBACK
SITE PLAN FIGURE 3.1
EAST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION
+78.60’
+75.60’
T.O. ROOF STRUC.
T.O. PARAPET LEVEL
+68.60’ ROOF LEVEL
+58.60’ 5TH FLOOR LEVEL
+48.60’ 4TH FLOOR LEVEL
+38.60’ 3RD FLOOR LEVEL
+28.60’ 2ND FLOOR LEVEL
+13.60’ GROUND LEVEL
+78.60’
+75.60’
T.O. ROOF STRUC.
T.O. PARAPET LEVEL
+68.60’ ROOF LEVEL
+58.60’ 5TH FLOOR LEVEL
+48.60’ 4TH FLOOR LEVEL
+38.60’ 3RD FLOOR LEVEL
+28.60’ 2ND FLOOR LEVEL
+13.60’ GROUND LEVEL
BUILDING ELEVATIONS NORTH AND EAST FIGURE 3.2
WEST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION (WING BUILDING)
SOUTH ELEVATION
+78.60’
+75.60’
T.O. ROOF STRUC.
T.O. PARAPET LEVEL
+68.60’ ROOF LEVEL
+58.60’ 5TH FLOOR LEVEL
+48.60’ 4TH FLOOR LEVEL
+38.60’ 3RD FLOOR LEVEL
+28.60’ 2ND FLOOR LEVEL
+13.60’ GROUND LEVEL
+78.60’
+75.60’
T.O. ROOF STRUC.
T.O. PARAPET LEVEL
+68.60’ ROOF LEVEL
+58.60’ 5TH FLOOR LEVEL
+48.60’ 4TH FLOOR LEVEL
+38.60’ 3RD FLOOR LEVEL
+28.60’ 2ND FLOOR LEVEL
+13.60’ GROUND LEVEL
+78.60’
+75.60’
T.O. ROOF STRUC.
T.O. PARAPET LEVEL
+68.60’ ROOF LEVEL
+58.60’ 5TH FLOOR LEVEL
+48.60’ 4TH FLOOR LEVEL
+38.60’ 3RD FLOOR LEVEL
+28.60’ 2ND FLOOR LEVEL
+13.60’ GROUND LEVEL
BUILDING ELEVATIONS SOUTH AND WEST FIGURE 3.3
Alviso Hotel 13 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
3.2.5 Stormwater Controls
Bioretention areas with catch basins would be installed in the northwest and south corners of the project site (Refer to Figure 3.4). The project would install new storm drains, which would connect with planned storm drain lines from an adjacent project.
3.2.6 Landscaping
A number of new trees will be planted (see Figure 3.5). Species include vine maple, California box elder, California buckeye, bunya pine, dwarf strawberry, toyon, Japanese holly, California sycamore, California scrub oak, island oak, and arroyo willow. Landscaping would also include a wide variety of small, medium, and large shrubs and grasses. Landscaping would be installed around the boundary of the site, as well as throughout the site’s interior. The total landscaped area proposed would be 187,792 square feet.
3.2.7 Green Building Measures
The proposed project would be required to be built in accordance with the California Building Code (CALGreen), which includes design provisions intended to minimize wasteful energy consumption.
The project would be designed and constructed in compliance with City of San José Council Policy 6-32 (Green Building Ordinance), which would require the building to meet the United States Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver rating.
3.2.8 Construction
The project would not involve demolition since the project site is currently undeveloped. Grading of the site would import approximately 1,000 cubic yards of fill. Construction activities would last approximately 24 months, construction is anticipated to begin in fall of 2021.
SD
SD
SD
SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
DMA4
DMA7
DMA6
DMA8
DMA3
DMA2
DMA1
DMA5
EX TCM 9 PER PD16-033
AND 18-125173 GR (3-06800)
DMA10
EX TCM 10 PER PD16-034
AND 20-108436 GR (3-06800)
TCM 1
TCM 3
TCM 2
TCM 4
TOPGOLF DR
BAY VISTA DR
DMA9
SPA AND POOL NOT
INCLUDED IN DMA 4
PROJECT BOUNDARY
PROJECT
BOUNDARY
PROJECT BOUNDARY
PROJECT BOUNDARY
PROJECT BOUNDARY
PROJECT BOUNDARY
GUADALUPE RIVER
WETLAND SETBACK TOPGOLF OUTFIELD
STORM WATER
CONTROL PLAN
1" =
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO:
CAD DWG FILE:
CHECKED BY:
DESIGNED BY:
DATE:
SCALE:
HMHC
NO DATE DESCRIPTION PD19-031 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HOTEL ALVISO @ TERRA S:\PROJECTS\458630\PL\PERMIT\458630-07SW.DWG
458630-07SW.DW
5.0 4586
RH/
OCTOBER 30, 20
1570 Oakland Road (408) 487-2200
San Jose, CA 95131 HMHca.com
RH/
REE IN GNE L NA
ROFESSIO
P DERETSI GER
CAL I FORN I A
OF ETATS
CIVI L
No. 81168
TNT DEVELOPMEN
SERVICES
(408) 857-4731
CORBeL architects
3450 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 1000
Los Angeles
CA 90010
(213) 739-9902
w w w . c o r b e l a r c h i t e c t s . c o m
TERRA VENTURES
1 10/29/20 PER CITY COMMENTS
2 02/01/21 PER CITY COMMENTS
LID TREATMENT DRAINAGE AREA DMA# (SEE SIZING CALCULATIONS, SHEET 5.2)
STORM DRAIN PIPE (EXISTING)
STORM DRAIN PIPE
CATCH BASIN
OVERLAND RELEASE PATH
CURB CUT
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE (EXISTING)
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
DIRECTION OF SURFACE FLOW DRAINAGE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
LEGEND
BIORETENTION AREA
PROJECT SITE INFORMATION:
1. SOILS TYPE: CLAY (D)
2. GROUND WATER DEPTH: 5'-17'
3. NAME OF RECEIVING BODY: GUADALUPE RIVER
4. FLOOD ZONE: AE
5. FLOOD ELEVATION (IF APPLICABLE): 12 FEET
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
INFORMATION:
I. PROPERTY INFORMATION:
I.A. PROPERTY ADDRESS:
APN: 014-39-026
I.B. PROPERTY OWNER:
THE SHOPS @ TERRA, LLC
II. RESPONSIBLE PARTY FOR MAINTENANCE:
II.A. CONTACT:
MICHAEL HUYGHUE
II.B. PHONE NUMBER OF CONTACT:
(904)-813-6340
II.C. EMAIL:
[email protected]
II.D. ADDRESS:
461 S MILPITAS BLVD
MILPITAS, CA 95035
STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT
EXISTING WETLAND
GRASS ROAD PAVERS
BUBBLER BOX
SD SD SD
SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES:
1. BENEFICIAL LANDSCAPING.
2. USE OF WATER EFFICIENT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS.
3. MAINTENANCE (PAVEMENT SWEEPING, CATCH BASIN CLEANING, GOOD HOUSEKEEPING).
4. CONNECT THE FOLLOWING FEATURES TO SANITARY SEWER:
a. COVERED TRASH/ RECYCLING ENCLOSURES.
SITE DESIGN MEASURES:
1. PROTECT EXISTING TREES, VEGETATION, AND SOIL
2. PROTECT RIPARIAN AND WETLAND AREAS/ BUFFERS.
3. PRESERVE OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL DRAINAGE PATTERNS.
4. DIRECT RUNOFF FROM ROOFS, SIDEWALKS, PATIOS TO
LANDSCAPED AREAS.
5. PLANT TREES ADJACENT TO AND IN PARKING AREAS AND
ADJACENT TO OTHER IMPERVIOUS AREAS.
40200 80
STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN FIGURE 3.4
SD
SD
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO:
CAD DWG FILE:
CHECKED BY:
DESIGNED BY:
DATE:
SCALE: C HMH
NO DATE DESCRIPTION PD19-031 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HOTEL ALVISO @ TERRA S:\PROJECTS\458630\LA\PLANNING\458630CL.DWG
458630CL.DWG
10.1 4586.00
ST
ST/CM
FEBRUARY 1, 2021
PLOTTED: 2/1/2021 3:25 PM
1570 Oakland Road (408) 487-2200
San Jose, CA 95131 HMHca.com
ST/CT/GO/SS
TNT DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
(408) 857-4731
CORBeL architects
3450 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 1000
Los Angeles
CA 90010
(213) 739-9902
w w w . c o r b e l a r c h i t e c t s . c o m
TERRA VENTURES
LANDSCAPING PLAN FIGURE 3.5
Alviso Hotel 16 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, CHECKLIST, AND
IMPACT DISCUSSION
This section presents the discussion of impacts related to the following environmental subjects in their respective subsections:
4.1 Aesthetics
4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
4.3 Air Quality
4.4 Biological Resources
4.5 Cultural Resources
4.6 Energy
4.7 Geology and Soils
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.11 Land Use and Planning
4.12 Mineral Resources
4.13 Noise
4.14 Population and Housing
4.15 Public Services
4.16 Recreation
4.17 Transportation
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems
4.20 Wildfire
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
The discussion for each environmental subject includes the following subsections:
• Environmental Setting – This subsection 1) provides a brief overview of relevant plans, policies, and regulations that compose the regulatory framework for the project and 2) describes the existing, physical environmental conditions at the project site and in the surrounding area, as relevant.
• Impact Discussion – This subsection 1) includes the recommended checklist questions from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines to assess impacts and 2) discusses the project’s impact on the environmental subject as related to the checklist questions. For significant impacts, feasible mitigation measures are identified. “Mitigation measures” are measures that will minimize, avoid, or eliminate a significant impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15370). 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.
Mitigation measures are also numbered to correspond to the impact they address. For example, MM BIO-1.3 refers to the third mitigation measure for the first impact in the Biological Resources section.
Alviso Hotel 17 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
AESTHETICS
4.1.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Streets and Highway Code Sections 260 through 263
The California Scenic Highway Program (Streets and Highway Code, Sections 260 through 263) is managed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The program is intended to protect and enhance the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors through special conservation treatment. There are no state-designated scenic highways in San José. Interstate 280 from the San Mateo County line to State Route (SR) 17, which includes segments in San José, is an eligible, but not officially designated, State Scenic Highway.3 In Santa Clara County, the one state-designated scenic highway is SR 9 from the Santa Cruz County line to the Los Gatos City Limit. Eligible State Scenic Highways (not officially designated) include SR 17 from the Santa Cruz County line to SR 9, SR 35 from Santa Cruz County line to SR 9, Interstate 280 from the San Mateo County line to SR 17, and the entire length of SR 152 within the County.
Local
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes the following policies applicable specifically to development projects in San José:
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Aesthetic Policies
Policies Description
Policy CD-1.1 Require the highest standards of architecture and site design, and apply strong design controls for all development projects, both public and private, for the enhancement and development of community character and for the proper transition between areas with different types of land uses.
Policy CD-1.23 Further the Community Forest Goals and Policies in this Plan by requiring new development to plant and maintain trees at appropriate locations on private property and along public street frontages. Use trees to help soften the appearance of the built environment, help provide transitions between land uses, and shade pedestrian and bicycle areas.
Policy CD-1.27 When approving new construction, require the undergrounding of distribution utility lines serving the development. Encourage programs for undergrounding existing overhead distribution lines. Overhead lines providing electrical power to 3 California Department of Transportation. “Scenic Highways.” Accessed March 29, 2021. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways.
Alviso Hotel 18 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
light rail transit vehicles and high tension electrical transmission lines are exempt from this policy.
Policy CD-10.2 Require that new public and private development adjacent to Gateways, freeways (including U.S.101, I-880, I-680, I-280, SR17, SR85, SR237, and SR87), and Grand Boulevards consist of high-quality architecture, use high-quality materials, and contribute to a positive image of San José.
Policy CD-10.3 Require that development visible from freeways (including U.S.101, I-880, I-680, I280, SR17, SR85, SR237, and SR87) be designed to preserve and enhance attractive natural and man-made vistas.
Alviso Master Plan
The Alviso Master Plan is a policy document that provides the background, vision, and character to guide the future of a unique area at the northern edge of San José. One of the stated purposes of the Plan is to protect and enhance the small town quality of Alviso by guiding appropriate new development, community facilities, and infrastructure. The Master Plan establishes the location, intensity, and character of land uses; the circulation pattern, and necessary infrastructure improvements to support development. The following policies are specific to aesthetics and are applicable to the proposed project:
Alviso Master Plan Relevant Policies and Design Guidelines Policies Description
Landscaping Policy 3 Landscaping should be used to screen unattractive uses and soften the effect of taller buildings due to the flood protection requirements.
Landscaping Policy 4 Landscaping should not block views of the rivers, natural riparian areas, or marshlands.
River Orientation
Policy 1
Commercial land uses adjacent to the Guadalupe River should provide access to the waterway.
River Orientation
Policy 2
Development along the Guadalupe River should be designed to reflect and acknowledge the river environment by orienting seating areas, windows, decks, balconies, and open spaces to the river while orienting utility, parking, storage and trash areas away from it.
River Orientation
Policy 3
New buildings adjacent to the Guadalupe River/Alviso Slough should be of an appropriate scale and character to enhance this waterway as a public oriented recreation resource and as a natural riparian corridor.
City of San José Outdoor Lighting Policy (Policy 4-3)
The City of San José’s Outdoor Lighting Policy requires outdoor lighting on private properties to be directed downward and include shielding to reduce light pollution and spill light. The policy also requires the use of energy efficient lighting fixtures.
Alviso Hotel 19 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Existing Conditions
The site is an undeveloped lot located at the western edge of the Alviso community of San José (the site is not visible from the central Alviso Village location), which is at the southern end of the San Francisco Bay. Within the Alviso community there is a mix of single-family and multi-family developments, many of which are one-to-two-story wood frame structures built before 1970. Singlestory, wood and stucco commercial buildings and small parking lots are found clustered in the central section of Alviso, off Gold Street and North First Street. Industrial uses in the Alviso Village area include a variety of building types and densities, ranging from modern concrete and glass office buildings to localized concentrations of outdoor storage and corporation yards. There are many trails and public open spaces in the area, including the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Alviso Marina County Park (gateway to the wildlife refuge), Guadalupe River Trail, San Francisco Bay Trail and Sunnyvale Baylands Park. East and west of Alviso are the foothills which border the Santa Clara Valley.
The topography of the project site is relatively flat with ground surface elevations ranging from roughly two feet below mean sea level in the areas closest to the non-wetland water body to 10 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the interior of the site. The site is an undeveloped open space comprised of non-native grassland vegetation. The Guadalupe River forms the southwestern boundary of the site. The Guadalupe River Trail is situated on top of the levee that separates the site from the river. High-voltage electrical transmission lines traverse east-to-west directly south of the site. Refer to Photo One through Photo Eight for views of the project site and surrounding area.
Surrounding Area
Immediately north, east, south, and, west of the site is undeveloped land. Adjacent land northwest of the site was recently developed as the Topgolf Project (File Number: PD16-034/PDC16-013) .
Topgolf consists of approximately 110,000 square feet of commercial/retail space, a 200-roomhotel, approximately 72,000 square feet of indoor/outdoor recreation use (Topgolf), and late night use.
Development north of the site, across North First Street, includes the Balaji Temple, a three-story office building, George Mayne Elementary School, Alviso Youth Center, single-family residences, and a small strip mall. The Balaji Temple consists of a one-story religious center and parking lot. The George Mayne Elementary School consists of one-story education buildings adjacent to paved parking and play areas as well as a large grass field. The two-story Alviso Youth Center is located on the same property as the school, adjacent to the grass field. Three-story single-family residences of recent construction and consisting of modern architectural elements are located west of the library.
The ground floors of the residences are elevated above street level for flood protection purposes. A sloping landscaped berm with stairways is located along the residential development’s frontage with North First Street. Development south of the site, across California State Route 237, consists of residential properties. Development east of the site consists of commercial buildings ranging in height from four to six stories. Development to the west of the site across the Guadalupe River and Guadalupe River Trail consists of a mobile home community, a two-story commercial office development, and a four-story hotel.
Alviso Hotel 20 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Scenic Vistas and Resources
The project site is not located along or visible from a state-designated scenic highway. 4 A 21.8-mile
stretch of Interstate 280 (I-280) is a state-designated scenic highway, from San Bruno to Portola Valley (post mile R0.0 to post mile R21.8). I-280 is the nearest state-designated scenic highway to the site (approximately seven miles south of the site and not visible from the site). The nearest portion of I-280 to the site is not part of the Interstate that is designated as scenic. Views of the Diablo Range foothills (to the east) are visible from the site; however, these views of these foothills are interrupted by existing urban development.
The City’s General Plan identifies Gateways and Urban Throughways (urban corridors) where preservation and enhancement of views of the natural and man-made environment are crucial. The nearest Gateway to the project site is located on the North First Street overpass where it crosses over State Route 237 (SR 237), approximately 0.45 miles southeast of the site. The site is partially visible from the overpass. The City has designated SR 237 as an Urban Throughway from the I-880 intersection to Fair Oaks Avenue in Sunnyvale. The site is visible from SR 237.
Due to the site’s flat topography, current views of the project site are limited to the site’s immediate vicinity. The high-voltage electrical transmission lines traversing east-to-west directly south of the site are visible from areas further away due to the transmission lines’ heights. 4 The State Scenic Highways Program is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The program is intended to protect and enhance the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors through special conservation treatment. The state laws governing the Scenic Highway Program are found in the Streets and Highway Code, Sections 260 through 263.
Photo 1: Project Site Facing Northeast
Photo 2: Non-wetland Water Feature South of the Project Site PHOTOS 1 & 2
Photo 3: Guadalupe River Southwest of the Project Site
Photo 4: View of Surrounding Land Development North of the Project Site PHOTOS 3 & 4
Photo 5: View of Surrounding Land Use Southeast of the Project Site Photo 6: View down Guadalupe River Trail facing South
PHOTOS 5 & 6
Photo 7: View of Surrounding Land Use West of the Project Site Photo 8: View of Surrounding Residential Land Use Northwest of the Project Site PHOTOS 7 & 8
Alviso Hotel 25 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.1.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
2) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
3) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of
public views of the site and its surroundings? 5
If the project is in an urbanized area, would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
4) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
5 Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.
Alviso Hotel 26 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact AES-1: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impacts to a scenic vista consist of modification of a scenic feature, such as a hillside, or bayland areas, or scenic skyline or built environment. While the project would not modify a scenic feature, the proposed structure would be visible to users of nearby public open spaces including Alviso Marina County Park, Alviso Park, the Guadalupe River Trail, San Francisco Bay Trail and Sunnyvale Baylands Park. The proposed structure would also be visible from SR 237 and the North First Street overcrossing, which are identified as an Urban Throughway and a Gateway, respectively, in the City’s General Plan. The proposed structure would be similar in scale to existing buildings east and west of the site that are visible from these locations.
The maximum allowed height on site is 65 feet, which is five stories above flood elevation, as a result of a text amendment to the Alviso Master Plan, and by extension the Envision 2040 General Plan, which changed the maximum allowable building height for properties on the west side of North First Street between Liberty and Tony P. Santos Streets, including the project site. The proposed building height for the project is 65 feet.
View from the SR 237 and the North First Street Overcrossing Although the project would introduce prominent features on the site that would be visible from a designated Gateway and Urban Throughway, commercial development of the density proposed by the project was anticipated in the City’s Envision 2040 General Plan, and the Final EIR completed for the General Plan concluded that development in accordance with the General Plan policies and design guidelines would not represent a significant aesthetics impact.
The office and hotel properties situated east of the project site are directly between the project site and the viewpoints from the North First Street overcrossing. Views of the site from the overcrossing are therefore largely blocked by the existing structures. The project would be visible from segments of SR 237, but the proposed structures would be similar in scale to existing structures on nearby properties. Therefore, the proposed project’s impact on the designated Urban Thoroughfare and Gateway would be less than significant.
Views from Residential Areas
Residential land uses are located north, south, and west of the project site. Views of the surrounding foothills are very limited from these locations due to existing development, roadways, high-voltage electrical transmission lines, and landscaping. The project would introduce prominent features on the site that would be visible from surrounding residential land uses. The proposed buildings would, however, be comparable in massing and scale to existing commercial/office and mixed-use buildings in the project area and would be consistent with planned growth for the area in the General Plan.
Additionally, private views are not a protected resource under CEQA. Therefore, the proposed project’s impact on residential views would be less than significant.
Alviso Hotel 27 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Views from Trails and Parks
The proposed hotel and parking garage would modify views from the segment of the Guadalupe River Trail located west of the site and Alviso Park located north of the site by introducing new structures.
The General Plan FEIR (as amended) concluded that new development and redevelopment allowed under the General Plan would alter the appearance of San José; and implementation of applicable policies and regulations (including the City’s Design Guidelines) would avoid substantial degradation of the visual character of the City. The proposed development would alter the visual character of the project site compared to the existing conditions. The proposed buildings would, however, be comparable in massing and scale to some of the existing commercial/office and mixeduse buildings in the project area and consistent with planned growth within the General Plan. As a result, the project would not degrade visual character of the area, and would not obscure any scenic vistas, damage scenic resources, or degrade the visual quality of the area. (Less than Significant Impact)
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. (No Impact)
There are no state-designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the site, therefore, the project would not damage scenic resources within any state-designated scenic highways. (No Impact) Impact AES-3: The project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. The project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. (Less than Significant Impact)
As described in Section 4.1.1.2, the property is currently undeveloped.
The project would develop the site with a hotel reaching a maximum height of 65 feet and parking garage, reaching 40 feet. The project would include landscaping around the boundary of the site, as well as throughout the site’s interior. While the project would introduce visually prominent commercial development on the site, the proposed structures would be similar in scale to existing structures on nearby properties.
The hotel’s building materials would primarily consist of fiber-cement board siding, vertical batten board siding, aluminum window frames, and windows. The garage would include a green screen and mesh panel (See Figure 4.1-1).
The project area is developed commercial, office and industrial land uses that range from one- to sixstories and has a mix of architectural styles. The existing buildings surrounding the site are made of materials similar to the proposed development. Development under the proposed project would be reviewed in accordance with the City’s Commercial Development Guidelines and the Alviso Master Alviso Hotel 28 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Plan’s Village Area Guidelines for Commercial Development during the Planning Permit stage as part of the City’s planning review process. For the above reasons, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or its surroundings nor conflict with applicable regulations governing scenic quality. (Less than Significant Impact)
EXTERIOR RENDERINGS FIGURE 4.1-1
Alviso Hotel 30 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
The site is currently undeveloped, and therefore does not produce light or glare.
The project would install security lighting throughout the site in parking areas, along pathways, and adjacent to buildings. The outdoor lighting would be comparable in brightness to the ambient lighting in the surrounding developments. All lighting would conform to the City’s Outdoor Lighting Policy (4-3) as applicable and be shielded to direct light downwards to ensure that lighting does not spill over onto adjacent residential properties, consistent with City standards.
The project will be reviewed in accordance with the City’s Commercial Development Guidelines and the Alviso Master Plan’s Village Area Guidelines for Commercial Development during the Planning Permit stage as part of the City’s planning review process. The project would be constructed with a variety of building materials which would be subject to the City’s Design Guidelines and regulations to ensure future light and glare impacts are minimized.
While the proposed building would include windows, the design of the building does not include large uninterrupted expansions of glass or highly reflective materials such as mirrored glass.
For the reasons described above, the proposed project would not create a substantial source of daytime or nighttime glare. The lighting would be designed to use modern technology, as previously described, to reduce spill light and visibility of the lights. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact AES-4: The project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 31 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
4.2.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
The California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) assesses the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural land and conversion of these lands over time. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status. The best quality land is called Prime Farmland. In CEQA analyses, the FMMP classifications and published county maps are used, in part, to identify whether agricultural resources that could be affected are present on-site or in the project area.6
California Land Conservation Act
The California Land Conservation Act (Williamson Act) enables local governments to enter into contracts with private landowners to restrict parcels of land to agricultural or related open space uses.
In return, landowners receive lower property tax assessments. In CEQA analyses, identification of properties that are under a Williamson Act contract is used to also identify sites that may contain agricultural resources or are zoned for agricultural uses.7 Fire and Resource Assessment Program
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) identifies forest land, timberland, and lands zoned for timberland production that can (or do) support forestry resources.8 Programs such as CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program and are used to identify whether forest land, timberland, or timberland production areas that could be affected are located on or adjacent to a project site.9
Existing Conditions
According to the Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2016 Map, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. Urban and Built-Up Land is defined as residential land with a density of at least six units per 10-acre parcel, as well as land used for industrial and commercial purposes, golf 6 California Department of Conservation. “Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.” Accessed April 26, 2019. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Index.aspx. 7 California Department of Conservation. “Williamson Act.” http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/lca. 8 Forest Land is land that can support 10 percent native tree cover and allows for management of forest resources (California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); Timberland is land not owned by the federal government or designated as experimental forest land that is available for, and capable of, growing trees to produce lumber and other products, including Christmas trees (California Public Resources Code Section 4526); and Timberland Production is land used for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses (Government Code Section 51104(g)).
9 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. “Fire and Resource Assessment Program.” Accessed October 22, 2020. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/.
Alviso Hotel 32 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
courses, landfills, airports, sewage treatment, and water control structures.10 According to Santa Clara County Office of the Assessor, the site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract.
4.2.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
2) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
3) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code Section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
4) Result in a loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
5) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
Note: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. 10 California Department of Conservation, Santa Clara County Important Farmland Map 2016. Available at:
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2016/scl16.pdf Alviso Hotel 33 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact AG-1: The project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. (No Impact)
According to the Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2016 Map, the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. The project, therefore, would not convert farmland to non-agricultural use. (No Impact)
Impact AG-2: The project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. (No Impact)
The site is zoned CIC(PD) - Planned Development (Combined Industrial/ Commercial Base District.
According to Santa Clara County Office of the Assessor, the site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. The project, therefore, would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. (No Impact)
Impact AG-3: The project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. (No Impact)
The site is zoned CIC(PD) - Planned Development (Combined Industrial/ Commercial Base District.
The project, therefore, would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. (No Impact) Impact AG-4: The project would not result in a loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (No Impact)
No forestland is located on or near the site. The project, therefore, would not result in a loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (No Impact) Impact AG-5: The project would not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (No Impact)
As described above, no farmland or forest land is located on or near the site. The project, therefore, would not involve other changes in the existing environment which could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (No Impact) Alviso Hotel 34 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
AIR QUALITY
The following discussion is based, in part, on an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment prepared for the project by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (I&R). A copy of the report, dated October 2, 2020, is included in Appendix A of this Initial Study.
4.3.1 Environmental Setting
Background Information
Criteria Pollutants
Air quality in the Bay Area is assessed related to six common air pollutants (referred to as criteria pollutants), including ground-level ozone (O3), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOx), and lead.11 Criteria pollutants are regulated because they result in health effects. An overview of the sources of criteria pollutants and their associated health are summarized in Table 4.3-1. The most commonly regulated criteria pollutants in the Bay Area are discussed further below.
Table 4.3-1: Health Effects of Air Pollutants
Pollutants Sources Primary Effects
O3
Atmospheric reaction of organic gases
with nitrogen oxides in sunlight
• Aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular diseases
• Irritation of eyes
• Cardiopulmonary function impairment
Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO2)
Motor vehicle exhaust, high
temperature stationary combustion,
atmospheric reactions
• Aggravation of respiratory illness
• Reduced visibility
Fine
Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
and Coarse
Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Stationary combustion of solid fuels,
construction activities, industrial
processes, atmospheric chemical
reactions
• Reduced lung function, especially in
children
• Aggravation of respiratory and
cardiorespiratory diseases
• Increased cough and chest discomfort
• Reduced visibility
Toxic Air
Contaminants
(TACs)
Cars and trucks, especially dieselfueled; industrial sources, such as chrome platers; dry cleaners and service
stations; building materials and
products
• Cancer
• Chronic eye, lung, or skin irritation
• Neurological and reproductive
disorders
High O3 levels are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and NOX.
These precursor pollutants react under certain meteorological conditions to form high O3 levels.
Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area’s attempts to 11 The area has attained both state and federal ambient air quality standards for CO. The project does not include substantial new emissions of sulfur dioxide or lead. These criteria pollutants are not discussed further.
Alviso Hotel 35 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
reduce O3 levels. The highest O3 levels in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys that are downwind of air pollutant sources.
PM is a problematic air pollutant of the Bay Area. PM is assessed and measured in terms of respirable particulate matter or particles that have a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10) and fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5). Elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 are the result of both region-wide emissions and localized emissions.
Toxic Air Contaminants
TACs are a broad class of compounds known to have health effects. They include but are not limited to criteria pollutants. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, diesel fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter [DPM] near a freeway).
Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about three-quarters of the cancer risk from TACs. Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. Medium- and heavy-duty diesel trucks represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. The majority of DPM is small enough to be inhaled into the lungs. Most inhaled particles are subsequently exhaled, but some deposit on the lung surface or are deposited in the deepest regions of the lungs (most susceptible to injury).12 Chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Sensitive Receptors
Some groups of people are more affected by air pollution than others. CARB has identified the following persons who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 16, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, and elementary schools.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Clean Air Act
At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for overseeing implementation of the Clean Air Act and its subsequent amendments. The federal Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set national ambient air quality standards for the six common criteria pollutants (discussed previously), including PM, O3, CO, SOx, NOx, and lead. 12 California Air Resources Board. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Accessed June 16, 2018. https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm.
Alviso Hotel 36 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
CARB is the state agency that regulates mobile sources throughout the state and oversees implementation of the state air quality laws and regulations, including the California Clean Air Act.
The EPA and the CARB have adopted ambient air quality standards establishing permissible levels of these pollutants to protect public health and the climate. Violations of ambient air quality standards are based on air pollutant monitoring data and are determined for each air pollutant.
Attainment status for a pollutant means that a given air district meets the standard set by the EPA and/or CARB.
Risk Reduction Plan
To address the issue of diesel emissions in the state, CARB developed the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. In addition to requiring more stringent emission standards for new on-road and off-road mobile sources and stationary diesel-fueled engines to reduce particulate matter emissions by 90 percent, the plan involves application of emission control strategies to existing diesel vehicles and equipment to reduce DPM (in additional to other pollutants). Implementation of this plan, in conjunction with stringent federal and CARB-adopted emission limits for diesel fueled vehicles and equipment (including off-road equipment), will significantly reduce emissions of DPM and NOX.
Regional
2017 Clean Air Plan
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is the agency primarily responsible for assuring that the federal and state ambient air quality standards are maintained in the San Francisco Bay Area. Regional air quality management districts, such as BAAQMD, must prepare air quality plans specifying how state and federal air quality standards will be met. BAAQMD’s most recently adopted plan is the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan (2017 CAP). The 2017 CAP focuses on two related BAAQMD goals: protecting public health and protecting the climate. To protect public health, the 2017 CAP describes how BAAQMD will continue its progress toward attaining 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 2017 CAP includes control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane and other super-greenhouse gases (GHGs) that are potent climate pollutants in the near-term, and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.13
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are intended to serve as a guide for those who prepare or evaluate air quality impact analyses for projects and plans in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin utilize the thresholds and methodology for assessing air quality impacts developed by BAAQMD within their CEQA Air Quality Guidelines.
The guidelines include information on legal requirements, BAAQMD rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures.
13 BAAQMD. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19, 2017. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/air-qualityplans/current-plans.
Alviso Hotel 37 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Community Air Risk Evaluation Program
Under the Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) program, BAAQMD has identified areas with high TAC emissions, and sensitive populations that could be affected by them, and uses this information to establish policies and programs to reduce TAC emissions and exposures. Impacted communities identified to date are located in Concord, Richmond/San Pablo, San José, eastern San Francisco, western Alameda County, Vallejo, San Rafael, and Pittsburg/Antioch. The main objectives of the program are to:
• Evaluate health risks associated with exposure to TACs from stationary and mobile sources; • Assess potential exposures to sensitive receptors and identify impacted communities; • Prioritize TAC reduction measures for significant sources in impacted communities; and • Develop and implement mitigation measures to improve air quality in impacted communities.
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to air quality and are applicable to the proposed project.
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Land Use Policies
Policies Description
Policy MS-10.1 Assess projected air emissions from new development in conformance with the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines and relative to state and federal standards.
Identify and implement feasible air emission reduction measures.
Policy MS-10.2 Consider the cumulative air quality impacts from proposed developments for proposed land use designation changes and new development, consistent with the region’s Clean Air Plan and State law.
Policy MS-11.2 For projects that emit toxic air contaminants, require project proponents to prepare health risk assessments in accordance with BAAQMD-recommended procedures as part of environmental review and employ effective mitigation to reduce possible health risks to a less than significant level. Alternatively, require new projects (such as, but not limited to, industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities) that are sources of TACs to be located an adequate distance from residential areas and other sensitive receptors.
Policy MS-11.4 Encourage the installation of appropriate air filtration at existing schools, residences, and other sensitive receptor uses adversely affected by pollution sources.
Policy MS-11.5 Encourage the use of pollution absorbing trees and vegetation in buffer areas between substantial sources of TACs and sensitive land uses.
Policy MS-13.1 Include dust, particulate matter, and construction equipment exhaust control measures as conditions of approval for subdivision maps, site development and planned development permits, grading permits, and demolition permits. At minimum, conditions shall conform to construction mitigation measures Alviso Hotel 38 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
recommended in the current BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines for the relevant project size and type.
Existing Conditions
The Bay Area is considered a non-attainment area for ground-level O3 and PM2.5 under both the federal Clean Air Act and state Clean Air Act. The area is also considered nonattainment for PM10 under the state act, but not the federal act. The area has attained both state and federal ambient air quality standards for CO. As part of an effort to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards for O3 and PM10, BAAQMD has established thresholds of significance for these air pollutants and their precursors. These thresholds are for O3 precursor pollutants (ROG and NOX), PM10, and PM2.5, and apply to both construction period and operational period impacts.
4.3.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
2) 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?
3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
4) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
As discussed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b), the determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for judgment on the part of the lead agency and must be based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data. The City of San José has considered the air quality thresholds updated by BAAQMD in May 2017 and regards these thresholds to be based on the best information available for the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin and conservative in terms of the assessment of health effects associated with TACs and PM2.5. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality thresholds used in this analysis are identified in Table 4.3-2.
Alviso Hotel 39 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.3-2: BAAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds Pollutant
Construction
Thresholds Operation Thresholds
Average Daily
Emissions
(pounds/day)
Annual Daily
Emissions
(pounds/year)
Annual Average
Emissions (tons/year)
Criteria Air Pollutants
ROG, NOx 54 54 10
PM10 82 (exhaust) 82 15
PM2.5 54 (exhaust) 54 10
CO Not Applicable 9.0 ppm (eight-hour) or 20.0 ppm (one-hour) Fugitive Dust
Dust-Control
Measures/Best
Management Practices
Not Applicable
Health Risks and Hazards for New Sources (within a 1,000-foot Zone of Influence) Health Hazard Single Source Combined Cumulative Sources Excess Cancer Risk >10 per one million >100 per million Hazard Index >1.0 >10.0
Incremental Annual PM2.5 >0.3 µg/m3 >0.8 μg/m3 (average) Notes: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, PM10 = course particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometers (µm) or less, and PM2.5 = fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 µm or less.
Impact AIR-1: The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. (Less than Significant Impact) The 2017 CAP is the applicable air quality plan for the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. The 2017 CAP includes control measures that are intended to reduce air pollutant emissions in the Bay Area either directly or indirectly. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines set forth criteria for determining consistency with the 2017 CAP. In general, a project is considered consistent if, a) the plan supports the primary goals of the 2017 CAP; b) it includes relevant control measures; and c) it does not interfere with implementation of 2017 CAP control measures. As shown in Table 4.3-3 below, the proposed project would be consistent with the 2017 CAP measures intended to reduce automobile trips, as well as energy and water usage and waste.
Alviso Hotel 40 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.3-3: Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan Applicable Control Measures Control Measures Description Project Consistency
Transportation Measures
Trip Reduction
Programs
Encourage trip reduction policies and
programs in local plans, e.g., general
and specific plans. Encourage local
governments to require mitigation of
vehicle travel as part of new
development approval, to develop
innovative ways to encourage
rideshare, transit, cycling, and walking
for work trips.
The project site is near VTA
bus lines that would support
multi-modal travel to and from
the site. Additionally, the
project includes an on-site
connection to the Guadalupe
River Trail at the southern
limits of the site and currently
proposes 20 long-term and
three short-term bicycle
parking spaces, consistent with
City standards. As noted in
Section 4.17, Transportation,
the project would be required
to implement a TDM program
which would include measures
to support reduced vehicle
trips. The project is consistent
with this measure.
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Access and Facilities
Encourage planning for bicycle and
pedestrian facilities in local plans, e.g.,
general and specific plans, fund bike
lanes, routes, paths and bicycle
parking facilities.
The project proposes 20 longterm and three short-term
bicycle parking spaces,
consistent with City standards.
The project area is equipped
with pedestrian facilities
including sidewalks and
crosswalks. The project
includes an on-site connection
to the Guadalupe River Trail at
the southern limits of the site.
The project is consistent with
this measure.
Land Use Strategies
Support implementation of Plan Bay
Area, maintain and disseminate
information on current climate action
plans and other local best practices.
The project would be located
in proximity to transit services;
therefore, the project is
consistent with this measure
(refer to Section 4.17
Transportation for more
information).
Building Measures
Green Buildings
Identify barriers to effective local
implementation of CALGreen (Title
24) statewide building energy code;
develop solutions to improve
implementation/ enforcement. Engage
with additional partners to target
reducing emissions from specific types
of buildings.
The project would comply with
Building Energy Efficiency
Standards (Title 24), the City’s
Green Building Ordinance, and
the most recent CALGreen
requirements. In addition, the
project would be designed to
achieve LEED Silver
Alviso Hotel 41 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.3-3: Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan Applicable Control Measures Control Measures Description Project Consistency
certification. The project is
consistent with this measure.
Urban Heat Island
Mitigation
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 reroofing/
roofing upgrades for commercial and
residential multifamily housing.
The project would be required
to comply with the City’s
Green Building Ordinance and
the most recent CALGreen
requirements which would
increase building efficiency
over standard construction.
Therefore, the project is
consistent with this control
measure.
Natural and Working Lands Measures
Urban Tree Planting
Develop or identify an existing model
municipal tree planting ordinance and
encourage local governments to adopt
such an ordinance. Include tree
planting recommendations, the Air
District’s technical guidance, best
management practices for local plans,
and CEQA review.
Any trees removed would be
required to be replaced in
accordance with the City’s tree
replacement policy. Therefore,
the project is consistent with
this control measure. Further
discussion in Section 4.4
Biological Resources.
Waste Management Measures
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.
The City adopted the Zero
Waste Strategic Plan which
outlines policies to help the
City foster a healthier
community and achieve its
Green Vision goals, including
75 percent diversion by 2013
and zero waste by 2022. In
addition, the project would
comply with the City’s
Construction and Demolition
Diversion Program during
construction which ensures
that at least 75 percent of
construction waste generated
by the project is recovered and
diverted from landfills.
Therefore, the project is
consistent with this control
measure.
The proposed project would not conflict with the 2017 CAP planning efforts since the project would have emissions below the BAAQMD thresholds (see Impact AIR-2). (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 42 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact AIR-2: The project would not 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. (Less than Significant Impact)
Construction Period Emissions
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2016.3.2 was used to estimate emissions from on-site construction activity, construction vehicle trips, and evaporative emissions.14 CalEEMod computes annual emissions that are based on the project type, size and acreage. The model provides emission estimates for both on-site and off-site construction activities. On-site activities are primarily made up of construction equipment emissions, while off-site activities include worker, hauling, and vendor traffic. The construction build-out scenario, including equipment list and schedule, were based on construction information provided by the project applicant.
The CalEEMod construction equipment information provided by the applicant included the schedule for each phase. Within each phase, the quantity of equipment to be used along with the average hours per day and total number of workdays was provided. Since different equipment would have different estimates of the working day per phase, the hours per day for each phase was computed by dividing the total number of hours that the equipment would be used by the total number of days in that phase.
The construction schedule assumed that the project would be built over a period of approximately 15 months, or 343 construction workdays. The first full year of operation was assumed to be 2023.
Table 4.3-4 summarizes the computed construction period emissions.
Table 4.3-4: Construction Period Emissions
Year ROG NOx PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Exhaust
Construction Emissions Per Year (Tons)
2021 0.07 0.66 0.04 0.03
2022 0.65 0.17 0.01 0.01
Average Daily Construction Emissions Per Year (lbs/day) 2021 (240 construction days) 0.59 5.50 0.35 0.25
2022 (103 construction days) 12.59 3.21 0.23 0.14
BAAQMD Thresholds 54 54 82 54
Exceed Threshold? No No No No
As shown in Table 4.3-4, predicted construction period emissions for the project would not exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds. As a result, project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. 14 See Appendix A for more information about CalEEMod Modeling.
Alviso Hotel 43 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Additionally, construction activities, particularly site preparation and grading, would temporarily generate fugitive dust in the form of PM10 and PM2.5. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site and trucks carrying uncovered loads of soils. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines consider these impacts to be less than significant if best management practices are implemented to reduce these emissions. The project applicant shall implement the following best management practices as a standard permit condition to ensure that dust and exhaust are controlled during project construction:
Standard Permit Condition:
1. The following measures shall be implemented during all phases of construction to control dust and exhaust at the project site:
a. Water active construction areas at least twice daily or as often as needed to control dust emissions.
b. Cover trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials and/or ensure that all trucks hauling such materials maintain at least two feet of freeboard. c. Remove visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
d. Enclose, cover, and water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.).
e. Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph). f. Pave new or improved roadways, driveways, and sidewalks as soon as possible. g. Lay building pads as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
h. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. i. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
j. Minimize idling times either by shutting off equipment when not in use, or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations).
Provide clear signage for construction workers at all access points. k. Maintain and properly tune construction equipment in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. Check all equipment by a certified mechanic and record a determination of running in proper condition prior to operation. l. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints.
The standard permit conditions listed above are consistent with BAAQMD-recommended basic control measures for reducing fugitive particulate matter. Implementation of these standards would reduce impacts due to fugitive dust during construction to a less than significant level.
Alviso Hotel 44 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Operational Period Emissions
Operational air emissions from the project would be generated primarily from vehicles driven by future guests, employees, and vendors. Other operational emissions would be produced from architectural coatings, maintenance products, and energy usage. CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions from operation of the proposed project assuming full build-out in 2023. Table 4.3-5 provides a summary of the predicted operation period emissions for the project.
Table 4.3-5: Operational Period Emissions
Scenario ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
2023 Project Operational
Emissions (tons/year) 1.10 1.02 1.14 0.32
BAAQMD Thresholds (tons/year) 10 10 15 10
Exceed Thresholds? No No No No
2023 Project Operational
Emissions (lbs/day) 6.01 5.60 6.26 1.78
BAAQMD Thresholds (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54
Exceed Thresholds? No No No No
Notes: Assumes 365-day operation
As shown in Table 4.3-5, the project would not exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds for operational period emissions. Therefore, the project operations would not 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.
The project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact AIR-3: The project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (Less than Significant Impact)
This project would introduce new sources of TACs during construction (i.e., on-site construction and truck hauling emissions) and operation (i.e., mobile sources). Project construction activities would generate dust and equipment exhaust that would affect nearby sensitive receptors. The project would generate some traffic consisting of light-duty vehicles. However, the number of net daily trips generated by the project would be small in relation to existing traffic volumes on surrounding roadways (i.e., 1,642 daily trips, see Section 4.17 Transportation) and emissions from automobile traffic generated by the project would be spread out over a broad geographical area and would not be localized. Project traffic was not considered a source of substantial TACs or PM2.5.
Alviso Hotel 45 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Project impacts to existing sensitive receptors were assessed for temporary construction activities only. The impact of existing sources of TACs was assessed in terms of cumulative risk, including the project contribution, as well as the risk on the new sensitive receptors introduced by the project.
Community risk impacts were addressed by predicting increased cancer risk, the increase in annual PM2.5 concentrations, and computing the Hazard Index (HI) for non-cancer health risks. To evaluate the increased cancer risks from the project, a 30-year exposure period was used, per BAAQMD guidance, with the sensitive receptors being exposed to both project construction and operation emissions during this timeframe. The closest sensitive receptors to the site are the children at the Mayne Elementary School, approximately 680 feet to the north, and the single-family residences, approximately 1,000 feet north of the site. There are additional residences west and south of the site at further distances. The project would not introduce new sensitive receptors.
The project maximally exposed individual (MEI) is identified as the sensitive receptor that is most impacted by the project’s construction and operation. Receptors for this assessment included locations where sensitive populations would be present for extended periods of time. Results of the Air Quality Analysis determined that the construction MEI is located on the first floor (five feet above ground) of the nearest residence to the north of the site.
The community health risk assessment also considered all substantial sources of TACs that could affect sensitive receptors located within 1,000 feet of the project site. Cumulative community risk sources within 1,000 feet of the project site include SR 237 and two permitted stationary source facilities (generators owned by South Bay Development, LLC and Verizon Wireless). Figure 4.3-1 shows the locations of the sensitive receptors and cumulative TAC sources and Table 4.3-6 summarizes the community risks due to construction emissions. )LJXUH 3URMHFW6LWH0(,DQG1HDUE\7$&6RXUFHV
+LJKZD\V±65
%$$40'SURYLGHVUDVWHUILOHVZLWKFDQFHUULVNDQG30
YDOXHVIRUDOOKLJKZD\VIUHHZD\V
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., October 2, 2020.
LOCATIONS OF SENSITIVE RECEPTORS AND NEARBY TAC SOURCES FIGURE 4.3-1 Alviso Hotel 47 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.3-6: Construction Risk of Impacts at the Off-site Receptors Source Cancer Risk (per
million)
Annual PM2.5
(μg/m3)
Hazard Index
Project Impacts
Project Construction 0.3 (infant) <0.01 <0.01
BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceed Threshold? No No No
Mayne Elementary School Student Receptors
Project Construction 0.1 (child) <0.01 <0.01
BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceeds Threshold? No No No
Cumulative Sources
SR 237 9.4 0.19 --
South Bay Development, LLC <0.1 -- --
Verizon Wireless 0.3 -- --
Combined Sources 10.1 (infant) <0.20 <0.01
BAAQMD Cumulative Significance
Threshold >100 >0.8 >10.0
Exceed Threshold? No No No
As shown in Table 4.3-6, the project’s community risk impact would not exceed the single-source or cumulative thresholds for increased cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, or HI values. Therefore, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (Less than Significant Impact)
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)
The project would generate localized emissions of diesel exhaust during construction equipment operation and truck activity. These emissions may be noticeable from time to time by adjacent receptors. However, they would be localized and are not likely to adversely affect people off-site by resulting in confirmed odor complaints. The project proposes construction of an approximately 112,463-square foot, 214-room hotel in a five-story building, surface parking, and a four-story parking garage. The project would not include any sources of significant odors that would cause complaints from surrounding uses. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 48 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The following discussion is based in part on a Biological Resources Report prepared for the project by WRA, Inc. in February 2020, as well as a Bird Safe Design Review completed in January of 2021.
Copies of these reports are attached to this Initial Study as Appendix B.
4.4.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Endangered Species Act
Individual plant and animal species listed as rare, threatened, or endangered under state and federal Endangered Species Acts are considered special-status species. Federal and state endangered species legislation has provided the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited distribution and/or low or declining populations. Permits may be required from both the USFWS and CDFW if activities associated with a proposed project would result in the take of a species listed as threatened or endangered. To “take” a listed species, as defined by the State of California, is “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill” these species. Take is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include harm of a listed species.
In addition to species listed under state and federal Endangered Species Acts, Sections 15380(b) and (c) of the CEQA Guidelines provide that all potential rare or sensitive species, or habitats capable of supporting rare species, must be considered as part of the environmental review process. These may include plant species listed by the California Native Plant Society and CDFW-listed Species of Special Concern.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits killing, capture, possession, or trade of migratory birds except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior.
Hunting and poaching are also prohibited. The taking and killing of birds resulting from an activity is not prohibited by the MBTA when the underlying purpose of that activity is not to take birds.15 Nesting birds are considered special-status species and are protected by the USFWS. The CDFW also protects migratory and nesting birds under California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800. The CDFW defines taking as causing abandonment and/or loss of reproductive efforts through disturbance.
15 United States Department of the Interior. “Memorandum M-37050. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act Does Not Prohibit Incidental Take.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/m37050.pdf.
Alviso Hotel 49 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Birds of Prey
Birds of prey, such as owls and hawks, are protected in California under provisions of the state Fish and Game Code, Section 3503.5 (1992), which states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Construction disturbance during the breeding season can result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “taking” by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).16
Sensitive Habitat Regulations
Wetland and riparian habitats are considered sensitive habitats under CEQA. They are also afforded protection under applicable federal, state, and local regulations, and are generally subject to regulation by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), CDFW, and/or the USFWS under provisions of the federal Clean Water Act (e.g., Sections 303, 304, 404) and State of California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
Fish and Game Code Section 1602
Streambeds and banks, as well as associated riparian habitat, are regulated by the CDFW per Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Work within the bed or banks of a stream or the adjacent riparian habitat requires a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW.
Regional and Local
Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (Habitat Plan) covers approximately 520,000 acres, or approximately 62 percent of Santa Clara County. It was developed and adopted through a partnership between Santa Clara County, the Cities of San José, Morgan Hill, and Gilroy, Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water), Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), USFWS, and CDFW. The Habitat Plan is intended to promote the recovery of endangered species and enhance ecological diversity and function, while accommodating planned growth in southern Santa Clara County. The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency is responsible for implementing the plan.
San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) has regulatory jurisdiction, as defined by the McAteer-Petris Act, over the Bay and its shoreline, which generally consists of the area between the Bay shoreline and a line 100 feet landward of and parallel to the shoreline. BCDC has two areas of jurisdiction: San Francisco Bay and the Shoreline Band. These areas are defined in the McAteer-Petris Act (PRC Section 66610). San Francisco Bay comprises areas that are subject to tidal action from the south end of the Bay to the Golden Gate (Point Bonita16 Formerly the California Department of Fish and Game.
Alviso Hotel 50 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Point Lobos) and to the Sacramento River line (a line between Stake Point and Simmons Point, extended northeasterly to the mouth of Marshall Cut), including all sloughs, tidelands (land lying between mean high tide and mean low tide); submerged lands (land lying below mean low tide), and marshlands. Specifically, it extends to the mean high tide line where tidal marsh is absent and up to 5 feet above mean sea level (MSL) where tidal marsh is present. The shoreline band consists of all territory located between the shoreline of San Francisco Bay as defined above and a line of 100 feet landward of and parallel with that line, but excluding any portions of such territory which are included in other areas of BCDC jurisdiction; provided that the Commission may, by resolution, exclude from its area of jurisdiction any area within the shoreline band that it finds and declares is of no regional importance to the Bay.
San José Tree Ordinance
The City of San José maintains the urban landscape by controlling the removal of ordinance trees on private property (San José Municipal Code Section 13.32). Ordinance trees are defined as trees 38 inches in circumference, or approximately 12 inches in diameter, at a height of 4.5 feet above the ground. Ordinance trees are generally mature trees that help beautify the City, slow the erosion of topsoil, minimize flood hazards, minimize the risk of landslides, increase property values, and improve local air quality. A tree removal permit is required from the City of San José for the removal of ordinance trees.
Riparian Corridor Protection and Bird-Safe Design Council Policy The City’s Riparian Corridor Protection and Bird-Safe Design Council Policy provides guidance consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the City’s Envision San José 2040 General Plan.
New buildings in existing urban infill areas are required to have a minimum 100-foot setback from riparian corridors. Additionally, new development should use materials and lighting that are designed and constructed to reduce light and glare impacts to riparian corridors and should be directed away from riparian corridors.
Bird-Safe Design Guidance includes: (1) the design of buildings and structures should avoid mirrors and large areas of reflective glass, (2) avoidance of transparent glass skyways, walkways, or entryways, (3) free-standing glass walls, and transparent building corners, (4) avoidance of funneling open space to a building façade. The area north of Highway 237, which includes the project site, is specifically mentioned in these guidelines as a location where bird safe design is an important consideration.
Alviso Hotel 51 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Existing Conditions
The project site is located within the Guadalupe River watershed, at the southern end of the San Francisco Bay.
Habitat Conditions
Field surveys completed on the site in December 2019 identified four general biotic/land cover types:
developed, ruderal herbaceous, seasonal wetland, and non-wetland waters. These habitats are described in detail below. Table 4.4-1 provides a summary of the land cover acreages on the site, and their distribution is depicted in Figure 4.4-1.
Table 4.4-1: Habitats on the Project Site
Biological Community Area (acres) Percentage of Site
Non-Sensitive
Developed 3.00 48%
Ruderal Herbaceous 2.49 40%
Sensitive
Seasonal Wetland 0.16 3%
Non-Wetland Waters 0.58 9%
Total 6.23 100%
Developed Land
The majority of the site is undeveloped, however (48%) of the habitat type is considered developed land because it has been previously graded. The northern portion of the project site consists of mostly bare ground which has been graded. Grading appears to be active and recent, as the only vegetation in the developed areas consist of sparse cover by annual grass seedlings. Due to the early stage of growth, vegetation in developed areas was not identifiable.
Ruderal Herbaceous
The project site has been highly altered and disturbed. As a result, the vegetation is characterized by non-native, herbaceous species typical of ruderal, highly disturbed conditions. Ruderal herbaceous vegetation is present along the slopes of the Guadalupe River canal and within the southern portion of the project site below the recently graded area. Dominant species include black mustard (Brassica nigra), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), smilo grass (Stipa miliacea var. miliacea), and oat grass (Avena spp.). Scattered coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) was present in the eastern portion of the project site, and other shrub species are occasionally present at low cover, including Italian buckthorn (Rhamnus alaterna) and tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca).
Source: Esri World Imagery; WRA, Inc., April 26, 2021.
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\29000\29259\GIS\ArcMap\Impact_20200114.mxd Alviso Hotel
Biological Resources Assessment
Santa Clara County, California
0 100 200
Feet ±
Figure 6. Project Footprint
Sources: Esri World Imagery, WRA | Prepared By: pkobylarz, 4/26/2021 Project Area (6.23 ac)
Project Footprint (3.06 ac)
Top of Bank
100ft TOB Setback
Wetland Avoidance Buffer (2.14 ac.)
Plan Details
Biological Communities:
Sensitive
Seasonal Wetland (0.16 ac)
Non-wetland Waters (0.58 ac)
Non-Sensitive
Ruderal Herbaceous (2.49 ac)
Developed (3.00 ac)
0 100 200
Feet ±
rint
By: pkobylarz, 4/26/2021
Project Area (6.23 ac)
Project Footprint (3.06 ac)
Top of Bank
100ft TOB Setback
Wetland Avoidance Buffer (2.14 ac.)
Plan Details
Biological Communities:
Sensitive
Seasonal Wetland (0.16 ac)
Non-wetland Waters (0.58 ac)
Non-Sensitive
Ruderal Herbaceous (2.49 ac)
Developed (3.00 ac)
BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES PRESENT WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA FIGURE 4.4-1 Alviso Hotel 53 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Seasonal Wetland
Three potential seasonal wetlands are present in the shallow depressions in the terrace northwest of the non-wetland water features, discussed below. These depressions are characterized by a mix of hydrophytic and halophytic vegetation such as pickleweed (Salicornia pacifica), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), and beardless wildrye (Elymus triticoides). The edges of these features transition into the vegetation characteristic of the ruderal herbaceous biological community. Shrubs and trees are not present.
Non-Wetland Waters
The non-wetland waters feature, present along the southern boundary of the project site, is comprised of the relict portion of the historic Guadalupe River channel. Between 1960 and 1968, the Guadalupe River was channelized, creating the isolated drainage feature. No inlet or outlet was observed during the site visit. Despite having no apparent inlet, based on historic aerial imagery, this feature appears to be perennially inundated, with only slight fluctuations in the water level. Non-wetland waters within the project site do not have any tidal connection to the Bay or the Guadalupe River, and therefore are not subject to BCDC’s Bay jurisdiction. The project site is also greater than 100 feet inland from nearby tidal vegetation, at its closest, and therefore is not within the Shoreline Band.
The non-wetland waters feature is almost entirely unvegetated, though a narrow band of hydrophytic vegetation is present around the water’s edge comprised primarily of pickleweed and salt grass. This narrow band of vegetation was too small to map separately and was included as part of the nonwetland waters feature.
Special-Status Species
Special-Status Plant Species
Based upon a review of the resources and databases listed in the Biological Resources Report (Appendix B), 51 special-status plant species were determined to have some potential to occur on the project site. Of these species, two have moderate or high potential to occur within the project site, while the remaining 49 species are unlikely to occur as a result of the high level of disturbance and a lack of suitable habitat elements such as vernal pools, chaparral, and woodland habitats or serpentine substrate. The two species with moderate or high potential to occur within the project site are Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdonii) and San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquinana). They are discussed in detail below.
Congdon’s Tarplant. Cogdon’s tarplant is a California Rare Plant Rank 1B species, meaning that it is considered extinct, rare, threatened, or endangered throughout its range in California. Congdon’s tarplant is an annual herb in the composite family (Asteraceae) that has a variable blooming period extending from June through November. It occurs in valley and foothill grasslands, particularly those with alkaline substrates, at an elevation ranging from 0 to 755 feet. The closest known occurrence of Congdon’s tarplant is approximately 0.5 miles east of the project site.
Based on the proximity of the site to known occurrences of the species and the species ability to grow in disturbed habitats, it was determined that Congdon’s tarplant has a high potential to occur at Alviso Hotel 54 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
the edges of the non-wetland waters feature and in mesic areas17 on the terrace above the nonwetland waters feature, which have not already been graded. Congdon’s tarplant is most commonly found in seasonal alkaline wetland depressions that are periodically disturbed. Therefore, it may be present on the site.
San Joaquin Spearscale. San Joaquin Spearscale is a California Rare Plant Rank 1B species, meaning that it is considered extinct, rare, threatened, or endangered throughout its range in California San Joaquin spearscale is an annual herb in the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae) that blooms from April to October. It typically occurs in seasonal alkali sink scrub and wetlands in chenopod scrub, alkali meadow, and valley and foothill grassland habitat at elevations ranging from 0 to 2,740 feet in elevation. The nearest known occurrence of San Joaquin spearscale is over 4.5 miles north of the site, in the Pacific Commons Preserve in the City of Fremont, where it was observed growing on the edge of a created vernal pool.
San Joaquin spearscale is a disturbance-tolerant species, and within the project site it has a moderate potential to occur at the edges of the non-wetland waters feature and in mesic areas on the terrace above the non-wetland waters feature, which have not already been graded.
Special-Status Wildlife Species
No federal or state listed species are expected to occur on the site. However, four California species of special concern, the San Francisco common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), may be present on the site due to the potential of suitable nesting and/or foraging habitat adjacent to the site for the San Francisco common yellowthroat, white-tailed kite, and burrowing owl, and due to the potential of suitable habitat on-site for the northern harrier. These species are discussed in detail below.
San Francisco (Saltmarsh) Common Yellowthroat. This subspecies of the common yellowthroat is a CDFW species of special concern with moderate potential to occur on the site. The species is found in freshwater marshes, coastal swales, riparian thickets, brackish marshes, and saltwater marshes.
The breeding range extends from Tomales Bay in the north, Carquinez Strait to the east, and Santa Cruz County to the south. The species requires thick, continuous cover such as tall grasses, tule patches, or riparian vegetation down to the water surface for foraging and prefers willows for nesting.
Foraging habitat for this species is not present around water features contained within the project site but is present along the adjacent Guadalupe river corridor in dense cattail patches. Nesting may occur in small shrubs along the edge of the project site; therefore, the species has moderate potential to occur.
White-tailed Kite. The white-tailed kite is a CDFW fully protected species with moderate potential to occur on the site. The species is found in open to semi-open habitats throughout the lower elevations of California, including grasslands, savannahs, woodlands, agricultural areas, and wetlands. Whitetailed kites are year-round residents of the state, establishing nesting territories that encompass open areas with healthy prey populations, and snags, shrubs, trees, or other nesting substrates. In the 17 A mesic habitat is a type of habitat with a moderate or well-balanced supply of moisture.
Alviso Hotel 55 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
project vicinity, white-tailed kites are known to nest along the northern edge of Santa Clara County throughout the open areas edging the San Francisco Bay. Suitable foraging habitat for the whitetailed kite is present on the project site. Although suitably large trees for nesting are not present within the project boundaries, suitable nesting sites are present in trees near the site.
Northern Harrier. The Northern harrier is CDFW species of special concern with moderate potential to occur on the site. The species occurs as a resident and winter visitor in open habitats throughout most of California, including freshwater and brackish marshes, grasslands and fields, agricultural areas and deserts. Harriers typically nest in treeless areas with patches of dense, relatively tall, vegetation, the composition of which is highly variable; nests are placed on the ground and often located near water or within wetlands.
Foraging habitat for this species is present on the project site in developed ruderal herbaceous areas, as well as in the vicinity within wetland and ruderal herbaceous and other open space areas. Nesting opportunities for this species are limited within the project site, but nesting may occur in vegetation along the edges of the season wetland area. Due to the presence of nearby foraging habitat and potential nesting habitat, this species has moderate potential to occur on the project site.
Burrowing Owl. The burrowing owl is a CDFW species of special concern and a USFWS bird of conservation concern. The species occurs as a year-round resident and winter visitor in much of California’s lowlands, inhabiting open areas with sparse or non-existent tree or shrub canopies.
Typical habitat is annual or perennial grassland, although human-modified areas such as agricultural lands and airports are also used. This species is dependent on burrowing mammals to provide the burrows that are characteristically used for shelter and nesting, and in northern California is typically found in close association with California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi). Manmade substrates such as pipes or debris piles may also be occupied in place of burrows. Prey consists of insects and small vertebrates. Breeding typically takes place from March to July.
Burrowing owl is routinely documented in the vicinity of the project site; the closest occurrence documented is 0.3 miles southeast of the project site. The grasslands on the project site provide suitable nesting, foraging, and roosting habitat, and the site is mapped as burrowing owl habitat by the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan.
Alviso Hotel 56 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.4.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) or United States Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS)?
2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW
or USFWS?
3) 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?
4) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Impact BIO-1: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Special Status Plant Species
Two special-status plant species have a moderate or high potential to occur in the project area based on the availability of suitable habitat, the presence of associated plant species, and the proximity to Alviso Hotel 57 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
documented occurrences. None of the special-status plant species covered under the Habitat Plan have potential to occur in the project area.
The majority of the project area has either already been graded or is located within the Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer, discussed below as part of mitigation measure BIO MM-3.1, in which no impacts would occur. However, Congdon’s tarplant and San Joaquin spearscale could occur in mesic areas of ruderal herbaceous vegetation outside of the Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer, and these plants could be impacted (either damaged or removed) by construction activities, such as grading and hardscaping. If present in the project area, impacts to the aforementioned special-status plant species could be significant under CEQA.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts to Congdon’s Tarplant and San Joaquin spearscale to a less than significant level.
MM BIO-1.1: Protocol-level surveys, as defined by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), shall be conducted by a qualified biologist during the documented bloom period of Congdon’s tarplant (May to November) and San Joaquin spearscale (April to October) to determine the presence of these species in areas to be disturbed.
Survey timing may fluctuate based on blooming periods of appropriate reference site locations. The biologist shall submit a report indicating the results of the survey to the City’s Director of PBCE or the Director’s designee for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permit.
If special-status plant surveys result in negative findings, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation would be required. Similarly, if special-status plant surveys find either species are observed within the project area but can be avoided, these plants would not be impacted, and no mitigation would be required. However, if either species is found to be present, the implementation of following measures would reduce project impact on special-status plants to less than significant:
• If a population of Congdon’s tarplant or San Joaquin spearscale is identified in the project footprint and cannot be avoided, mitigation for loss of individuals shall be completed. Mitigation shall be achieved by establishing a new population in the seasonal wetland and ruderal herbaceous vegetation that occur within the Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer on the project site. This area shall not be developed by the project, and shall contain suitable habitat types for establishing a new population. Mitigation shall be a 1:1 ratio of plant establishment, on an acreage basis.
• A Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) shall be completed by a qualified biologist or botanist prior to removal of the individuals. The HMMP shall include a detailed explanation of how the new population would be established, as well as an explanation of what metrics shall be used to measure the success criteria of the new Alviso Hotel 58 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
population. The HMMP shall include details for monitoring criteria to quantitatively sample the Congdon’s tarplant or San Joaquin spearscale population and determine the number of
germinated/surviving plants. This monitoring shall continue annually or until the success criteria described in the HMMP has been met; once annual monitoring has documented that a self-sustaining population has been successfully established on site, this mitigation measure shall be determined to have been met. If after five years of implementation of the new population the success criteria has not been met, adaptive management measures created by a qualified biologist or botanist shall be implemented. The HMMP shall be submitted to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permit.
Special Status Wildlife Species
Of the 42 special-status wildlife species known to occur in the greater vicinity of the project, four were determined to have moderate or high potential to occur on site: San Francisco common yellowthroat, white-tailed kite, northern harrier, and burrowing owl. No special-status birds were observed within the project area during the site assessment.
None of the bird species listed above are state or federally listed as endangered, threatened or candidates for listing. White-tailed kite is listed as a California fully protected species, while northern harrier, burrowing owl and San Francisco common yellowthroat are CDFW Species of Special Concern (SSC). These designations require extra consideration for buffer zones around active nests, but otherwise require protection and surveys to be completed in the same manner as other species protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). If nesting birds are present during construction, they may be impacted directly or indirectly by operation of equipment, increased noise, and increased human presence. Impacts to common native nesting birds and the aforementioned special-status birds would be considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts to nesting birds to a less than significant level.
MM BIO-1.2: For the protection of special-status birds and native nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), future project activities shall occur from September 1 – January 31 (inclusive) outside of the nesting season, to the extent feasible.
If work cannot be scheduled to occur outside of the nesting season, and project activities (grading, staging, etc.,) are initiated during the nesting season (February 1 – August 31, inclusive), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey no more than 14 days prior to the start of project activities, such as grading or staging, and prior to issuance of any grading permit. If no active nests are identified during the surveys, no impacts will occur to birds and work shall progress without restriction. If active nests are identified, a no-disturbance buffer around the nest shall be implemented Alviso Hotel 59 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
to avoid impacts to nesting birds. Buffers shall be determined by a qualified biologist, and typically range from 25 feet to 500 feet depending on the species, nest location, and protection status of that species. After an active nest is determined to no longer be active, because of young fledging or predation, the buffer around the nest shall be removed and work shall progress without restriction.
Although ground squirrels are not active on the site, burrow surrogates that may become occupied by burrowing owls exist in crevices in stockpiles and manmade culverts adjacent to water features.
Burrowing owl is common in the vicinity of the site, and may disperse through the project area or potentially use it as wintering or breeding habitat. Burrowing owl is a CDFW SSC, and is therefore given special considerations with regards to no-work buffers and any actions that could exclude the species from suitable or occupied habitat. Burrowing owls that could be present on the site could be directly harmed if burrows or burrow surrogate structures are graded, excavated, or otherwise disassembled. Any impacts to burrowing owls or occupied burrows as a result of project activities would be considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts to burrowing owls to a less than significant level.
MM BIO-1.3: Prior to issuance of any grading, building, or demolition permits, the project applicant shall implement Condition 15 of the Habitat Plan and pay burrowing owl impact fees to the Habitat Agency. Pursuant to Condition 15, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys in all suitable habitat areas. To maximize the likelihood of detecting owls, the preconstruction survey shall last a minimum of three hours. The survey shall begin one hour before sunrise and continue until two hours after sunrise (for three hours total) or begin two hours before sunset and continue until one hour after sunset. Additional time may be required for large project sites. A minimum of two surveys shall be conducted (if owls are detected on the first survey, a second survey is not needed). All owls observed shall be counted and their locations mapped. Surveys shall conclude no more than two calendar days prior to the start of any construction. Therefore, the project applicant must begin surveys no more than four days prior to construction (two days of surveying plus up to two days between surveys and construction). To avoid last-minute changes in schedule or contracting that may occur if burrowing owls are found, the project applicant may also conduct a preliminary survey up to fourteen (14) days before start of any construction. This preliminary survey may count as the first of the two required surveys as long as the second survey concludes no more than two calendar days in advance of construction.
If evidence of western burrowing owls is found during the breeding season (February 1–August 31, inclusive), the project applicant shall avoid all nest sites that could be disturbed by project construction during the remainder of the breeding season or while the nest is occupied by adults or young.
Alviso Hotel 60 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Avoidance shall include establishment of a 250-foot non-disturbance buffer zone around nests. Construction may occur outside of the 250-foot nondisturbance buffer zone. Construction may occur inside of the 250-foot nondisturbance buffer during the breeding season if:
• the nest is not disturbed, and
• the project applicant develops an avoidance, minimization, and monitoring plan is approved by the Habitat Agency and the Wildlife Agencies prior to project construction.
If evidence of western burrowing owls is found during the non-breeding season (September 1–January 31, inclusive), the project applicant shall establish a 250-foot non-disturbance buffer around occupied burrows as determined by a qualified biologist. Construction activities outside of this 250-foot buffer are allowed. Construction activities within the nondisturbance buffer are allowed if the certain criteria are met, as outlined in the Habitat Plan Conditions Implementation Guide, in order to prevent owls from abandoning important overwintering sites.
The project applicant shall submit a report disclosing evidence of compliance with the Habitat Plan to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee prior to issuance of any grading, building, or demolition permits.
With the implementation of BIO MM-1.1 through BIO MM-1.3, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Impact BIO-2: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Riparian Habitat
As described previously, the City of San José has a riparian buffer policy meant to limit development near riparian corridors and protect sensitive riparian resources. Under the City’s policy, the required riparian setback for the Guadalupe River extends 100 feet landward from the top of bank. In addition, the Habitat Plan requires a 100-foot setback from the top of bank for projects that are adjacent to Category One streams, such as the Guadalupe River. The project is set back approximately 150 feet from the Guadalupe River and 100 feet from the top of the river bank. No construction activities, such as staging, would occur within the setback. The project has been designed to avoid impacts on the riparian buffer and no project activities would occur within the 100-foot riparian setback.
Additionally, the project would be setback 50 feet from the edge of the wetland and non-wetland Alviso Hotel 61 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
water features south and east of the project site, thus avoiding impacts to these areas. The project, therefore, would not result in a significant impact to a riparian corridor.
Sensitive Natural Community
The project area is located within an urban area in which a number of invasive weeds are known to occur. Movement of equipment to and from the site has the potential to result in the introduction or spread of invasive weeds. The introduction and/or spread of invasive weeds would be considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts due to the introduction and spread of invasive weeds to a less than significant level.
MM BIO-2.1: All seeds and straw materials used on site shall be composed of weed-free rice (or similar acceptable material) straw, and all gravel and fill material shall be certified weed-free. Proof of certification, in the form of a California Department of Food and Agriculture Form 66-079 “Certificate of Quarantine Compliance,” or equivalent certification from a qualified biologist, shall be submitted to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee prior to issuance of any grading, building, or demolition permits.
During construction, vehicles and equipment shall be washed (including wheels, undercarriages, and bumpers) before leaving and after entering the project footprint. Vehicles shall be cleaned at existing construction yards or legal operating car washes. This measure shall be printed on all construction documents, contracts, and project plans.
Following construction, temporary impact zones or any disturbed ground that will not be under hardscape, landscaped, or maintained, shall be reseeded with a native seed mixture as verified by a qualified biologist. Seed mixtures applied for erosion control shall be composed of native species appropriate for the site in order to provide long-term erosion control and slow colonization by invasive non-native plants. The project applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape plan identifying the areas to be reseeded and the native seed mixture to be used and submit the plan to the Director of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee for review and approval.
As described in Section 4.4.1.2 previously, the project site contains two sensitive communities:
seasonal wetlands and non-wetland waters. Additional information and discussion of impacts to these habitats, such as wetlands, are described in further detail in the response to Impact BIO-3 below, and mitigation measure BIO MM-3.1 and BIO MM-3.2 would reduce impacts to sensitive natural communities to a less than significant level. The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, Alviso Hotel 62 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
policies, regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS with implementation of MM BIO-2.1. (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Impact BIO-3: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
The project area contains two sensitive aquatic communities: seasonal wetland and non-wetland waters. Any impacts to these aquatic communities would be potentially significant. Without proper erosion and sedimentation measures, ground-disturbing activities and vegetation removal also increase the likelihood of sedimentation occurring in adjacent seasonal wetland and non-wetland waters within the site outside of the proposed limit of disturbance. Additionally, earth work and equipment use may result in erosion, siltation, or discharge of fuels or other construction equipmentrelated substances into the seasonal wetlands. Discharge of sediment or hazardous materials may impact potentially jurisdictional features within the site.
In the absence of suitable mitigation measures, any impacts to seasonal wetland would be potentially significant. The proposed project shall implement Conditions 3 and 12 of the Habitat Plan to reduce construction impacts to streams, wetlands, and riparian habitat. These Habitat Plan conditions require avoidance of wetlands and require construction setbacks for streams and riparian area during construction. Mitigation measures, based on these conditions, are outlined below.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts to wetlands and non-wetland waters to a less than significant level.
MM BIO-3.1: Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits, the project applicant shall establish a Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer at least 50 feet from the edge of the wetland or non-wetland water features and at least 100 feet from the edge of the riparian area, and all grading and construction activities shall occur outside of this area. The Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer shall be temporarily staked prior to grading and construction activities, using orange construction fencing, lathe and flagging or its equivalent, by a qualified biologist to ensure that construction equipment and personnel avoid these features. Fencing shall be erected along the outer edge of the site, between the site and any adjacent wetland, pond, or riparian area, for the duration of project construction. Photo documentation shall be submitted to the Director of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee.
Typical avoidance and minimization measures, such as those listed in Table 6-2 of the Habitat Plan or measures deemed appropriate by a qualified biologist, shall be implemented during construction. To this end, all personnel working adjacent to the Wetland and Riparian Avoidance Buffer shall be trained by a qualified biologist in the avoidance and minimization measures outlined in Table 6-2 of the Habitat Plan. Training materials shall be Alviso Hotel 63 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
submitted to the Director of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee upon request.
MM BIO-3.2: The following measures shall be implemented to ensure avoidance of erosion or pollution to wetlands during construction activity:
• Appropriate erosion control measures (e.g., fiber rolls, filter fences, vegetative buffer strips) shall be used on site to reduce siltation and runoff of contaminants into wetlands or non-wetland waters. Filter fences, if used, shall be of material that will not trap reptiles and amphibians (i.e., no mesh, woven, or netted material and no high density plastic fencing). Erosion control blankets shall be used as a last resort because of their tendency to biodegrade slowly and trap reptiles and amphibians.
• Erosion-control measures shall be placed between the wetland or pond and the outer edge of the Project site. Fiber rolls used for erosion control shall be certified as free of noxious weed seed. • Vehicles and equipment shall be parked on pavement, existing roads, and previously disturbed area.
• No construction or maintenance vehicles shall be refueled within 200 feet of avoided wetlands and non-wetland waters unless a bermed and lined refueling area is constructed and hazardous material absorbent pads are available in the case of a spill. • Used cleaning materials (e.g., liquids) shall be disposed of safely, and if necessary, taken off site for proper disposal. Used disposable globes should be retained for safe disposal in sealed bags.
With the implementation of BIO MM-3.1 and BIO MM-3.2, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) 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. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) The project site is in the vicinity of known avian breeding and migratory habitat. Building features, most often those associated with lighting or glass components (i.e., glazing), can attract birds from these nearby habitats and cause mortality in the form of collisions resulting from confusion.
A review of the project design was completed by WRA, Inc. to determine the potential for impacts from bird collisions (refer to Appendix B). WRA determined that although the design of the project would result in a low overall risk for bird collisions, some design elements such as proposed glazing on façades facing wetland areas and the Guadalupe River, as well as landscaping adjacent to façades Alviso Hotel 64 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
with untreated glazing, do still pose a relatively increased risk. Any impacts to local or migrating birds resulting from building design features that are considered hazardous would be considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce impacts from bird collisions to a less than significant level:
MM BIO-4.1: Façade Treatments. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the project applicant shall ensure that all glazing on the southern façade of the building facing identified wetland areas and the Guadalupe River is treated with birdfriendly glazing treatments. Examples of bird-friendly glazing treatments include the use of opaque glass, the covering of clear glass surface with patterns, the use of paned glass with fenestration patterns, and the use of external screens over non-reflective glass. For the remaining building façades, no more than 10 percent of the surface area of façades between the ground and 60 feet above ground shall have untreated glazing. The final building design shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist for compliance, and the results of the review provided to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.
Landscaping. Any trees used in landscaping that are adjacent to areas of untreated glazing shall have heights that do not exceed the first story of the building. This can be achieved through selection of species and/or through pruning. In these areas, tree species shall be selected that do not provide valuable resources for birds (e.g., food such as berries or other fruits, or cavities for nesting in their adult state) and that are not known to grow exceptionally tall (avoid oaks, redwoods, and eucalyptus trees). The final landscape plan shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist for compliance, and the results of the review provided to the City of San José Director of Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee, prior to issuance of any building permit.
With incorporation of MM BIO-4.1, 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. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
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. (Less than Significant Impact)
The City of San José maintains the urban landscape partly by controlling the removal of ordinance trees on private property (San José Municipal Code Section 13.32). Ordinance trees are defined as trees 38 inches in circumference or more, or approximately 12 inches in diameter, at a height of 4.5 feet above natural grade. Ordinance trees are generally mature trees that help beautify the City, slow Alviso Hotel 65 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
erosion of topsoil, minimize flood hazards, minimize the risk of landslides, increase property values, and improve local air quality. A tree removal permit is required from the City of San José for the removal of ordinance trees.
The removed trees would be replaced according to tree replacement ratios required by the City, as provided in Table 4.4-2 below, as amended.
Table 4.4-2: Tree Replacement Ratios
Circumference of
Tree to be
Removed
Type of Tree to be Removed Minimum Size of
Each
Native Non-Native Orchard Replacement Tree
38 inches or more 5:1 4:1 3:1 15-gallon
19 up to 38 inches 3:1 2:1 none 15-gallon
Less than 19 inches 1:1 1:1 none 15-gallon
x:x = tree replacement to tree loss ratio
Note: Trees greater than or equal to 38-inch circumference shall not be removed unless a Tree Removal Permit, or equivalent, has been approved for the removal of such trees. For Multifamily Residential, Commercial, and Industrial properties, a permit is required for removal of trees of any size.
A 38-inch tree equals 12.1 inches in diameter.
A 24-inch box tree equals two 15-gallon trees
Single-family and two-dwelling properties may be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio.
The only mature tree on the project site is a palm tree located in the eastern portion of the site. The one tree would be removed; therefore, the project would conservatively be required to plant five replacement trees, at a 5:1 ratio18. The project would exceed this requirement by planting approximately 100 trees on-site. The species of trees to be planted would be determined in consultation with the City Arborist and staff from the Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. The replacement trees shall be water-efficient landscaping, which conforms to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
In the event the project site does not have sufficient area to accommodate the required tree mitigation, one or more of the following measures will be implemented, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Director’s designee, at the development permit stage:
• The size of a 15-gallon replacement tree may be increased to 24-inch box and count as two replacement trees to be planted on the project site, at the development permit stage. • Pay off-site tree replacement fee(s) to the City, prior to the issuance of grading permit(s), in accordance to the City Council approved Fee Resolution. The City will use the off-site tree replacement fee(s) to plant trees at alternative sites. 18 This conservatively assumes that the tree to be removed is a native tree with a circumference of 38 inches or more, therefore requiring replacement at a 5:1 ratio.
Alviso Hotel 66 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
The project proposes to remove the existing tree on site and plant approximately 100 trees, increasing the total number of trees on site. The project would therefore exceed the tree replacement ratios shown in Table 4.4-2 above, and would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. (Less Than Significant Impact)
Impact BIO-6: The project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
The proposed project is a covered project under the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. The Habitat Plan defines measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts on covered species and their habitats while allowing for the implementation of certain covered projects. Chapter 6 of the Habitat Plan includes detailed and comprehensive conditions to avoid and minimize impacts on the 18 “covered species” (nine animal species and nine plant species) included in the Plan area.19 In conformance with the Habitat Plan, project proponents are required to pay impact fees in accordance with the types and acreage of habitat or “land cover” impacted, and to implement conservation measures specified by the Habitat Plan. Land cover impacts are used because it is the best predictor of potential species habitat, and is applicable to all of the covered species (with the exception of the burrowing owl). Additional fees (i.e., specialty fees) in-lieu of providing compensatory mitigation are imposed for projects that impact serpentine habitat, wetlands, and burrowing owls, and for certain projects that result in atmospheric nitrogen emissions, although in some cases, project proponents may provide land to restore or create habitat types protected by the Habitat Plan in lieu of payment of fees.
Applicable Habitat Plan Conditions
Condition 1 - Avoid Direct Impacts on Legally Protected Plant and Wildlife Species. Several wildlife species that occur in the project vicinity are protected under state and federal laws. Some of these animal species are listed as fully protected under the California Fish and Wildlife Code (e.g., whitetailed kite), and eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Further, all native bird species and their nests are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code. Actions conducted under the Habitat Plan must comply with the provisions of the MBTA and California Fish and Wildlife Code. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1.1 through 4.1 would ensure the project complies with Condition 1 of the Habitat Plan. 19 The covered plant species are: Tiburon Indian Paintbrush (Castilleja affinis ssp. Neglecta), Coyote ceanothus (Ceanothus ferrisiae), Mount Hamilton thistle (Cirsium fontinales var. campylon), Santa Clara Valley dudleya (Dudleya abramsii ssp. Setchellii), Fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria lilacea), Loma Prieta hoita (Hoita strobilina), Smooth lessingia (Lessingia micradenia var. glabrata), Metcalf Canyon jewelflower (Streptanthus albidus ssp.
Albidus), and Most beautiful jewelflower (Streptanthus albidus ssp. Peramoenus). The covered animal species are:
Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis), Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii), Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata), and Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus).
Alviso Hotel 67 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Condition 3 - Maintain Hydrologic Conditions and Protect Water Quality. Condition 3 applies to all projects and identifies a set of programmatic best management practices (BMPs), performance standards, and control measures to minimize increases of peak discharge of storm water and to reduce runoff of pollutants to protect water quality, including during project construction. These requirements include pre-construction, construction site, and post-construction actions. Preconstruction conditions are site design planning approaches that protect water quality by preventing and reducing the adverse impacts of stormwater pollutants and increases in peak runoff rate and volume. They include hydrologic source control measures that focus on the protection of natural resources. Construction site conditions include source and treatment control measure to prevent pollutants from leaving the construction site and minimizing site erosion and local stream sedimentation during construction. Post-construction conditions include measures for stormwater treatment and flow control. Mitigation measure MM BIO-3.2 would ensure the project complies with Condition 3 of the Habitat Plan.
Condition 11 – Stream and Riparian Setbacks. Condition 11 applies to covered projects that may affect streams and associated riparian vegetation within the Habitat Plan area. This condition requires new covered projects to adhere to setbacks from creeks and streams and associated riparian vegetation to minimize and avoid impacts on aquatic and riparian land cover types, covered species, and wildlife corridors. The required setback for the reach of the Guadalupe River (a Category One stream) adjacent to the project site is 100 feet from the top of bank. The project would be set back at least 100 feet from the Guadalupe River top of bank, and would therefore comply with Condition 11 of the Habitat Plan.
Condition 12 - Wetland and Pond Avoidance and Minimization. Condition 12 applies to covered projects that would directly or indirectly affect wetlands or ponds. The purpose of Condition 12 is to minimize impacts on wetlands and ponds and avoid impacts on high quality wetlands and ponds by prescribing vegetated stormwater filtration features, proper disposal of cleaning materials, and other requirements. Project proponents are required to pay a wetland fee for impacts on wetlands and ponds to cover the cost of restoration or creation of aquatic land cover types required by the Habitat Plan. Covered activities can avoid paying the wetland fee if they avoid impacts on wetlands. The project would be required to implement mitigation measure MM BIO-3.1 to ensure compliance with Condition 12 of the Habitat Plan.
Condition 15 - Western Burrowing Owl. Condition 15 requires the implementation of measures to avoid and minimize direct impacts on burrowing owls, including pre-construction surveys, establishment of 250-foot non-disturbance buffers around active nests during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), establishment of 250-foot non-disturbance buffers around occupied burrows during the nonbreeding season, and construction monitoring. Pre-construction surveys for burrowing owls are required by the Habitat Plan in areas mapped as breeding habitat, which include the project site. As mentioned above, additional fees in-lieu of providing compensatory mitigation are imposed for Habitat Plan covered projects that impact burrowing owls. Because the project site includes habitat for burrowing owls, as mapped by the Habitat Plan, a specialty fee for impacts on habitat for this species would apply. The project would pay all applicable fees and implement mitigation measure MM BIO-1.2 to ensure compliance with Condition 15 of the Habitat Plan.
Condition 17 – Tricolored Blackbird. Condition 17 calls for surveys of project areas within 250 feet of any riparian, coastal and valley freshwater marsh (perennial wetlands), or pond land cover types Alviso Hotel 68 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
for potential tricolored blackbird nesting substrate. The project site is located within a designated tricolored blackbird survey area under the Habitat Plan. Although potentially suitable nesting habitat was identified along the Guadalupe River, no tricolored blackbirds were observed within or immediately adjacent to the project site during the site survey conducted during the breeding season, and the species is determined to be absent. Even though it is likely that blackbirds are absent from the project site and all areas within 250 feet of the site, based on the species’ known distribution, the project applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with this condition for Habitat Plan compliance purposes. The following standard Habitat Plan conditions would apply to the project:
Standard Habitat Plan Conditions: The project would be required to implement the following standard Habitat Plan conditions to demonstrate compliance with Condition 17. • Implement Condition 17 of the Habitat Plan. To avoid direct impacts of covered activities on nesting tricolored blackbird colonies, the following procedures will be implemented. o Preconstruction Survey. Prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities, a qualified biologist will:
▪ Make his/her best effort to determine if there has been nesting at the site in the past 5 years. This includes checking the CNDDB, contacting local experts, and looking for evidence of historical nesting (i.e., old nests). ▪ If no nesting in the past 5 years is evident, conduct a preconstruction survey in areas identified in the habitat survey as supporting potential tricolored blackbird nesting habitat. Surveys will be made at the appropriate times of year when nesting use is expected to occur. The surveys will document the presence or absence of nesting colonies of tricolored blackbird. Surveys will conclude no more than two calendar days prior to construction.
To avoid last minute changes in schedule or contracting that may occur if an active nest is found, the project proponent may also conduct a preliminary survey up to 14 days before construction. If a tricolored blackbird nesting colony is present (through step 1 or 2 above), a 250-foot buffer will be applied from the outer edge of all hydric vegetation associated with the site and the site plus buffer will be avoided (see below for additional avoidance and minimization details). The Wildlife Agencies will be notified immediately of nest locations.
o Avoidance and Minimization. If tricolored blackbird colonies are identified during the breeding season, covered activities will be prohibited within a 250-foot no-activity buffer zone around the outer edge of all hydric vegetation associated with the colony.
This buffer may be reduced in areas with dense forest, buildings, or other habitat features between the construction activities and the active nest colony, or where there is sufficient topographic relief to protect the colony from excessive noise or visual disturbance. Depending on site characteristics, the sensitivity of the colony, and surrounding land uses, the buffer zone may be increased. Land uses potentially affecting a colony will be observed by a qualified biologist to verify that the activity is not disrupting the colony. If it is, the buffer will be increased. Implementing Entity technical staff will coordinate with the Wildlife Agencies and evaluate exceptions to the minimum no-activity buffer distance on a case-by-case basis.
Alviso Hotel 69 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
o Construction Monitoring. If construction takes place during the breeding season when an active colony is present, a qualified biologist will monitor construction to ensure that the 250-foot buffer zone is enforced. If monitoring indicates that construction outside of the buffer is affecting a breeding colony, the buffer will be increased if space allows (e.g., move staging areas farther away). If space does not allow, construction will cease until the colony abandons the site or until the end of the breeding season, whichever occurs first. The biological monitor will also conduct training of construction personnel on the avoidance procedures, buffer zones, and protocols in the event that tricolored blackbirds fly into an active construction zone (i.e., outside the buffer zone).
Project’s Overall Compliance with the Habitat Plan
The project is subject to applicable SCVHP conditions and fees (including the nitrogen deposition fee) prior to issuance of any grading permits. The project applicant would be required to submit the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Private Application form to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement (PBCE) or the Director’s designee for approval and payment of the nitrogen deposition fee prior to the issuance of a grading permit.20 As described above, implementation of mitigation measures and standard Habitat Plan conditions, along with payment of all applicable fees, would ensure the project’s compliance with the Habitat Plan. (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) 20 The Habitat Plan and supporting materials can be viewed at www.scv-habitatplan.org.
Alviso Hotel 70 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The discussion in this section is based in part on an Archaeological Survey Report prepared for the project by Holman & Associates, in November 2015. The report is included as Appendix C.
4.5.1 Environmental Setting
The project site is located in Santa Clara Valley, where Native American occupation extended over 5,000 to 8,000 years and possibly longer. Before European settlement, Native Americans resided in the area that encompasses the project site. The South Bay Area’s favorable environment during the prehistoric period included alluvial plains, foothills, many water courses, and bay margins that provided an abundance of wild food and other resources.
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
National Historic Preservation Act
Federal protection is legislated by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and the Archaeological Resource Protection Act of 1979. These laws maintain processes for determination of the effects on historical properties eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Section 106 of the NHPA and related regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 800) constitute the primary federal regulatory framework guiding cultural resources investigations and require consideration of effects on properties that are listed or eligible for listing in the NRHP. Impacts to properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA.
California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) is administered by the State Office of Historic Preservation and encourages protection of resources of architectural, historical, archeological, and cultural significance. The CRHR identifies historic resources for state and local planning purposes and affords protections under CEQA. Under Public Resources Code Section 5024.1(c), a resource may be eligible for listing in the CRHR if it meets any of the NRHP criteria.21 Historical resources eligible for listing in the CRHR must meet the significance criteria described previously and retain enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to convey the reasons for their significance. A resource that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the CRHR if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific data.
The concept of integrity is essential to identifying the important physical characteristics of historical resources and, therefore, in evaluating adverse changes to them. Integrity is defined as “the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance.” The processes of determining integrity are similar for both the CRHR and NRHP and use the same seven variables or aspects to define integrity 21 California Office of Historic Preservation. “CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6.” March 14, 2006.
Alviso Hotel 71 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
that are used to evaluate a resource's eligibility for listing. These seven characteristics include 1) location, 2) design, 3) setting, 4) materials, 5) workmanship, 6) feeling, and 7) association.
California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act The California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act applies to both state and private lands. The act requires that upon discovery of human remains, construction or excavation activity must cease, and the county coroner be notified.
Public Resources Code Sections 5097 and 5097.98
Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines specifies procedures to be used in the event of an unexpected discovery of Native American human remains on non-federal land. These procedures are outlined in Public Resources Code Sections 5097 and 5097.98. These codes protect such remains from disturbance, vandalism, and inadvertent destruction, establish procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project, and establish the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) as the authority to resolve disputes regarding disposition of such remains.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, in the event of human remains discovery, no further disturbance is allowed until the county coroner has made the necessary findings regarding the origin and disposition of the remains. If the remains are of a Native American, the county coroner must notify the NAHC. The NAHC then notifies those persons most likely to be related to the Native American remains. The code section also stipulates the procedures that the descendants may follow for treating or disposing of the remains and associated grave goods.
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to cultural resources and are applicable to the proposed project.
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Cultural Resources Policies Policies Description
Policy ER-10.1 For proposed development sites that have been identified as archaeologically or paleontologically sensitive, require investigation during the planning process in order to determine whether potentially significant archaeological or paleontological information may be affected by the project and then require, if needed, that appropriate mitigation measures be incorporated into the project design.
Policy ER-10.2 Recognizing that Native American human remains may be encountered at unexpected locations, impose a requirement on all development permits and tentative subdivision maps that upon discovery during construction, development activity will cease until professional archaeological examination confirms whether the burial is human. If the remains are determined to be Native American, applicable state laws shall be enforced.
Alviso Hotel 72 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Policy ER-10.3 Ensure that City, State, and Federal historic preservation laws, regulations, and codes are enforced, including laws related to archaeological and paleontological resources, to ensure the adequate protection of historic and pre-historic resources.
City of San José Historic Resources Inventory (HRI)
The HRI is an inventory of San José’s historically and architecturally significant buildings.
According to the City of San José’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 13.48 of the Municipal Code), a resource qualifies as a City Landmark if it has “special historical, architectural, cultural, aesthetic or engineering interest or value of an historic nature” and is one of the following resource types:
1. An individual structure or potion thereof:
2. An integrated group of structures on a single lot;
3. A site, or portion thereof; or
4. Any combination thereof.
Six City Landmarks are located within the Port of Alviso NRHP district, the boundary of which is roughly 2,370 feet northwest of the project site. None are located on or adjacent to the site.
Prehistoric and Historic Resources
Cultural resources are evidence of past human occupation and activity and include both historical and archaeological resources. These resources may be located above ground or underground and have significance in the history, prehistory, architecture, architecture of culture of the nation, State of California, or local or tribal communities.
Prehistoric resources are resources that have significance in prehistory, which is defined as events of the past occurring prior to advent of written records. Historic resources are generally 50 years or older in age and include, but are not limited to, buildings, districts, structures, sites, objects and areas.
Archaeological resources are resources associated with human activity in the past and encompass both prehistoric and historic resources.
Based on the archaeological survey report prepared by Holman & Associates, portions of the project site are moderately to highly sensitive to contain buried Native American sites. There is also a high potential for historic-era archaeological deposits associated with the buildings formerly located on the project site.
In October 2015, surface reconnaissance of the site was completed to inspect for the presence of cultural resources. No resources were discovered during the reconnaissance.
Paleontological Resources
Paleontological resources are fossils, the remains or traces of prehistoric life preserved in the geologic record. They range from the well-known and well-publicized (such as mammoth and dinosaur bones) to scientifically important fossils. Based on a Paleontological Evaluation Report Alviso Hotel 73 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
completed for the City’s General Plan, the project site is located in an area of Bay Mud that has a high sensitivity to paleontological resources at depths close to the ground surface.
4.5.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource as
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5?
3) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Impact CUL-1: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. (Less than Significant Impact)
The site is undeveloped; therefore, no historic buildings or structures are located on the project site.
As described previously, historic resources such as the Port of Alviso NHRP and six City Landmarks are located in the vicinity of the site; however, the project is a substantial distance (over 2,300 feet) and would not result in impacts to these historic resources. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact CUL-2: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Although portions of the site contain substantial amounts of artificial fill (up to 14 feet in some areas), the project would include disturbance of native soils for trenching, site grading, and other construction activities. The Native American Heritage Commission and Native American contacts were consulted during the development of the Archaeological Survey Report and no specific Native American resource were identified within or adjacent to the study area. While there are no recorded archaeological or historic sites on the project site, there is a potential for buried archaeological resources to occur on the site.
Impact CUL-1: Ground disturbing activities associated with project construction may result in impacts to unrecorded archaeological resources.
Mitigation Measures: The project will be required to implement the following mitigation measures to reduce possible impacts to cultural resources to a less than significant level.
Alviso Hotel 74 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
MM CUL-2.1: Treatment Plan: Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, a project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared by a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area. The Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall reflect permitlevel detail pertaining to depths and locations of all ground disturbing activities. The Cultural Resources Treatment Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Supervising Environmental Planner of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement prior to approval of any grading permit. The Treatment Plan shall contain, at a minimum:
• Identification of the scope of work and range of subsurface effects (including location map and development plan), including requirements for preliminary field investigations.
• Description of the environmental setting (past and present) and the historic/prehistoric background of the parcel (potential range of what might be found).
• Development of research questions and goals to be addressed by the investigation (what is significant vs. what is redundant information). • Detailed field strategy used to record, recover, or avoid the finds and address research goals.
• Analytical methods.
• Report structure and outline of document contents.
• Disposition of the artifacts.
• Appendices: all site records, correspondence, and consultation with Native Americans, etc.
MM CUL-2.2: Investigation: Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the project applicant shall complete a preliminary field investigation program in conformance with the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan required under Mitigation Measure MM CUL-2.1. The locations of subsurface testing and exploratory trenching shall be determined prior to issuance of any grading permit based on the Cultural Resources Treatment Plan recommendations. A qualified archaeologist and a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, shall complete a presence/absence exploration. Results of the investigation shall be provided to the Supervising Environmental Planner of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement prior to issuance of any grading permit.
Alviso Hotel 75 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
If any finds were discovered during the preliminary field investigation, the project shall implement MM CUL-2.4 for evaluation and recovery methodologies. The results of the preliminary field investigation and program shall be submitted to the Supervising Environmental Planner of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading permit.
MM CUL-2.3: Construction Monitoring and Protection Measures: Although the data recovery and treatment program would be expected to recover potentially significant materials and information from the areas impacted by the project prior to grading, it is possible that additional resources could remain on-site.
Therefore, all ground-disturbing activities (e.g., grading and excavation) shall be completed under the observation of a qualified archaeologist and a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area.
The qualified archaeologist or a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, shall have authority to halt construction activities temporarily in the immediate vicinity of an unanticipated find. If, for any reasons, the qualified archaeologist or a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, is not present, but construction crews encounter a cultural resource, all work shall stop temporarily within 50 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, has been contacted to determine the proper course of action. The Supervising Environmental Planner and Historic Preservation Officer of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement shall be notified of any finds during the grading or other construction activities. Any human remains encountered during construction shall be treated according to the protocol identified in MM CUL-2.5.
MM CUL-2.4: Evaluation and Data Recovery: The Supervising Environmental Planner and Historic Preservation Officer of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement shall be notified of any finds during the preliminary field investigation, grading, or other construction activities. Any historic or prehistoric material identified in the project area during the preliminary field investigation and during grading or other construction activities shall be evaluated for eligibility for listing as a Candidate City Landmark and/or in the California Register of Historic Resources. Data Alviso Hotel 76 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
recovery methods may include, but are not limited to, backhoe trenching, shovel test units, hand auguring, and hand-excavation.
The techniques used for data recovery shall follow the protocols identified in the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan. Data recovery shall include excavation and exposure of features, field documentation, and recordation.
MM CUL-2.5: Human Remains: Native American coordination shall follow the protocols established under Assembly Bill 52, State of California Code, and applicable City of San José procedures.
If any human remains are found during any field investigations, grading, or other construction activities, all provisions of California Health and Safety Code Sections 7054 and 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Sections 5097.9 through 5097.99, as amended per Assembly Bill 2641, shall be followed. In the event of the discovery of human remains during construction, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The project applicant or qualified archaeologist in consultation with a Native American representative registered with the Native American Heritage Commission from the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area shall immediately notify the Supervising Environmental Planner of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, who will then notify the Santa Clara County Coroner. The Coroner shall make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American.
If the remains are believed to be Native American, the Coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC shall then designate a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall inspect the remains and make a recommendation on the treatment of the remains and associated artifacts.
If one of the following conditions occurs, the landowner or his authorized representative shall work with the Coroner, in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, to reinter the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
• The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission. • The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation; or Alviso Hotel 77 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
MM CUL-2.6: Site Security: At the discretion of the Supervising Environmental Planner and Historic Preservation Officer of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, site fencing shall be installed on-site during the investigation, grading, building, or other construction activities to avoid destruction and/or theft of potential cultural resources. The responsible qualified archaeologist, in consultation with a qualified Native American monitor, registered with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area, shall advise the Supervising Environmental Planner and Historic Preservation Officer of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement as to the necessity for a guard. The purpose of the security guard shall be to ensure the safety of any potential cultural resources (including human remains) that are left exposed overnight. The Director of PBCE shall have the final discretion to authorize the use of a security guard at the project site.
MM CUL-2.7: Final Reporting: Once all analyses and studies required by the projectspecific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan have been completed, the project applicant, or representative, shall prepare a final report summarizing the results of the field investigation, data recovery activities and results, and compliance with the Cultural Resources Treatment Plan during all demolition, grading, building, and other construction activities. The report shall document the results of field and laboratory investigations and shall meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeological Documentation. The contents of the report shall be consistent with the protocol included in the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan.
The report shall be submitted to the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for review and approval prior to issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy (temporary or final). Once approved, the final documentation shall be submitted to the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University, as appropriate.
MM CUL-2.8: Curation: Upon completion of the final report required by the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan, all recovered archaeological materials not identified as tribal cultural resources by the Native American monitor, shall be transferred to a long-term curation facility. Any curation facility used shall meet the standards outlined in the National Park Services’ Curation of Federally Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections (36 CFR 79).
The project applicant shall notify the Supervising Environmental Planner of the City of San José Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement of the selected curation facility prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy (temporary or final). To the extent feasible, and in Alviso Hotel 78 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
consultation with the Native American representative, all recovered Native American/tribal cultural resources and artifacts shall be reburied on-site in an area that is unlikely to be disturbed again. Treatment of materials to be curated shall be consistent with the protocols included in the project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan.
All archaeological materials recovered during the data recovery efforts shall be cleaned, sorted, catalogued, and analyzed following standard archaeological procedures, and shall be documented in a report submitted to the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement and the NWIC.
MM CUL-2.9: Dignified and Respectful Treatment – Cultural Sensitivity Training Prior to Construction: An important aspect of the consultation process is a dignified and respectful treatment of Tribal Cultural Resources. Prior to issuance of the Grading Permit, the project shall be required to submit evidence that an Archaeological Monitoring Contractor Awareness Training was held prior to ground disturbance. The training shall be facilitated by the project archaeologist in coordination with a Native American representative registered with the Native American Heritage Commissions for the City of San José and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area as described in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.
The proposed project would be required to implement the provisions of a project-specific Cultural Resources Treatment Plan, as outlined in the mitigation measures above. Implementation of these measures would ensure extensive subsurface investigation where subsurface excavation and groundwork would occur. Through this field investigation and data recovery program, the project would avoid demolition, substantial alteration, or relocation of an eligible resource. Significant disturbance of any human remains, Native American or otherwise, would be avoided through a robust protection program designed to respond to an encounter with cultural resources and/or human remains in consultation with appropriate parties (e.g., the Most Likely Descendant).
With implementation of MM CUL-2.1 – MM CUL-2.9, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Impact CUL-3: The project would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
With incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2.1 – 2.8, as discussed under Impact CUL-2, the project would have a less than significant impact on human remains. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 79 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
ENERGY
4.6.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
Energy Star and Fuel Efficiency
At the federal level, energy standards set by the EPA apply to numerous consumer products and appliances (e.g., the EnergyStar™ program). The EPA also sets fuel efficiency standards for automobiles and other modes of transportation.
Renewables Portfolio Standard Program
In 2002, California established its Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, with the goal of increasing the percentage of renewable energy in the state's electricity mix to 20 percent of retail sales by 2010. Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, requiring statewide emissions reductions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In 2008, EO S-14-08 was signed into law, requiring retail sellers of electricity serve 33 percent of their load with renewable energy by 2020. In October 2015, Governor Brown signed SB 350 to codify California’s climate and clean energy goals. A key provision of SB 350 requires retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2030. SB 100, passed in 2018, requires 100 percent of electricity in California to be provided by 100 percent renewable and carbon-free sources by 2045.
Executive Order B-55-18 To Achieve Carbon Neutrality
In September 2018, Governor Brown issued an executive order, EO-B-55-18 To Achieve Carbon Neutrality, setting a statewide goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter.” The executive order requires CARB to “ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal.” EO-B-55-18 supplements EO S-3-05 by requiring not only emissions reductions, but also that, by no later than 2045, the remaining emissions be offset by equivalent net removals of CO2 from the atmosphere through sequestration.
California Building Standards Code
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, as specified in Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 24), was established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. Title 24 is updated approximately every three years.22 Compliance with Title 24 is mandatory at the time new building permits are issued by city and county governments.23
22 California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo.
23 California Energy Commission (CEC). “2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2019- building-energy-efficiency.
Alviso Hotel 80 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
California Green Building Standards Code
CALGreen establishes mandatory green building standards for buildings in California. CALGreen was developed to reduce GHG emissions from buildings, promote environmentally responsible and healthier places to live and work, reduce energy and water consumption, and respond to state environmental directives. CALGreen covers five categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality.
Advanced Clean Cars Program
CARB adopted the Advanced Clean Cars program in 2012 in coordination with the EPA and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The program combines the control of smogcausing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated set of requirements for vehicle model years 2015 through 2025. The program promotes development of environmentally superior passenger cars and other vehicles, as well as saving the consumer money through fuel savings.24 Regional and Local
Climate Smart San José
Climate Smart San José is a plan to reduce air pollution, save water, and create a stronger and healthier community. The City approved goals and milestones in February 2018 to ensure the City can substantially reduce GHG emissions through reaching the following goals and milestones:
• All new residential buildings will be Zero Net Carbon Emissions (ZNE) by 2020 and all new commercial buildings will be ZNE by 2030 (Note that ZNE buildings would be all electric with a carbon-free electricity source).
• San José Clean Energy (SJCE) will provide 100-percent carbon-free base power by 2021. • One gigawatt of solar power will be installed in San Jose by 2040. • 61 percent of passenger vehicles will be powered by electricity by 2030.
Existing Conditions
Total energy usage in California was approximately 7,881 trillion British thermal units (Btu) in the year 2017, the most recent year for which this data is available.25 Out of the 50 states, California is ranked second in total energy consumption and 48th in energy consumption per capita. The breakdown by sector was approximately 18 percent (1,416 trillion Btu) for residential uses, 19 percent (1,473 trillion Btu) for commercial uses, 23 percent (1,818 trillion Btu) for industrial uses, and 40 percent (3,175 trillion Btu) for transportation.26 This energy is primarily supplied in the form of natural gas, petroleum, nuclear electric power, and hydroelectric power. 24 California Air Resources Board. “The Advanced Clean Cars Program.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/acc.htm.
25 United States Energy Information Administration. “State Profile and Energy Estimates, 2017.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2.
26 United States Energy Information Administration. “State Profile and Energy Estimates, 2017.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2.
Alviso Hotel 81 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Electricity
Electricity in Santa Clara County in 2018 was consumed primarily by the commercial sector (77 percent), followed by the residential sector consuming 23 percent. In 2019, a total of approximately 16,664 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity was consumed in Santa Clara County. 27 San José Clean Energy (SJCE) is the electricity provider for residents and businesses in the City of San José. SJCE sources the electricity and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) delivers it to customers over their existing utility lines. SJCE customers are automatically enrolled in the GreenSource program, which provides 80 percent GHG emission-free electricity. Customers can choose to enroll in SJCE’s TotalGreen program at any time to receive 100 percent GHG emissionfree electricity form entirely renewable sources.
Natural Gas
PG&E provides natural gas services within San José. In 2018, approximately one percent of California’s natural gas supply came from in-state production, while the remaining supply was imported from other western states and Canada.28 In 2018, residential and commercial customers in California used 34 percent of the state’s natural gas, power plants used 35 percent, the industrial sector used 21 percent, and other uses used 10 percent. Transportation accounted for one percent of natural gas use in California. In 2018, Santa Clara County used approximately 3.5 percent of the state’s total consumption of natural gas.29
Fuel for Motor Vehicles
In 2018, 15.5 billion gallons of gasoline were sold in California.30 The average fuel economy for light-duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and sport utility vehicles) in the United States has steadily increased from about 13.1 miles per gallon (mpg) in the mid-1970s to 24.9 mpg in 2018. 31 Federal
fuel economy standards have changed substantially since the Energy Independence and Security Act was passed in 2007. That standard, which originally mandated a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by the year 2020, was subsequently revised to apply to cars and light trucks model years 2011 through 2020. 32,33
27 California Energy Commission. Energy Consumption Data Management System. “Electricity Consumption by County.” Accessed October 21, 2020. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. 28 California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2019 California Gas Report. Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/documents/cgr/2019_CGR_Supplement_7-1-19.pdf. 29 California Energy Commission. “Natural Gas Consumption by County.” Accessed October 21, 2020. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx.
30 California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. “Net Taxable Gasoline Gallons.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/dataportal/dataset.htm?url=VehicleTaxableFuelDist. 31 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “The 2018 EPA Automotive Trends Report: Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Fuel Economy, and Technology since 1975.” March 2019. 32 United States Department of Energy. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed October 21, 2020. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/eisa.
33 Public Law 110–140—December 19, 2007. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed October 21, 2020. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ140/pdf/PLAW-110publ140.pdf.
Alviso Hotel 82 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.6.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project construction
or operation?
2) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Impact EN-1: The project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. (Less than Significant Impact) Energy Efficiency During Construction
The anticipated construction schedule assumes that the project will be built over a period of approximately 24 months, beginning in fall of 2021. The project would require site preparation, grading and excavation, trenching, paving, and construction of the hotel building interior and exterior and the parking garage structure. Energy would not be wasted or used inefficiently by construction equipment, as the proposed project would include several measures to improve efficiency of the construction (e.g., limiting idling time or use U.S. EPA tiered equipment). In addition, construction waste management methods and processes would be employed to reduce the amount of construction waste.
Energy Use During Project Operation
Operation of the project would consume energy for multiple purposes, including building heating and cooling, lighting, and appliance use. Operational energy would also be consumed by hotel guests and employees. The net increase in energy use of the proposed project is summarized in Table 4.6-1 below.
Table 4.6-1 Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Development Electricity (kWh) Natural Gas (kBtu) Gasoline (gallons) Proposed Uses 971,598 4,816,590 24,069
Note: the estimated gasoline demand is based on the estimated annual VMT of 599,330 for the project, and an average fuel economy of 24.9 mpg.
kWh = kilowatt per hour
kBtu = kilo-British thermal unit
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. The Estuary @ Terra Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment. October 2, 2020; and Fehr & Peers. Alviso Hotel Transportation Analysis Report. July 2020.
Alviso Hotel 83 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
As shown in Table 3.6-1 above, the project would result in an increase in energy demand compared to existing conditions. The project, however, would not represent a wasteful or inefficient use of energy resources because the project would be required to comply with Title 24 and CALGreen requirements to reduce energy consumption. In addition, the project would be required to prepare and implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to reduce project VMT below the City threshold for residential projects. The TDM plan would incentivize the use of alternative methods of transportation to and from the site, which would reduce the project’s gasoline demand.
New automobiles used by employees, guests, and vendors of the proposed project would be subject to fuel economy and efficiency standards applied throughout the State of California, which means that over time the fuel efficiency of vehicles associated with the project site would improve.
Implementation of the project would not result in a substantial increase of transportation-related energy use. For these reasons, the project would not result in a wasteful use of energy or conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact EN-2: The project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. (No Impact)
Electricity for the proposed project would be provided by SJCE. The proposed development would be completed in compliance with the current energy efficiency standards set forth in Title 24 and CALGreen. For these reasons, the project would not conflict with or obstruct state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. (No Impact)
Alviso Hotel 84 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.7.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. The act regulates development in California near known active faults due to hazards associated with surface fault ruptures. Alquist-Priolo maps are distributed to affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new construction. Areas within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone require special studies to evaluate the potential for surface rupture to ensure that no structures intended for human occupancy are constructed across an active fault.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (SHMA) was passed in 1990 following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The SHMA directs the California Geological Survey (CGS) to identify and map areas prone to liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and amplified ground shaking. CGS has completed seismic hazard mapping for the portions of California most susceptible to liquefaction, landslides, and ground shaking, including the central San Francisco Bay Area. The SHMA requires that agencies only approve projects in seismic hazard zones following site-specific geotechnical investigations to determine if the seismic hazard is present and identify measures to reduce earthquake-related hazards.
California Building Standards Code
The CBC prescribes standards for constructing safe buildings. The CBC contains provisions for earthquake safety based on factors including occupancy type, soil and rock profile, ground strength, and distance to seismic sources. The CBC requires that a site-specific geotechnical investigation report be prepared for most development projects to evaluate seismic and geologic conditions such as surface fault ruptures, ground shaking, liquefaction, differential settlement, lateral spreading, expansive soils, and slope stability. The CBC is updated every three years.
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Regulations Excavation, shoring, and trenching activities during construction are subject to occupational safety standards for stabilization by the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) under Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Excavation Rules. These regulations minimize the potential for instability and collapse that could injure construction workers on the site.
Public Resources Code Section 5097.5
Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in geologic strata. They range from mammoth and dinosaur bones to impressions of ancient Alviso Hotel 85 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
animals and plants, trace remains, and microfossils. These are valued for the information they yield about the history of the earth and its past ecological settings. California Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 specifies that unauthorized removal of a paleontological resource is a misdemeanor.
Under the CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant impact on paleontological resources if it would disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Local
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following polices are specific to geological resources and are applicable to the proposed project.
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Geology and Soil Policies Policy Description
Policy EC-4.2 Development in areas subject to soils and geologic hazards, including unengineered fill and weak soils and landslide-prone areas, only when the severity of hazards have been evaluated and if shown to be required, appropriate mitigation measures are provided. New development proposed within areas of geologic hazards shall not be endangered by, nor contribute to, the hazardous conditions on the site or on adjoining properties. The City of San José Geologist will review and approve geotechnical and geological investigation reports for projects within these areas as part of the project approval process.
Policy EC-4.4 Require all new development to conform to the City of San José’s Geologic Hazard Ordinance.
Policy EC-4.5 Ensure that any development activity that requires grading does not impact adjacent properties, local creeks, and storm drainage systems by designing and building the site to drain properly and minimize erosion. An Erosion Control Plan is required for all private development projects that have a soil disturbance of one acre or more, adjacent to a creek/river, and/or are located in hillside areas. Erosion Control Plans are also required for any grading occurring between October 1 and April 30.
Action EC-4.11: Require the preparation of geotechnical and geological investigation reports for projects within areas subject to soils and geologic hazards, and require review and implementation of mitigation measures as part of the project approval process.
Action EC-4.12: Require review and approval of grading plans and erosion control plans (if applicable) prior to issuance of grading permits by the Director of Public Works.
Policy ES-4.9 Permit development only in those areas where potential danger to health, safety, and welfare of the persons in that area can be mitigated to an acceptable level.
Alviso Hotel 86 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Existing Conditions
Soil Conditions
The proposed project site is situated on the coastal plain immediately south of tidal flats that fringe the southern San Francisco Bay. The topography is relatively flat with a slight downward slope towards the north.
Groundwater
The depth to groundwater in the project area ranges from feet 14 to 15 feet below ground surface, based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) report completed for the site.
Groundwater typically flows northwest toward the San Francisco Bay, but recently groundwater has flowed to the southeast due to drought conditions. Seasonal fluctuations in rainfall influence groundwater levels and may cause several feet of variation.
Seismicity and Seismic Hazards
The project site is located within the seismically active San Francisco Bay Area region. There is a 72 percent probability that one or more major earthquake (7.7 in magnitude or greater) will occur in the region by 204434. Although the site is within a seismically active region, it is not located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the Santa Clara County Fault Hazard Zone, or the City of San José Potential Hazard Zone.35 The potential for fault rupture at the site is low.
Significant active faults (which have a capability of generating an earthquake with a magnitude of
6.7 or greater)36 within the region include the Hayward Fault, Calaveras Fault, and San Andreas Fault, located roughly five miles northeast, nine miles east, and 13 miles west of the site, respectively. Other significant faults in the region include the San Gregorio Fault, Greenville, Concord-Green Valley, and Healdsburg Roger Creek Faults (which range from 25 to 50 miles in distance from the site). Due to the proximity of the project site to these active or potentially active faults, ground shaking, ground failure, and/or liquefaction as a result of an earthquake could cause damage to structures on the site.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a result of seismic activity and is characterized as the transformation of loose, watersaturated soils from a solid state to a liquid state after ground shaking. There are many variables that contribute to liquefaction, including the age of the soil, soil type, soil cohesion, soil density, and groundwater level. Soil susceptible to liquefaction includes loose to medium dense sand and gravel, low plasticity silt, and some low-plasticity clay deposits. Liquefaction can result in ground surface deformations and settlement.
34 US Geological Survey. UCERF3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California’s Complex Fault System. Fact Sheet 2015 – 3009. March 2015. Accessed January 7 2020. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2015/3009/pdf/fs2015-3009.pdf 35 Santa Clara County, Santa Clara County Geologic Hazard Zones, Map 20. Accessed January 7, 2020 https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/DocsForms/Documents/GEO_GeohazardATLAS.pdf. 36 An active fault is one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years. California Geological Survey. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Accessed January 7, 2019.
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/ap/Pages/main.aspx.
Alviso Hotel 87 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Surface soils on the proposed project site are classified as Holocene-age levee deposits, consisting of loose, moderate-to-well-sorted or clayey silt grading to sandy or silty clay. The project site is located within a State of California Hazard Zone for liquefaction and within a County of Santa Clara Liquefaction Hazard Zone.37
Lateral Spreading
Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading typically occurs as a form of horizontal displacement of relatively flat-lying alluvial material within an underlying liquified layer, toward an open or “free” face such as an open body of water, channel, or excavation. Generally, in soils this movement is due to failure along a weak plane, formed within an underlying liquified layer. As cracks develop within the weakened material, blocks of soil displace laterally towards the free face.
The project site is located approximately 150 feet from the Guadalupe River and there are liquefiable sand layers underlying the site, and, therefore, there is a potential displacement during an earthquake.
Differential Settlement
Differential (uneven) settlement is associated with loose unsaturated sands and gravels. These soils typically settle during strong seismic shaking. Soils that are variable in nature and contain organic materials are more susceptible to differential settlement than uniform soils. Differential settlement during seismic shaking occurs when the foundation settles unevenly, which can cause one part of a structure to settle into the ground more than other which could cause damage to buildings, roadways, utilities, and hardscape improvements. The existing undocumented fill on the site may be susceptible to settlement.
Landslides
Landslides are the movement of rock, debris, or earth down a slope and typically occur in connection with other natural disasters such as earthquakes and floods. Landslides occur when the stability of a slope changes from a stable to an unstable condition. In general, slopes steeper than approximately 15 degrees are typically most susceptible to landslides. Earthquakes can induce landslides in hillside areas and along creeks.
The project site is not located within a California Seismic Hazard Zone for landsliding or within a County of Santa Clara Landslide Hazard Zone. The project area is relatively flat and, therefore, the probability of landslides occurring at the project sites during a seismic event is low. 37 County of Santa Clara. County Geologic Hazard Zones. Map 11. October 2012.
Alviso Hotel 88 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.7.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
- Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault (refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42)?
- Strong seismic ground shaking?
- Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
- Landslides?
2) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
3) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that will become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
4) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in the
current California Building Code, creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property?
5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are
not available for the disposal of wastewater?
6) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
As previously discussed in Section 4.0, on December 17, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion in “CBIA vs. BAAQMD” holding that CEQA is primarily concerned with the impacts of a project on the environment and generally does not require agencies to analyze the impact of existing conditions on a project’s future users or residents unless the project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards or risks that already exist. Nevertheless, the City has policies and regulations that address existing conditions affecting a proposed project, such as locating structures in geologic hazard zones, which are discussed below.
Alviso Hotel 89 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
The policies of the City of San José 2040 General Plan have been adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation environmental effects resulting from planned development within the City. The City of San José General Plan Policy EC-4.2 states that development is allowed in areas subject to soils and geologic hazards, including un-engineered fill and weak soils and landscape-prone areas, only when the severity of hazards have been evaluated and if shown to be required, appropriate mitigation measures are provided. New development proposed within areas of geologic hazards shall not be endangered by, nor contribute to, the hazardous conditions on the site or on adjoining properties. To ensure this, the policy requires the City of San José Geologist to review and approve geotechnical and geological investigation reports for projects within these areas as part of the project approval process.
In addition, Policy EC-4.4 requires all new development to conform to the City of San José’s Geologic Hazard Ordinance. To ensure that proposed development sites are suitable, Action EC-4.11 requires the preparation of geotechnical and geological investigation reports for projects within areas subject to soils and geologic hazards, and require review and implementation of mitigation measures as part of the project approval process.
The analysis below includes discussion of both impacts of the environment on the project, such as hazards to proposed structures due to undocumented fill on the site, and impacts from the project on the environment, such as the potential for the proposed project to result in off-site geologic hazards.
Impacts of the project on the environment are discussed in terms of their significance under CEQA, while impacts of the environment on the project are discussed in terms of the project’s consistency with relevant City policies.
Impact GEO-1: The project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impacts to the Project
The project site is located in a seismically active region and, therefore, strong ground shaking would be expected during the lifetime of the proposed project. There are no known active faults traversing the project site and the site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Potential for surface rupture from displacement or fault movement directly beneath the proposed project is, therefore, considered low. Depending on the intensity and magnitude of a seismic event, new buildings may experience shaking due to the site’s proximity to the active Hayward, San Andreas, Monte Vista-Shannon, and Calaveras Faults.
The project site would be subject to strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction in the event of a large earthquake. Consistent with the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code, to avoid and/or minimize potential damage from seismic shaking, the proposed project would be built using standard engineering and seismic safety design techniques.
Consistent with these requirements, the following condition shall be implemented to ensure the proposed development is designed to address seismic hazards.
Alviso Hotel 90 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Standard Permit Condition:
• To avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic shaking, project construction shall use standard engineering and seismic safety design techniques. Building design and construction will be completed in conformance with the recommendations of an approved geotechnical investigation. The geotechnical investigation report shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works as part of the building permit review and entitlement process.
The buildings shall meet the requirements of applicable Building and Fire Codes as adopted or updated by the City. The project shall be designed to withstand soil hazards identified on the site and the project shall be designed to reduce the risk to life or property on-site and offsite to the extent feasible and in compliance with the Building Code. • All excavation and grading work shall be scheduled in dry weather months or the construction sites shall be weatherized.
• Stockpiles and excavated soils shall be covered with secured tarps or plastic sheeting. • The project shall be constructed in accordance with standard engineering practices in the California Building Code, as adopted by the City of San José. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of a Public Works clearance.
Compliance with these standard permit conditions would ensure that the proposed project is designed to properly account for soil-related hazards on the site.
The proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact GEO-2: The project would not result in substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil. (Less than Significant Impact)
The City’s NPDES Municipal Permit, urban runoff policies, and the Municipal Code are the primary means of enforcing erosion control measures through the grading and building permit process. The Draft Program EIR for the General Plan concluded that with the regulatory programs currently in place, the possible impacts of accelerated erosion during construction would be less than significant38. The City shall require all phases of the project to comply with all applicable City regulatory programs pertaining to construction related erosion, including the standard permit condition above.
38 City of San José. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Envision San José 2040 General Plan.
SCH# 2009072096. Page 515.
Alviso Hotel 91 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Through conformance with the standard permit conditions listed above, the project would not result in substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact GEO-3: The project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. (Less than Significant Impact)
Strong shaking during an earthquake can result in ground failure such as that associated with soil liquefaction and differential compaction. The project site is located within a State of California Liquefaction Zone. A design-level geotechnical investigation will be prepared for the proposed development that identifies site-specific ground failure hazards such as liquefaction and lateral spreading and appropriate techniques to minimize risks to people and structures. In addition, the project shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the recent California Building Code as a standard permit condition.
Standard Permit Condition:
1. The project shall be constructed in accordance with the standard engineering practices in the California Building Code, as adopted by the City of San José. A grading permit from the San José Department of Public Works shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a Public Works clearance. These standard practices would ensure that the future building on the site is designed to properly account for soils-related hazards on the site.
Adherence to the California Building Code would ensure the project resists minor earthquakes without damage and major earthquakes without collapse. The project site is located in a relatively flat area and would not be exposed to substantial slope instability, erosion, or landslide-related hazards.
Dewatering is not required for the construction of the project. The project would be required to implement the standard permit conditions listed under Impact GEO-1. Development of the project site would not change or exacerbate the geologic conditions of the project area. Therefore, the project would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact GEO-4: The project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in the current California Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. (Less than Significant Impact)
The on-site soils may have expansion potential. By implementing the standard permit conditions described in GEO-1 and GEO-3, the project would be designed and constructed to minimize hazards due to expansive soils and the soil conditions on-site would not be exacerbated by the project such that it would impact on- or off-site conditions. Therefore, the project would not be located on Alviso Hotel 92 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
expansive soil, as defined in the current California Building Code, creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact GEO-5: The project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. (No Impact)
The proposed project would connect to the existing sewer system; therefore, the project would not require septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. (No Impact) Impact GEO-6: The project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. (Less than Significant Impact) Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments found in the geologic strata. Most of the City is situated on alluvial fan deposits of Holocene age that have a low potential to contain significant nonrenewable paleontological resources; however, older Pleistocene sediments present at or near the ground surface at some locations have high potential to contain these resources. These older sediments, often found at depths of greater than 10 feet bgs, have yielded the fossil remains of plants and extinct terrestrial Pleistocene vertebrates.
The General Plan EIR recognized that while development allowed under the General Plan could directly impact paleontological resources, implementation of General Plan policies and existing regulations and programs would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. As such, the following standard permit conditions would be applied to the proposed project to reduce and avoid impacts to unidentified paleontological resources.
Standard Permit Condition:
• The City shall ensure all construction personnel receive paleontological awareness training that includes information on the possibility of encountering fossils during construction and the types of fossils likely to be seen, based on past finds in the project area and proper procedures in the event fossils are encountered. Worker trainings shall be prepared and presented by a qualified paleontologist.
• If vertebrate fossils are discovered during construction, all work on the site shall stop immediately, Director of PBCE or Director’s designee shall be notified, and a qualified professional paleontologist shall assess the nature and importance of the find and recommend appropriate treatment. Treatment may include, but is not limited to, preparation and recovery of fossil materials so that they can be housed in an appropriate museum or university collection and may also include preparation of a report for publication describing the finds.
The project applicant shall be responsible for implementing the recommendations of the qualified paleontologist. A report of all findings shall be submitted to the Director of PBCE or Director’s designee.
Alviso Hotel 93 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Although unlikely, the project could result in the disturbance of previously undiscovered paleontological resources. With implementation of the standard permit conditions described above, impacts to undiscovered paleontological resources would be minimal. Therefore, the project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 94 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The following discussion is based, in part, on an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment prepared for the project by Illingworth &Rodkin, Inc. A copy of the report, dated October 2, 2020, is included in Appendix A of this Initial Study.
4.8.1 Environmental Setting
Background Information
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, GHGs, regulate the earth’s temperature. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. In GHG emission inventories, the weight of each gas is multiplied by its global warming potential (GWP) and is measured in units of CO2 equivalents (CO2e). The most common GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor but there are also several others, most importantly methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These are released into the earth’s atmosphere through a variety of natural processes and human activities.
Sources of GHGs are generally as follows:
• CO2 and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. • N2O is associated with agricultural operations such as fertilization of crops. • CH4 is commonly created by off-gassing from agricultural practices (e.g., keeping livestock) and landfill operations.
• Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were widely used as refrigerants, propellants, and cleaning solvents, but their production has been stopped by international treaty. • HFCs are now used as a substitute for CFCs in refrigeration and cooling. • PFCs and SF6 emissions are commonly created by industries such as aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.
An expanding body of scientific research supports the theory that global climate change is currently causing changes in weather patterns, average sea level, ocean acidification, chemical reaction rates, and precipitation rates, and that it will increasingly do so in the future. The climate and several naturally occurring resources within California are adversely affected by the global warming trend.
Increased precipitation and sea level rise will increase coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion, and degradation of wetlands. Mass migration and/or loss of plant and animal species could also occur.
Potential effects of global climate change that could adversely affect human health include more extreme heat waves and heat-related stress; an increase in climate-sensitive diseases; more frequent and intense natural disasters such as flooding, hurricanes and drought; and increased levels of air pollution.
Alviso Hotel 95 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Regulatory Framework
State
Assembly Bill 32
Under the California Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as AB 32, CARB established a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, adopted mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHGs, and adopted a comprehensive plan, known as the Climate Change Scoping Plan, identifying how emission reductions would be achieved from significant GHG sources.
In 2016, SB 32 was signed into law, amending the California Global Warming Solution Act. SB 32, and accompanying Executive Order B-30-15, require CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030. CARB updated its Climate Change Scoping Plan in December of 2017 to express the 2030 statewide target in terms of million metric tons of CO2E (MMTCO2e). Based on the emissions reductions directed by SB 32, the annual 2030 statewide target emissions level for California is 260 MMTCO2e.
Senate Bill 375
SB 375, known as the Sustainable Communities Strategy and Climate Protection Act, was signed into law in September 2008. SB 375 builds upon AB 32 by requiring CARB to develop regional GHG reduction targets for automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. The per-capita GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Area include a seven percent reduction by 2020 and a 15 percent reduction by 2035.
Consistent with the requirements of SB 375, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) partnered with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), BAAQMD, and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission to prepare the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan process. The SCS is referred to as Plan Bay Area 2040. Plan Bay Area 2040 establishes a course for reducing per-capita GHG emissions through the promotion of compact, high-density, mixed-use neighborhoods near transit, particularly within identified Priority Development Areas (PDAs).
Regional and Local
2017 Clean Air Plan
To protect the climate, the 2017 CAP (prepared by BAAQMD) includes control measures designed to reduce emissions of methane and other super-GHGs that are potent climate pollutants in the nearterm, and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.
CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines are intended to serve as a guide for those who prepare or evaluate air quality impact analyses for projects and plans in the San Francisco Bay Area. The jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin utilize the thresholds and methodology for assessing GHG impacts developed by BAAQMD within the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. The Alviso Hotel 96 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
guidelines include information on legal requirements, BAAQMD rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures.
Climate Smart San José
Climate Smart San José was developed by the City to reduce air pollution, save water, and create a healthier community. The plan contains nine strategies to reduce carbon emissions consistent with the Paris Climate Agreement. These strategies include use of renewable energy, densification of neighborhoods, electrification and sharing of vehicle fleets, investments in public infrastructure, creating local jobs, and improving building energy-efficiency.
Reach Building Code
In 2019, the San José City Council approved Ordinance No. 30311 and adopted Reach Code Ordinance (Reach Code) to reduce energy-related GHG emissions consistent with the goals of Climate Smart San José. The Reach Code applies to new construction projects in San José. It requires new residential construction to be outfitted with entirely electric fixtures. Mixed-fuel buildings (i.e., use of natural gas) are required to demonstrate increased energy efficiency through a higher Energy Design Ratings and be electrification ready. In addition, the Reach Code requires EV charging infrastructure for all building types (above current CalGreen requirements), and solar readiness for non-residential buildings.
City of San José Private Sector Green Building Policy (6-32) In October 2008, the City adopted the Private Sector Green Building Policy (6-32) that establishes baseline green building standards for private sector new construction and provides a framework for the implementation of these standards. This policy requires that applicable projects achieve minimum green building performance levels using the Council adopted standards. Future development proposed under the Downtown Strategy 2040 would be subject to this policy.
Envision San Jose 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes the following GHG policies applicable to the proposed project.
Policy Description
MS-2.11 Require new development to incorporate green building practices, including those required by the Green Building Ordinance. Specifically, target reduced energy use through construction techniques (e.g., design of building envelopes and systems to maximize energy performance), through architectural design (e.g., design to maximize cross ventilation and interior daylight) and through site design techniques (e.g., orienting buildings on sites to maximize the effectiveness of passive solar design).
MS-14.4 Implement the City’s Green Building Policies so that new construction and rehabilitation of existing buildings fully implements industry best practices, including the use of optimized energy system, selection of materials and resources, water efficiency, sustainable site selection, passive solar building design, and planting of trees and other landscape materials to reduce energy consumption.
CD-3.2 Prioritize pedestrian and bicycle connections to transit, community facilities (including schools), commercial areas, and other areas serving daily needs. Ensure Alviso Hotel 97 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
that the design of new facilities can accommodate significant anticipated future increases in bicycle and pedestrian activity.
CD-5.1 Design areas to promote pedestrian and bicycle movements and to facilitate interaction between community members and to strengthen the sense of community LU05.4 Require new commercial development to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle access through techniques such as minimizing building separation from public sidewalks; providing safe, accessible, convenient, and pleasant pedestrian connections; and including secure and convenient bike storage.
TR-3.3 As part of the development review process, require that new development along existing and planned transit facilities consist of land use and development types and intensities that contribute toward transit ridership. In addition, require that new development is designed to accommodate and to provide direct access to transit facilities.
San José 2030 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy
The 2030 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy (GHGRS) is the latest update to the City’s GHGRS and is designed to meet statewide GHG reduction targets for 2030 set by Senate Bill 32. As a qualified Climate Action Plan, the 2030 GHGRS allows for tiering and streamlining of GHG analyses under CEQA. The GHGRS identifies General Plan policies and strategies to be implemented by development projects in the areas of green building/energy use, multimodal transportation, water conservation, and solid waste reduction. Projects that comply with the policies and strategies outlined in the 2030 GHGRS, would have less than significant GHG impacts under CEQA.39
Existing Conditions
Unlike emissions of criteria and toxic air pollutants, which have regional and local impacts, emissions of GHGs have a broader, global impact. Global warming is a process whereby GHGs accumulating in the upper atmosphere contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth and changes in weather patterns.
The project site is currently undeveloped and thus is not generating any GHG emissions. 39 City of San José. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy. November 2020. https://www.sanjoseca.gov/yourgovernment/department-directory/planning-building-code-enforcement/planning-division/environmentalplanning/greenhouse-gas-reduction-strategy.
Alviso Hotel 98 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.8.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of GHGs?
Impact GHG-1: The project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Consistency with 2030 GHGRS
As discussed in Section 4.8.1.2, Regulatory Framework, the project would be subject to the City’s recently approved 2030 GHGRS which was adopted after a project-level GHG analysis was prepared for the proposed project.
The 2030 GHGRS identifies required General Plan policies and strategies to be implemented by development projects in the areas of green building/energy use, multimodal transportation, water conservation, and solid waste reduction. Compliance with these mandatory policies and strategies and any voluntary measures proposed by the project ensure a project’s consistency with the GHG Reduction Strategy. The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation of Combined Industrial/Commercial. The proposed project incorporates applicable mandatory measures of the GHGRS, as shown in Table 4.8-1 (this table is also included as Appendix J).
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
Table A: General Plan Consistency
1) Consistency with the Land Use/ Transportation Diagram (Land Use and Density) Is the project consistent with the Land
Use/Transportation Diagram?
Yes. As discussed in Section 4.11 Land Use and
Planning, the project is consistent with the
Combined Industrial/Commercial General Plan
land use designation for the site and does not
require a General Plan Amendment.
Alviso Hotel 99 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
2) Implementation of Green Building Measures
MS-2.2: Encourage maximized use of on-site
generation of renewable energy for all new and
existing buildings
Yes. The project includes installation of solar
panels on the rooftop of the hotel building. The
project applicant is committed to the project being
compliant with all mandatory applicable state and
local green building and energy codes.
MS-2.3: Encourage consideration of solar
orientation, including building placement,
landscaping, design and construction techniques
for new construction to minimize energy
consumption.
Yes. The proposed project is located and
designed to maximize sun exposure and reduce
energy consumption. All building facades and
hotel rooms include windows to maximize
natural sunlight and reduce energy consumption
for lighting and heating during winter months.
MS-2.7: Encourage the installation of solar panels
or other clean energy power generation sources
over parking areas.
Yes. Parking for the project would be primarily
situated in parking structures underneath
buildings, thus minimizing the surface parking
heat island effect. The project would not include
solar panels over the parking garage; however,
solar panels would be installed on the rooftop of
the hotel building. The project would comply
with applicable local and the state mandatory
measures that are encouraging clean energy power
generation.
MS-2.11: Require new development to
incorporate green building practices, including
those required by the Green Building Ordinance.
Specifically, target reduced energy use through
construction techniques (e.g., design of building
envelopes and systems to maximize energy
performance), through architectural design (e.g.,
design to maximize cross ventilation and interior
daylight) and through site design techniques (e.g.,
orienting buildings on sites to maximize the
effectiveness of passive solar design).
Yes. The project will conform with the City’s
Green Building Ordinance which includes
measures for reduced energy consumption (e.g.,
LED light fixtures, energy saving appliances).
MS-16.2: Promote neighborhood-based
distributed clean/renewable energy generation to
improve local energy security and to reduce the
amount of energy wasted in transmitting
electricity over long distances.
Yes. The project applicant is committed to
working with the city and the adjoining property
owners towards supporting neighborhood-based
distributed clean/ renewable energy generation
when it becomes available in the area.
3) Pedestrian, Bicycle & Transit Site Design Measures
CD-2.1: Promote the Circulation Goals and
Policies in the Envision San José 2040 General
Plan. Create streets that promote pedestrian and
Yes. The project includes an on-site connection
to the Guadalupe River Trail at the southern
limits of the site and currently proposes 20
Alviso Hotel 100 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
bicycle transportation by following applicable
goals and policies in the Circulation section of
Envision San José 2040 General Plan.
a) Design the street network for safe shared use
by pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles.
Include elements that increase driver
awareness.
b) Create a comfortable and safe pedestrian
environment by implementing wider
sidewalks, shade structures, attractive street
furniture, street trees, reduced traffic speeds,
pedestrian-oriented lighting, mid-block
pedestrian crossings, pedestrian activated
crossing lights, bulb-outs and curb extensions
at intersections, and on-street parking that
buffers pedestrians from vehicles.
c) Consider support for reduced parking
requirements, alternative parking
arrangements, and Transportation Demand
Management strategies to reduce area
dedicated to parking and increase area
dedicated to employment, housing, parks,
public art, or other amenities. Encourage decoupled parking to ensure that the value and cost of parking are considered in real estate
and business transactions.
long-term and three short-term bicycle parking
spaces.
Bicycle access would be provided via North
First Street, where Class II bike lanes currently
exist along the project frontage. Upon entering
the project site at the Bay Vista driveway, a
two-way path is provided along the east side of
Bay Vista Drive. The path continues through
the project site and provides access to the
Guadalupe River Trail. This path would help
prevent vehicle-bicycle conflicts on the project
site. Pedestrian access would be provided via
this path also.
Within the project site, sidewalks would
provide hotel access to and from the parking
garage and surface parking areas. The project
would not substantially increase hazards due to
bicycles or pedestrians entering and exiting the
project site.
CD-2.5: Integrate Green Building Goals and
Policies of the Envision San José 2040 General
Plan into site design to create healthful
environments. Consider factors such as shaded
parking areas, pedestrian connections,
minimization of impervious surfaces,
incorporation of stormwater treatment measures,
appropriate building orientations, etc.
Yes. As discussed in Section 2.0, Project
Information, the proposed project would include
shaded parking in the lower levels of the
parking structure, on-site bicycle parking,
would plant 30 trees on-site and would include
stormwater treatment measures consistent with
City post construction requirements.
CD-2.11: Within the Downtown and Urban
Village Overlay areas, consistent with the
minimum density requirements of the pertaining
Land Use/Transportation Diagram designation,
avoid the construction of surface parking lots
except as an interim use, so that long-term
development of the site will result in a cohesive
urban form. In these areas, whenever possible, use
structured parking, rather than surface parking, to
fulfill parking requirements. Encourage the
Not Applicable. The project site is not located
in the Downtown area or within an Urban
Village overlay.
Alviso Hotel 101 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
incorporation of alternative uses, such as parks,
above parking structures.
CD-3.2: Prioritize pedestrian and bicycle
connections to transit, community facilities
(including schools), commercial areas, and other
areas serving daily needs. Ensure that the design
of new facilities can accommodate significant
anticipated future increases in bicycle and
pedestrian activity.
Yes. The project would not remove or inhibit
access to any existing bicycle or pedestrian
facilities. The project includes an on-site
connection to the Guadalupe River Trail at the
southern limits of the site and currently
proposes 20 long-term and three short-term
bicycle parking spaces. Within the project site,
sidewalks would provide hotel access to and
from the parking garage and surface parking
areas. The project would not conflict with any
program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing
pedestrian facilities.
CD-3.4: Encourage pedestrian cross-access
connections between adjacent properties and
require pedestrian and bicycle connections to
streets and other public spaces, with particular
attention and priority given to providing
convenient access to transit facilities. Provide
pedestrian and vehicular connections with crossaccess easements within and between new and existing developments to encourage walking and
minimize interruptions by parking areas and curb
cuts.
Yes. The project includes an on-site connection
to the Guadalupe River Trail at the southern
limits of the site. Within the project site,
sidewalks would provide hotel access to and
from the parking garage and surface parking
areas.
LU-3.5: Provide for the needs of bicyclists and
pedestrians, including adequate bicycle parking
areas and design measures to promote bicyclists
and pedestrian safety.
Not applicable. The project site in not located
in the Downtown area.
TR-2.8: Require new development to promote onsite facilities such as bicycle storage and showers, provide connections to existing and planned
facilities, dedicate land use to expand existing
facilities or provide new facilities such as
sidewalks and/or bicycle lanes/paths, or share in
the cost of improvements.
Yes. The project would include 20 long-term
and three short-term bicycle parking spaces.
TR-7.1: Require large employers to develop
TDM programs to reduce the vehicle trips and
vehicle miles generated by their employees
through the use of shuttles, provision for carsharing, bicycle sharing, carpool, parking strategies, transit incentives and other measures.
Yes. As noted in Section 4.17, Transportation,
the project would be required to implement a
TDM program which would include measures
to support reduced vehicle trips.
Alviso Hotel 102 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
TR-8.5: Promote participation in car share
programs to minimize the need for parking spaces
in new and existing development.
Yes. As noted in Section 4.17, Transportation,
the project would be required to implement a
TDM program which may include a car share
program.
4) Water Conservation and Urban Forestry Measures
MS-3.1: Require water-efficient landscaping,
which conforms to the state’s Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), for all
new commercial, institutional, industrial, and
developer-installed residential development unless
for recreation needs or other area functions.
Yes. The proposed project would include use of
low water use plants and irrigation systems
consistent with the State’s MWELO
requirements.
MS-3.2: Promote the use of green building
technology or techniques that can help reduce the
depletion of the City’s potable water supply, as
building codes permit. For example, promote the
use of captured rainwater, graywater, or recycled
water as the preferred source of non-potable water
needs such as irrigation and building cooling,
consistent with Building Codes or other
regulations.
Yes. The project would utilize recycled water
for landscape irrigation.
MS-19.4: Require the use of recycled water
whenever feasible and cost-effective to serve the
existing and new development.
Yes. The project would utilize recycled water
for landscape irrigation.
MS-21.3: Ensure that San José’s Community
Forest is comprised of species that have low water
requirements and are well adapted to its
Mediterranean climate. Select and plant diverse
species to prevent monocultures that are
vulnerable to pest invasions. Furthermore,
consider the appropriate placement of tree species
and their lifespan to ensure perpetuation of the
Community Forest.
Yes. The proposed trees would have low water
requirements and are suitable for San José’s
climate. The project would plant diverse
species.
MS-26.1: As a condition of new development,
require the planting and maintenance of both
street trees and trees on private property to
achieve a level of tree coverage in compliance
with and that implements City laws, policies or
guidelines.
Yes. As noted in Section 4.4, the project would
be required to comply with the City’s tree
replacement policy and would result in
approximately 100 trees being planted.
ER-8.7: Encourage stormwater reuse for
beneficial uses in existing infrastructure and
future development through the installation of rain
Yes. The proposed project includes waterefficient landscaping that does not warrant use of irrigation such that rain barrels, cisterns, or
water storage facilities would be necessary.
Alviso Hotel 103 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
barrels, cisterns, or other water storage and reuse
facilities.
Table B: Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy
Part 1: Residential Projects – Not Applicable to the Project Part 2: Residential and Non-Residential Projects
Renewable Energy Development
1. Install solar panels, solar hot water, or other
clean energy power generation sources on
development sites, or
2. Participate in community solar programs to
support development of renewable energy in
the community, or
3. Participate in San José Clean Energy at the
Total Green level (i.e., 100% carbon-free
electricity) for electricity accounts associated
with the project.
Supports Strategies: GHGRS #1, GHGRS #3
Yes. The project includes installation of solar
panels on the rooftop of the hotel building.
Building Retrofits – Natural Gas
This strategy applies to projects that include a
retrofit of an existing building.
Supports Strategies: GHGRS # 4
Not Applicable. This strategy is not applicable
because the project does not include a retrofit of
existing buildings.
Zero Waste Goal
1. Provide space for organic waste collection
containers, and/or
2. Exceed the City’s construction and demolition
waste diversion requirement
Supports Strategies: GHGRS #5
Yes. Organic waste containers will not be
provided for the proposed hotel. However, the
proposed project would meet the City’s
construction and demolition waste diversion
requirements.
Caltrain Modernization
1. For projects located within 1/2 mile of a
Caltrain station, establish a program through
which to provide project tenants and/or
residents with free or reduced Caltrain passes;
or
2. Develop a program that provides project
tenants and/or residents with options to reduce
their vehicle miles traveled (e.g., a TDM
program), which could include transit passes,
bike lockers and showers, or other strategies
to reduce project related VMT.
Supports Strategies: GHGRS #6
Yes. As noted in Section 4.17, Transportation,
the project would be required to implement a
TDM program which would include measures
to support reduced vehicle trips.
Alviso Hotel 104 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.8-1: San José Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist
Policy/Strategy Consistency Discussion
Water Conservation
1. Install high-efficiency appliances/fixtures to
reduce water use, and/or include water
sensitive landscape design, and/or
2. Provide access to reclaimed water for outdoor
water use on the project site.
Supports Strategies: GHGRS #7
Yes. The proposed project would include highefficiency fixtures to reduce water usage and would utilize recycled water for landscape
irrigation.
Note:
Refer to Section 4.8.1.2 for more information on the seven strategies identified in the 2030 GHGRS.
As noted above, the project would be consistent with 2030 GHGRS and therefore would not conflict with AB 32 or SB 32. For these reasons, the impact would be less than significant. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact GHG-2: The project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. (Less than Significant Impact)
As discussed under Impact GHG-1, the project would be consistent with the 2030 GHGRS.
Additionally, the proposed project would not conflict or otherwise interfere with the statewide GHG reduction measures identified in CARB’s Scoping Plan nor would the project conflict with SB 100 goals. The project would be constructed in conformance with CALGreen and the Title 24 Building Code, which requires high-efficiency water fixtures, water-efficient irrigation systems, and compliance with current energy efficacy standards. Therefore, the project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 105 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The following discussion is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and a Phase II Soil and Groundwater Investigation completed by Geologica Inc. in November 2015 and March 2016, respectively, a Soil Management Plan completed for the site and surrounding sites by Geologica Inc. in June 2018, and a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed by ERAS Environmental, Inc in April 2021. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment from 2015, the Phase II Report from 2016, and the Soil Management Plan from 2018 were completed for a 36-acre study area that includes the project site, as well as the City approved Topgolf @ Terra development northwest of the project site. The reports are attached as Appendices D, E, and F, respectively. The Phase I completed in 2021 was completed for the specific project site (APN 015-48-006) 40 and is attached as Appendix
G.
4.9.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
Overview
The storage, use, generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste are highly regulated under federal and state laws. In California, the EPA has granted most enforcement authority over federal hazardous materials regulations to the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). In turn, local agencies have been granted responsibility for implementation and enforcement of many hazardous materials regulations under the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) program.
Worker health and safety and public safety are key issues when dealing with hazardous materials.
Proper handling and disposal of hazardous material is vital if it is disturbed during project construction. Cal/OSHA enforces state worker health and safety regulations related to construction activities. Regulations include exposure limits, requirements for protective clothing, and training requirements to prevent exposure to hazardous materials. Cal/OSHA also enforces occupational health and safety regulations specific to lead and asbestos investigations and abatement.
Federal and State
Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77
Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77 Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace (FAR Part 77) sets forth standards and review requirements for protecting the airspace for safe aircraft operation, particularly by restricting the height of potential structures and minimizing other potential hazards (such as reflective surfaces, flashing lights, and electronic interference) to aircraft in flight. These regulations require that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be notified of certain proposed construction projects located within an extended zone defined by an imaginary slope radiating outward for several miles from an airport’s runways, or which would otherwise stand at least 200 feet in height above the ground.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 40 The site was originally APN 015-39-020, but the site’s APN has been changed to APN 015-48-006.
Alviso Hotel 106 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. Over five years, $1.6 billion was collected and the tax went to a trust fund for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. CERCLA accomplished the following objectives:
• Established prohibitions and requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites;
• Provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and
• Established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified.
The law authorizes two kinds of response actions:
• Short-term removals, where actions may be taken to address releases or threatened releases requiring prompt response; and
• Long-term remedial response actions that permanently and significantly reduce the dangers associated with releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances that are serious, but not immediately life-threatening. These actions can be completed only at sites listed on the EPA’s National Priorities List.
CERCLA also enabled the revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List.
CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act on October 17, 1986.41
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted in 1976, is the principal federal law in the United States governing the disposal of solid waste and hazardous waste. RCRA gives the EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the "cradle to the grave." This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA also sets forth a framework for the management of non-hazardous solid wastes.
The Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) are the 1984 amendments to RCRA that focused on waste minimization, phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste, and corrective action for releases. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased enforcement authority 41 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Superfund: CERCLA Overview.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cercla-overview.
Alviso Hotel 107 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
for the EPA, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.42
Government Code Section 65962.5
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code requires CalEPA to develop and update a list of hazardous waste and substances sites, known as the Cortese List. The Cortese List is used by state and local agencies and developers to comply with CEQA requirements. The Cortese List includes hazardous substance release sites identified by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).
43 Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 provides the EPA with authority to require reporting, record-keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. Certain substances are generally excluded from TSCA, including, among others, food, drugs, cosmetics, and pesticides. The TSCA addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of specific chemicals including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), asbestos, radon, and leadbased paint.
California Accidental Release Prevention Program
The California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) Program aims to prevent accidental releases of regulated hazardous materials that represent a potential hazard beyond the boundaries of a property. Facilities that are required to participate in the CalARP Program use or store specified quantities of toxic and flammable substances (hazardous materials) that can have off-site consequences if accidentally released. The Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health reviews CalARP risk management plans as the CUPA.
Asbestos-Containing Materials
Friable asbestos is any asbestos-containing material (ACM) that, when dry, can easily be crumbled or pulverized to a powder by hand, allowing the asbestos particles to become airborne. Common examples of products that have been found to contain friable asbestos include acoustical ceilings, plaster, wallboard, and thermal insulation for water heaters and pipes. Common examples of nonfriable ACMs are asphalt roofing shingles, vinyl floor tiles, and transite siding made with cement.
The EPA phased out use of friable asbestos products between 1973 and 1978. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines require that potentially friable ACMs be removed prior to building demolition or remodeling that may disturb the ACMs. 42 United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-resource-conservation-and-recoveryact. 43 California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
Alviso Hotel 108 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1
The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission banned the use of lead-based paint in 1978.
Removal of older structures with lead-based paint is subject to requirements outlined by the Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1 during demolition activities.
Requirements include employee training, employee air monitoring, and dust control. If lead-based paint is peeling, flaking, or blistered, it is required to be removed prior to demolition.
Local
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to hazards and hazardous materials and are applicable to the proposed project.
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Hazardous Material Policies Policy Description
Policy EC-7.1 For development and redevelopment projects, require evaluation of the proposed site’s historical and present uses to determine if any potential environmental conditions exist that could adversely impact the community or environment.
Policy EC-7.2 Identify existing soil, soil vapor, groundwater and indoor air contamination and mitigation for identified human health and environmental hazards to future users and provide as part of the environmental review process for all development and redevelopment projects. Mitigation measures for soil, soil vapor and groundwater contamination shall be designed to avoid adverse human health or environmental risk, in conformance with regional, state and federal laws, regulations, guidelines and standards.
Action EC-7.9: Ensure coordination with the County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Department of Toxic Substances Control or other applicable regulatory agencies, as appropriate, on projects with contaminated soil and/or groundwater or where historical or active regulatory oversight exists.
Action EC 7.10: Require review and approval of grading, erosion control and dust control plans prior to issuance of a grading permit by the Director of Public Works on sites with known soil contamination. Construction operations shall be conducted to limit the creation and dispersion of dust and sediment runoff.
Existing Conditions
Historic Uses
The project site was undeveloped from at least 1897 until the mid-1960s. Portions of the site were utilized from the 1950s through the 1960s as an unpermitted debris dumping area. The Guadalupe River was present on the southeastern portion of the site until the mid-1960s when the river was channelized to the west of the site. A portion of the former riverbed remains on the site currently.
Alviso Hotel 109 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
In the late 1990s, the northwestern portion of the site was included as part of a former golf driving range facility. The development was cleared by 2016, at which point the entire property consisted of vacant land.
South Bay Asbestos Area
The entire town of Alviso, including the project site, is located within a former Superfund site called the South Bay Asbestos Area. Three sources of asbestos were identified in the area: the “ring levee”, truck yards, and former landfills where asbestos containing materials were historically disposed.
Asbestos fibers from these sources proliferated throughout the 550-acre South Bay Asbestos Area.
Remediation of the truck yards and ring levee were completed in 1994 and 1997, respectively.
Following the completion of remediation activities and subsequent testing by the EPA, the South Bay Asbestos Area was removed from the Superfund list. Other than deed restrictions placed on the properties containing the former landfills to prevent the release of asbestos resulting from future development activities, no remaining Superfund regulations apply to the area.
The former Sainte Claire Landfill site is located immediately west of the project site, along either side of Gold Street south of Moffat Street. This landfill was identified by the EPA as having the potential for asbestos-containing waste materials. In 2011, the property owner performed additional sampling work under EPA oversight sufficient to show that the former Sainte Claire landfill need not be deed restricted to prevent potential exposure to asbestos containing waste. Of the 28 samples analyzed, only one had over the one percent concentration action level. All of the other concentrations were less than 0.25 percent or none detected, which means the 0.29 percent average for all samples is substantially less than the one percent action level established for the site by the EPA. The EPA coordinated its review of this sampling effort and the analytical results closely with the supporting state agency, the California DTSC. The DTSC has concurred with EPA that based on sampling results, a deed restriction (i.e., land use covenant) is not needed for the Sainte Claire Landfill. As a result, the landfill is not subject to the requirements and restrictions of the South Bay Asbestos Area.44 The project site is not within the former landfill.
Current Uses
The site is undeveloped and vacant except for a large homeless encampment close to the southeast portion of the site and a number of small encampments along the northwest portion of the site.
Garbage and household debris extends across the middle of the site. The site is mostly surrounded by chain link fencing on the northwest and northeast sides. The site has irregular topography with many small, elevated areas and low sections scattered throughout, and is approximately 15 feet below the adjacent levee and parcels to the northwest and northeast. The low area of the site extends southeast to the elevated Highway 237. The northwest portion of the site is graded and covered with gravel, which extends northwest to a paved road to the Topgolf facility.
Septic systems, drywells, monitoring wells or other evidence of subsurface investigations were not observed on the site. No evidence of underground storage tanks, aboveground tanks, sumps, pits, or 44 US EPA. Explanation of Significant Differences to the Record of Decision - South Bay Asbestos Superfund Site Operable Unit 2 - Overall Site. September 28, 2011.
Alviso Hotel 110 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
wells was observed. Additionally, no evidence of significant spillage, leakage or dumping of hazardous materials was observed.45
The site was noted to previously be at or below sea level. Up to 14 feet of uncompacted fill and rubble materials have been placed on top of native soils on the site. Given that the project site is known to contain imported soils and fill from unknown locations, there is a potential for contaminated soils to be on the project site. The site is currently approximately five feet above Mean Sea level (MSL).
Surrounding Land Uses
The site is bordered on the east by an office business park with a hotel. The site is bordered to the northwest by a fence-enclosed driving range that is part of the newly constructed three-story Topgolf, beyond which are residences, the Alviso Community Center, the Alviso Health Center, and a gated and fenced parking lot. The site is bordered to the northeast by a strip of undeveloped land and a large, landscaped asphalt parking lot for two recently constructed multi-story office buildings. Across North First Street, to the north, is Mayne Elementary School, youth center, public library, two residential subdivisions and, at the northeast corner of First and Liberty Streets, a small retail center.
A large area of undeveloped land bounds the site to the southeast, which extends to the elevated Highway 237. The southern side of the project site is bounded by the Guadalupe River with an adjacent paved trail along the riverfront.
The Syntax Court Waste Disposal site is located southeast of the property, near the intersection of Highway 237 and North First Street. The former Sainte Claire Landfill site is located west of the project site, along either side of Gold Street south of Moffat Street. The project site is not within the bounds of either the Syntax Court Disposal or Sainte Claire Landfill sites.
Recognized Environmental Conditions
Based on previous site investigations, a field reconnaissance, and records searches, the Phase I ESA prepared for the project in 2015 identified the following potential sources of hazardous contamination on the project site:
• Undocumented fill containing concrete debris and other materials underlies most or all of the project site to a depth of up to 14 feet.
• Soil samples taken in 2004 found concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons and heavy metals in exceedance of Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Environmental Screening Levels.
• Off-site shallow groundwater has been impacted by chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which are believed to be sourced from a localized area near the intersection of North First Street and Highway 237. In-situ groundwater remediation by injection is in process, however, the leading edge of the plume appears to extend onto the project site. 45 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 015-48-006 North First Street. May 3, 2021.
Alviso Hotel 111 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Several other environmental compliance issues were noted, including a lack of a hazardous materials business plan. In addition, two groundwater piezometers (i.e., devices used to measure groundwater pressure) are known to be on the site but their location is unknown, and they were never properly abandoned or closed under a County permit.
A Soil Management Plan (SMP) for the project site and surrounding parcels was completed in 2018.
The SMP was prepared to provide technical and operational guidelines to be instituted during the development of the project site and the surrounding parcels, including any invasive activities such as the installation of utility lines or foundations. The document covers soil management procedures, dust control measures, and decontamination procedures.
A Subsurface Investigation Report was also prepared in 2018 to further characterize soil and groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the proposed project site. Soil and groundwater investigation were conducted in October of 2018. Eight soil borings were advanced to depths of 12 to 28 feet, arranged at locations surrounding the former GP-2 boring46 (drilled off-site close to the project site boundary). Soil and groundwater samples were recovered from each boring and analyzed for TPH-dro and TPH-oro.
Analytical results indicated that all soil contaminant detections were below the commercial/industrial ESL levels of 1,000 and 140,000 mg/kg, respectively.
Groundwater analysis indicated that TPH-dro exceeded Tier 1 ESL levels at several sampling locations. However, the report noted that groundwater underlying the project site is not suitable for use as drinking water due to high salinity related to proximity to the San Francisco Bay. TPH-dro levels did not exceed aquatic habitat or gross contamination levels (640 and 2,500 ug/L, respectively). TPH-oro analytical results did not exceed the gross contaminant level of 50,000 ug/L.
The report also noted that the RWQCB concluded that motor oil detections were likely petroleum degradants and suggested combining TPH-dro and TPH-oro results for comparison to TPH-dro standards. The report stated that this approach would suggest groundwater ESL exceedances at GP-2 and possibly 10 feet and 50 feet to the north of GP-2.
Based on these results, the report concluded that detections of TPH compounds, VOCs, and metals at the project site are related to historic fill placed throughout the project site and contaminants randomly distributed through that fill. As the project site is proposed to be developed for commercial use and would be completely paved and/or otherwise covered and encapsulated, the report concluded that removal of random localized exceedances would not be necessary or practical. As such, the report recommended no further soil testing or excavation at the project site. The previous SMP developed for the site was recommended as a guideline to detail procedures for management of lowlevel contamination at the project site for subsurface work or grading.
Off-Site Potential Sources of Contamination
The following nearby sites were analyzed in the Phase I Report completed in 2021 due to their close proximity to the project site and their listings within relevant agency databases. 46 GP-2 boring is a boring from the subsurface investigation completed by Geologica, Inc in 2016. The boring detected an apparent petroleum hydrocarbon “hot spot” in the soil and groundwater in the southwest corner.
Alviso Hotel 112 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4701 North First Street
This site is located to the northwest boundary of the project site, and previously included portions of the project site. The 4701 North First Street includes five parcels (015-48-002, -003, -004, -005, and - 007) and was undergoing redevelopment with an upgraded golf center, hotel, and commercial buildings. Investigations were conducted at this location starting in 2015 to assess if excavated soil and produced groundwater would require special handling and or disposal during grading activities during the redevelopment activities.
During investigation activities, fill, including concrete debris, was noted to a depth of up to 14 feet below ground surface (bgs). Groundwater was reported to be present at depths of seven to 18 feet bgs. The expected groundwater flow direction was reported to be to the northwest due to the proximity to the Guadalupe River.
Soil and/or groundwater indicated the presence of contaminants, including the following:
• Total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as diesel and motor oil (TPH-dro and TPH-oro) • Total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as hydraulic oil range organics (TPH-horo) • Total oil and grease (TOG)
• VOCs (benzene, 1,1-dichloroethene, and vinyl chloride) • Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
• Dieldrin
• Metals (arsenic, cobalt, lead, and nickel)
Groundwater samples were collected from two borings in close vicinity and located upgradient of the project site. Concentrations of benzene detected were 0.73 micrograms per liter (ug/L), which are above the RWQCB‘s January 2019 environmental screening level of 0.42 ug/L.
In 2019, a Soil Vapor and Groundwater Testing report was completed for an assessment of vapor intrusion due to the potential presence of low levels of VOCs in the fill and/or in groundwater at the site. The report indicated that low concentrations of VOCs were scattered across the site in soil vapor and occasionally exceeded the ESLs for potential vapor intrusion for commercial or industrial land use. The RWQCB staff indicated that the concentrations detected did not warrant the installation of a vapor mitigation system.
Fuel related VOCs, including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) were detected consistently at low concentrations across the site. Chlorinated solvents detected on the site consisted of tetrachloroethane (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE), cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE), and trans1,2-DCE. A Soil Management Plan was put in place for the site and surrounding areas to manage the risk of exposure. No further soil testing or excavation was recommended.
A Vapor Intrusion Mitigation (VIM) Design report for the site was prepared in 2019. VOCs detected on the site appeared to be randomly distributed. The RWQCB agreed that a passive/active VIM system beneath the proposed structure would fully mitigate the risk posed by the known contamination. The system was installed in 2019.
Alviso Hotel 113 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Syntax Court Disposal Site
Previous unpermitted disposals occurred at this location, which is located approximately 1,000 feet east of the project site. The site is now being developed as the 237 @ First Street Development Project. Historical records and previous investigations found that undocumented fill was placed in areas along the former Guadalupe River floodplain dating back to the 1950s, west of the Syntax Court Disposal Site. Development is planned for this site, and therefore investigations and remediation are currently ongoing.
Two groundwater monitoring wells are present at the eastern margin of the Syntax Court Disposal Site, immediately adjacent to the eastern boundary of the project site. The most recent groundwater monitoring report, dated October 2020, indicated the detection of 1,1-DCA at 2.7 ug/L, and 1,1-DCE at 1.7 ug/L. No other VOCs or SVOCs were detected. While these detection levels exceed Tier 1 ESL levels, the noted Tier 1 levels are for the leaching to groundwater to be potential drinking water.
As groundwater in the area is impacted by salinity, it is unlikely to be utilized for drinking water.
Contaminant levels detected are below contemporary ESLs for commercial vapor intrusion (1,1- DCA, 33 ug/L; 1,2-DCE 9.8 ug/L) and ecological habitat goals (1,1-DCA, 47 ug/L; 1,2-DCE 10,000 ug/L).
Based on the contaminant levels observed in ongoing groundwater monitoring, the Syntax Court Disposal site does not present a risk to subsurface conditions at the project site.
Phase II Soil & Groundwater Investigation
Several soil and groundwater investigations have been completed for the project site to date; for a review of these studies, refer to the proposed project’s Phase II Investigation (Appendix E). To evaluate the currently proposed project, Geologica took 11 soil and groundwater samples on the site in January 2016. However, only the samples taken in the proposed hotel site will be discussed in the Initial Study. All other samples were taken on the site of the approved Topgolf development (File Number: PD16-034/PDC16-013) and were discussed in the environmental review of that project.
Continuous soil cores and temporary groundwater monitoring wells were utilized, with sample depths ranging from the surface to between 16 and 24 feet bgs. The samples were analyzed for many varieties of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), heavy metals, organochlorine pesticides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Supplemental soil and groundwater sampling were completed in February 2016 to further assess site conditions. The complete results of the investigations are provided in Appendix E along with maps showing the soil boring locations and details pertaining to methodology and quality control. The results of the sampling are summarized and discussed below.
Asbestos
Asbestos testing was completed at 15 locations on the site in 1996 to evaluate for asbestos in the onsite fill. Sampling locations were not clearly identified, but did not include a small portion of the site located west of the Pin High Golf Center and south of the RV parking lot. The laboratory analyses did not detect the presence of asbestos in any of the samples. Because the testing locations are unknown and did not include a portion of the site, asbestos may be present in the undocumented fill in areas of the site that were not previously tested.
Alviso Hotel 114 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)
No TPH as gasoline or diesel were detected in any of the soil samples on the project site.
The RWQCB has established environmental screening levels (ESLs) for Direct Exposure of 1,200 mg/kg and 140,000 mg/kg for TPH-d and TPH-mo, respectively. Only one sample had a TPH-d detection greater than the Direct Exposure ESL of 1,200 mg/kg. TPH-d was not reported at concentrations greater than the Soil to Groundwater Leaching ESL of 3,600 mg/kg. None of the reported TPH-mo concentrations exceeded the Direct Exposure ESL of 140,000 mg/kg.
Pesticides
No pesticides were detected on the project site. However, pesticides were detected in the adjacent Topgolf site. The pesticide levels were generally at low concentrations except for three samples that were above Soil to Groundwater Leaching ESLs. All samples were below the Commercial/Industrial Direct Exposure ESL. Due to the proximity of the Topgolf sampling, it is possible that some pesticides are present in the project site soils as well.
Metals
Cadmium was detected in one on-site soil sample above the Commercial/Industrial Direct Exposure ESL of 0.058 mg/kg. However, this concentration is consistent with natural background concentrations for this metal in Bay Area soils. While no other metals were detected on the project site samples, other metals were detected above ESLs in the Topgolf site. The other metals include arsenic, lead, and beryllium.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
No PCBs were detected in the on-site soil. One sample in the Topgolf site contained PCBs at a concentration below ESLs. PCBs were not detected in any other samples.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
No VOCs were detected in the on-site soil. Acetone was detected in one sample in the Topgolf site.
No other VOCs were detected.
Groundwater
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH)
The presence of total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel (TPH-d) and motor oil (TPH-mo) was documented during the Phase I ESA from 2015, the Phase I ESA from 2021, and the Phase II Soil and Groundwater Analysis. Maximum TPD-d concentrations ranged up to 1,900 ug/l, while TPH-mo ranged up to 10,000 ug/l. Numerous detected concentrations of TPH-mo exceeded the applicable ESLs during the time of the Phase II completed in 2016. Analytical results disclosed in the Phase I ESA completed in 2021 indicated that all soil contaminant detections were below the commercial/industrial ESL levels of 1,000 and 140,000 mg/kg, respectively.
Alviso Hotel 115 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
The VOCs 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE) and vinyl chloride (VC) were detected in the groundwater on-site at 18 ug/l and 0.69, respectively, which exceed the applicable ESLs. Several other VOCs were detected at concentrations below applicable ESLs including 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), cis1,2- dichloroethene (cis-DCE), 1,1-dichloroethane (DCA), and 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane.
As discussed previously, the up-gradient property southeast of the site (237 @ First Street Development Project) comprises the Syntax Court Disposal Site, which is a source of chlorinated VOCs to groundwater. Groundwater impacts and associated remediation and monitoring are currently occurring on that property under the oversight of the RWQCB. Based on the types of VOC’s detected in the groundwater samples for the proposed project, the Syntax Court Disposal Site groundwater VOC plume appears to extend onto the subject property. A groundwater monitoring program is in place at the 237 @ First Street Property. Based on the contaminant levels observed in ongoing groundwater monitoring, the Syntax Court Disposal site does not present a risk to subsurface conditions at the project site.
Dissolved Metals
Groundwater samples indicated detections of cobalt and nickel above the applicable ESLs. The cobalt and nickel concentrations were consistent throughout the project site and the adjacent Topgolf site, indicating that the detections likely represent background conditions. Mercury was also detected in some samples in the Topgolf site. No other metals were detected above their respective ESLs.
Other Hazards
Asbestos Containing Materials
Friable asbestos is any asbestos containing material (ACM) that, when dry, can easily be crumbled or pulverized to a powder by hand allowing the asbestos particles to become airborne. ACMs are of concern because exposure to ACMs has been linked to cancer. Use of friable asbestos products was banned in 1978. Given that there are no existing buildings on site and the existing buildings on the Topgolf site were constructed in the 1990s, ACMs are assumed to be absent for the purposes of this analysis.
As described previously, given the history of asbestos contamination in the Alviso area, undocumented fill on portions of the site that were not previously tested may contain asbestos Lead-Based Paint
Lead-based paint is of concern both as a source of direct exposure through ingestion of paint chips, and as a contributor to lead in interior dust and exterior soil. In 1978, the Consumer Products Safety Commission banned paint and other surface coating materials containing lead. Given that there are no existing buildings on site and the existing buildings on the Topgolf site were constructed in the 1990s, lead-based paint is assumed to be absent for the purposes of this analysis.
Alviso Hotel 116 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Airports
The Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport is located approximately 5.6 miles south of the project site. As previously mentioned, Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77, “Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace” (referred to as FAR Part 77) requires that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) be notified of certain proposed construction projects located within an extended zone defined by an imaginary slope radiating outward for several miles from an airport’s runways, or which would otherwise stand at least 200 feet in height above ground. For the project site, any structure exceeding 195 feet in height above grade would require submittal to the FAA for airspace safety review. As the proposed project would have a maximum height of 65 feet, notification to the FAA is not required to determine the potential for the project to create an aviation hazard.
Wildfire Hazards
The project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.
47 4.9.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
3) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
4) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as
a result, will it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
5) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, result in a safety hazard
or excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area?
47 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Santa Clara County FHSZ Map. November 6, 2007.
Accessed October 22, 2020. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6766/fhszs_map43.pdf Alviso Hotel 117 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
6) Impair implementation of, or physically
interfere with, an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
7) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving wildland fires?
Impact HAZ-1: The project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Soil Management Plan
A SMP was prepared for the site in June 2018 (see Appendix F). The SMP was prepared to provide technical and operational guidelines to be instituted during the development of the project site and the surrounding parcels, including any invasive activities such as excavation, drilling, or activities involving soil disturbance. The SMP establishes management practices for handling impacted groundwater and/or soil material that may be encountered during site development and soildisturbing activities.
Components of the SMP include: a detailed discussion of the site background; a summary of the analytical results from soil and groundwater sampling; protocols for preparation of a Health and Safety Plans; protocols for conducting earthwork activities in areas where impacted soil and/or groundwater are present or suspected, including site cap maintenance; health and safety measures and soil handing procedures; mobilization of equipment; site grading protocols; excavation and stockpiling protocols; transport and disposal guidelines; protocols for importing clean soil; protocols for excavation for subsurface utilities; protocols for construction dewatering; dust control measures; worker training requirements; and decontamination procedures. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) provides regulatory oversight for remediation of contamination on the site. The RWQCB reviewed and approved the SMP in its capacity as the regulatory agency. Implementation of the approved SMP would reduce impacts associated with on-site contamination to less than significant levels (refer to MM HAZ-1.1, below).
Operation and construction of the proposed hotel would not require the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials in quantities that would result in a significant hazard to the public.
Operation of the proposed project would include the use and storage of cleaning supplies and maintenance chemicals in small quantities. No other hazardous materials would be used or stored onsite. The small quantities of cleaning supplies and materials would be stored on the site in accordance with all pertinent local, state, and federal regulations and thus would not pose a risk to the public or the environment.
Alviso Hotel 118 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
As described above, contaminated soil and groundwater exists on the site. Construction activities could result in the exposure of construction workers (and surrounding residential uses and elementary school) to hazardous materials.
Impact HAZ-1: Residual soil and groundwater contamination could expose construction workers and members of the public, including the surrounding residential uses and elementary school, to hazardous materials during construction activities.
Mitigation Measures: As a condition of approval, the project proponent shall implement the following measures to reduce impacts from hazardous materials to a less than significant level:
MM HAZ-1.1: Prior to the issuance of any grading, demolition, or building permits, the project applicant shall prepare and implement the approved Soil Management Plan prepared for the site under the oversight of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
With implementation of General Plan policies and precautionary measures, development of the project site would not expose construction workers, the public, or the environment to significant hazards related to soil or groundwater contamination. (Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Impact HAZ-2: The project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
As previously described in Impact HAZ-1, the project would properly store small quantities of cleaning and maintenance products. No other hazardous materials would be used on-site during project operation. Thus, there would be no significant hazardous materials that could be released during upset and accident conditions. Additionally, with implementation of MM HAZ-1.1, any contaminated soils and groundwater on-site would be properly managed during construction so as to not expose construction workers, the public, or the environment to hazardous materials. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Impact HAZ-3: The project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. (Less than Significant Impact) Mayne Elementary School is within a quarter mile of the project site, located directly across North First Street at 5030 North First Street. However, as previously discussed in Impact HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous Alviso Hotel 119 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
materials, substances, or wastes in quantities that would pose a risk to human health. Mitigation measures MM HAZ-1.1, identified for contaminated soil/groundwater, would provide adequate mitigation to ensure no exposure for the school from on-site contaminants encountered during construction. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact HAZ-4: The project would not be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation) The South Bay Asbestos Area Superfund site is a 550-acre site located in the Alviso District of San José which encompasses the project site. The site includes former landfills, a ring levee and truck yards. The Marshland and Santos landfills accepted asbestos containing material from an asbestoscement pipe manufacturing plant from 1953 to 1982. Prior to joining the City of San José, the Alviso District erected a ring levee to protect low lying areas from flooding. The ring levee was built with locally quarried rock that contained naturally occurring asbestos. The EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers removed the ring levee, installed landfill caps, paved truck yards, and restored wetlands.
The landfill caps require ongoing maintenance and inspection, including following soil management plans.
The EPA has conducted five, Five-Year Reviews of the South Bay Asbestos Area Superfund site’s remedy. These reviews ensure that the remedies put in place protect public health and the environment, and function as intended by site decision documents. The most recent review concluded that response actions at the site are in accordance with the remedy selected by the EPA and that the remedy continues to be protective of human health and the environment.48 As discussed under Impact HAZ-1, the project would include mitigation measures to ensure any contaminated soils and groundwater on-site would be properly managed during construction so as to not expose construction workers, the public, or the environment to hazardous materials.
Additionally, the adjacent Topgolf project site has been listed as a Cleanup Program Site since the project’s approval due to the remedial action to clean the site’s soil and groundwater prior to construction. That project implemented similar mitigation measures to ensure that impacts resulting from removal of the contaminated soil and groundwater would result in less than significant impacts. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation)
Impact HAZ-5: The project would not be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. The project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. (Less than Significant Impact)
48 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Superfund Site: South Bay Asbestos Area, Alviso Cleanup Activities. Accessed January 15, 2021.
https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.Cleanup&id=0902250#bkground Alviso Hotel 120 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
As described in Section 4.9.1.2 Existing Conditions the project is over two miles away from the nearest airport, which is the Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport. The proposed hotel would be a maximum of 65 feet tall, well under the FAA’s notification height limit of 200 feet above ground level49. The project site is outside of the 2027 60 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour.50 Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact HAZ-6: The project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. (No Impact)
The parking lot design provides adequate access for emergency vehicles throughout the project site (see Section 4.17 Transportation). The proposed project would not impair or interfere with the implementation of an adopted City of San Jose or County of Santa Clara emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. (No Impact)
Impact HAZ-7: The project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. (Less than Significant Impact)
As described in Section 4.9.1.2 Existing Conditions, the project site is not located in a fire hazard severity zone. The project would not exacerbate existing conditions. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. (Less than Significant Impact) 49 FAA. Notice of Proposed Construction of Alteration. §77.13 Construction or alteration requiring notice. 50 Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport. 2027 CNEL Contours for Airport Master Plan. Amended June 8, 2010. Map.
Alviso Hotel 121 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.10.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
Federal and State
National Flood Insurance Program
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) established the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to reduce impacts of flooding on private and public properties. The program provides subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations protecting development in floodplains. As part of the program, FEMA publishes Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that identify Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). An SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the one-percent annual chance flood, which is also referred to as the base flood or 100- year flood.
Statewide Construction General Permit
The SWRCB has implemented an NPDES General Construction Permit for the State of California (Construction General Permit). For projects disturbing one acre or more of soil, a Notice of Intent (NOI) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) must be prepared by a qualified professional prior to commencement of construction. The Construction General Permit includes requirements for training, inspections, record keeping, and, for projects of certain risk levels, monitoring. The general purpose of the requirements is to minimize the discharge of pollutants and to protect beneficial uses and receiving waters from the adverse effects of construction-related storm water discharges.
Regional and Local
San Francisco Bay Basin Plan
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB regulates water quality in accordance with the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan lists the beneficial uses that the San Francisco Bay RWQCB has identified for local aquifers, streams, marshes, rivers, and the San Francisco Bay, as well as the water quality objectives and criteria that must be met to protect these uses. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB implements the Basin Plan by issuing and enforcing waste discharge requirements, including permits for nonpoint sources such as the urban runoff discharged by a City’s stormwater drainage system. The Basin Plan also describes watershed management programs and water quality attainment strategies.
Municipal Regional Permit Provision C.3.
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB re-issued the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (MRP) in 2015 to regulate stormwater discharges from municipalities and local agencies (copermittees) in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties, and the cities of Alviso Hotel 122 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Fairfield, Suisun City, and Vallejo.51 Under Provision C.3 of the MRP, new and redevelopment projects that create or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area are required to implement site design, source control, and Low Impact Development (LID)-based stormwater treatment controls to treat post-construction stormwater runoff. LID-based treatment controls are intended to maintain or restore the site’s natural hydrologic functions, maximizing opportunities for infiltration and evapotranspiration, and using stormwater as a resource (e.g., rainwater harvesting for non-potable uses). The MRP also requires that stormwater treatment measures are properly installed, operated, and maintained.
In addition to water quality controls, the MRP requires new development and redevelopment projects that create or replace one acre or more of impervious surface to manage development-related increases in peak runoff flow, volume, and duration, where such hydromodification is likely to cause increased erosion, silt pollutant generation, or other impacts to local rivers, streams, and creeks.
Projects may be deemed exempt from these requirements if they do not meet the minimized size threshold, drain into tidally influenced areas or directly into the Bay, or drain into hardened channels, or if they are infill projects in subwatersheds or catchment areas that are greater than or equal to 65 percent impervious.
Water Resources Protection Ordinance and District Well Ordinance The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) operates as the flood control agency for Santa Clara County. Their stewardship also includes creek restoration, pollution prevention efforts, and groundwater recharge. Permits for well construction and destruction work, most exploratory boring for groundwater exploration, and projects within Valley Water property or easements are required under Valley Water’s Water Resources Protection Ordinance and District Well Ordinance.
Post-Construction Urban Runoff Management (City Council Policy No. 6-29) The City of San José’s Policy No. 6-29 implements the stormwater treatment requirements of Provision C.3 of the MRP. City Council Policy No. 6-29 requires new development and redevelopment projects to implement post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Treatment Control Measures (TCMs). This policy also established specific design standards for postconstruction TCMs for projects that create or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces.
Post-Construction Hydromodification Management (City Council Policy No. 8-14) The City of San José’s Policy No. 8-14 implements the hydromodification management requirements of Provision C.3 of the MRP. Policy No. 8-14 requires new development and redevelopment projects that create or replace one acre or more of impervious surface area, and are located within a subwatershed that is less than 65 percent impervious, to manage development-related increases in peak runoff flow, volume, and duration, where such hydromodification is likely to cause increased erosion, silt generation, or other impacts to local rivers, streams, and creeks. The policy requires these projects to be designed to control project-related hydromodification through a Hydromodification Management Plan (HMP). Projects that do not meet the minimum size threshold, drain into tidally influenced areas or directly into the Bay, or are infill projects in subwatersheds or 51 MRP Number CAS612008
Alviso Hotel 123 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
catchment areas that are greater than or equal to 65 percent impervious would not be subject to the HMP requirement.
City of San José Floodplain Ordinance
The City’s Floodplain Ordinance establishes minimum elevations for finished building floors based on base flood elevations (BFEs) established for the NFIP, and generally prohibits any improvements that will cause a cumulative rise of more than one foot to the base flood elevation at any point in San José.
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to hydrology and water quality and are applicable to the proposed project.
Policy Description
Policy IN-3.7 Design new projects to minimize potential damage due to stormwaters and flooding to the site and other properties.
Policy IN-3.9 Require developers to prepare drainage plans for proposed developments that define needed drainage improvements per City standards.
Policy MS-3.4 Promote the use of green roofs (i.e., roofs with vegetated cover), landscapebased treatment measures, pervious materials for hardscape, and other stormwater management practices to reduce water pollution.
Policy ER-8.1 Manage stormwater runoff in compliance with the City’s Post-Construction Urban Runoff (6-29) and Hydromodification Management (8-14) Policies.
Policy ER-8.3 Ensure that private development in San José includes adequate measures to treat stormwater runoff.
Policy EC-4.1 Design and build all new or remodeled habitable structures in accordance with the most recent California Building Code and municipal code requirements as amended and adopted by the City of San José, including provisions for expansive soil, and grading and stormwater controls.
Policy EC-5.7 Allow new urban development only when mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design to ensure that new urban runoff does not increase flood risks elsewhere.
Policy EC-5.16 Implement the Post-Construction Urban Runoff Management requirements of the City’s Municipal NPDES Permit to reduce urban runoff from project sites.
Alviso Hotel 124 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Alviso Master Plan
The Alviso Master Plan establishes the location, intensity, and character of land uses; the circulation pattern, and necessary infrastructure improvements to support development. The following policies are specific to hydrology and water quality and are applicable to the proposed project.
Alviso Master Plan Relevant Utilities Policies
Policies Description
Storm Drainage
Policy 1
All new development projects should be evaluated to determine the possible need for additional storm drainage facilities
Environmental
Protection Policy 1
All new parking, circulation, loading, outdoor storage, utility, and other similar activity areas must be located on paved surfaces with proper drainage to avoid potential pollutants from entering the groundwater, Guadalupe River, Coyote Creek, or San Francisco Bay
Existing Conditions
Water Quality
The project site is located within the Guadalupe River watershed, which covers a 170 square-mile area, including the Guadalupe River/Alviso Slough (adjacent to the west of the site). The water quality of the river/slough can be greatly affected by pollution carried in contaminated surface runoff.
Pollutants from unidentified sources, known as “non-point” source pollutants, are washed from streets, construction sites, parking lots, and other exposed surfaces into storm drains. Grading and excavation activities during construction could increase the amount of surface water runoff (i.e., particles of fill or excavated soil) from the site, or could erode soil downgradient, if the flows are not controlled).
Groundwater
The project site is located in the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin between the Diablo Mountains to the east and Santa Cruz Mountains to the west. The Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin is filled by valley floor alluvium and the Santa Clara Formation. Groundwater at the project site can range from 14 to 15 feet below ground surface (bgs).52 Groundwater levels typically fluctuate seasonally depending on the variation in rainfall, irrigation from landscaping, and other factors. The project site does not contribute to the recharging of the County’s groundwater aquifers managed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
Storm Drainage
The site is currently undeveloped and pervious. While a majority of storm water would percolate into the ground on-site, runoff still occurs under high rain scenarios. Runoff follows the grade of the site, flowing northeast towards storm drains on North First Street, which is then conveyed to a pump 52 Geologica, Inc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: Pin High Golf Center & 3 Adjacent Parcels. November 10, 2015.
Alviso Hotel 125 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
station near Gold Street or flowing towards the non-wetland water feature on the southeast portion of the site.
4.10.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality?
2) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in
a manner which would:
- result in substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site; - substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or off-site;
- create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
- impede or redirect flood flows?
4) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
5) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Alviso Hotel 126 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact HYD-1: The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. (Less than Significant Impact)
Construction-Related Water Quality Impacts
Construction of the proposed project, including grading, and excavation activities, may result in temporary impacts to surface water quality. Surface runoff that flows across the site may contain sediments that are ultimately discharged into the storm drainage system. Construction of the project would disturb more than one acre of soil and, therefore, compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Activities is required. As part of development of the proposed project, a Notice of Intent (NOI) would be submitted to the State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB). Prior to initiation of construction or demolition activities a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be prepared in accordance with the NPDES requirements. The SWPPP would identify specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be used at the project site to treat and control stormwater, reduce sedimentation, and prevent erosion.
All development projects in San José shall comply with the City’s Grading Ordinance. The City of San José Grading Ordinance requires the use of erosion and sediment controls to protect water quality while a site is under construction. Prior to issuance of a permit for grading activity occurring during the rainy season (October 1 to April 30), the applicant is required to submit an Erosion Control Plan to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. The Plan must detail the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented to prevent the discharge of stormwater pollutants.
The Municipal Regional Permit and City Council Policy 8-14 requires regulated projects to include measures to control hydromodification impacts where the project would otherwise cause increased erosion, silt pollutant generation, or other adverse impacts to local rivers and creeks. Development projects that create and/or replace one acre or more of impervious surface and are located in a subwatershed or catchment that is less than 65 percent impervious must manage increases in runoff flow and volume so that post-project runoff shall not exceed estimated pre-project rates and durations. Projects located within catchment areas that drain to hardened channels that extend continuously to the Bay, or projects located within tidally-influenced creek areas or Bayland areas, are not subject to the City’s hydromodification requirements.
Based on the SCVUPPP Watershed Map for the City of San José, the project site is currently exempt from the NPDES hydromodification requirements because it is located in a subwatershed that drains into a hardened channel and/or tidal area.53
Standard Permit Conditions: Consistent with the General Plan, standard permit conditions that shall be implemented to prevent stormwater pollution and minimize potential sedimentation during construction include, but are not limited to, the following:
53 Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program. Accessed October 20, 2020. http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/hmp_maps.htm
Alviso Hotel 127 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• Utilize on-site sediment control BMPs to retain sediment on the project site; • Utilize stabilized construction entrances and/or wash racks; • Implement damp street sweeping;
• Provide temporary cover of disturbed surfaces to help control erosion during construction; and
• Provide permanent cover to stabilize the disturbed surfaces after construction has been completed.
The project, with the implementation of the SWPPP and standard permit conditions, would not result in significant construction-related water quality impacts. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact HYD-2: The project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project site does not presently contribute to recharging of the groundwater aquifers used for water supply (managed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District) and this condition would not change once development is complete. As a result, implementation of the project would not interfere with groundwater recharge or cause a reduction in the overall groundwater supply. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact HYD-3: The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or impede or redirect flood flows. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project site is exempt from the hydromodification control requirements in the Municipal Regional NPDES permit and Council Policy 8-14 because it is located in a subwatershed that drains into a hardened channel and/or tidal area. Moreover, details of specific site design and stormwater treatment control measures demonstrating compliance with Municipal Regional NPDES permit and City Council Policy 6-29 shall be included in the project design (refer to Figure 3.4), to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.
The project would not alter the course of a stream or river. As part of the development of the proposed project, a SWPPP would be prepared in compliance with NPDES requirement and would ensure erosion or siltation impacts are less than significant.
Alviso Hotel 128 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Stormwater catch basins would be located throughout the site. Stormwater would be collected in the catch basins, then directed to bioretention areas for treatment and detention before being conveyed off-site to an existing 48-inch storm drain in North First Street. Although the project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site, the proposed detention system would limit runoff from the proposed project to the equivalent of existing conditions. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact HYD-4: The project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones. (Less than Significant Impact) The project site is not within a tsunami inundation area or subject to a seiche. A seiche is the resonant oscillation of water generated in an enclosed body of water, such as San Francisco Bay, from seismic activity. Seiches are related to tsunamis for enclosed bays, inlets, and lakes. These tsunami-like waves can be generated by earthquakes, subsidence or uplift of large blocks of land, submarine and onshore landslides, sediment failures and volcanic eruptions. The strong currents associated with these events may be more damaging than inundation by waves. The largest seiche wave ever measured in the San Francisco Bay, following the 1906 earthquake, was four inches high. The Bay Area has not been adversely affected by seiches during its history within this seismically active region of California.54 Thus the risk of inundation of seiche at the project site is low.
Tsunami hazards for the Santa Clara County coastline have been modeled by the California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) to identify areas at risk for tsunami inundation.
Multiple source events were selected to represent local and distant earthquakes, and hypothetical extreme undersea, near-shore landslides occurring around the San Francisco Bay region. As defined by the Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning Milpitas Quadrangle dated July 31, 2009, the risk of inundation by tsunami at the proposed site is low. The project is unlikely to be affected by seiches or tsunamis and therefore would not release pollutants due to inundation.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) manages the NFIP and creates Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that designates 100-year floodplain zones and delineate other flood hazard areas. A 100-year floodplain zone is the area that has a one in one hundred (one percent) chance of being flooded in any one year based on historical data. The project site is located in flood hazard zone AE, defined as a special flood hazard area with a one percent annual chance flood event (also known as the 100-year flood zone) as determined by the FEMA NFIP. Tidal inundation from San Francisco Bay under the regulatory assumptions necessitated by a non-accredited outboard levee system inundates the project site to a base flood elevation of 12 feet.
Standard Permit Conditions: The project would implement the following standard permit conditions to reduce flooding impacts to proposed structures in order to comply with relevant City policies.
54 US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District, Port of Oakland. Oakland Harbor Navigation Improvement (-50 foot) Project SCH No. 97072051 Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report, May 1998, updated January 2000.
Alviso Hotel 129 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• The lowest floor shall be elevated above 12.00’ NAVD88 or floodproof to the same elevation. For insurance rating purposes, the structure’s floodproofed design elevation must be at least one foot above the base flood elevation to receive rating credit. • An Elevation Certificate (FEMA Form 086-0-33) for the proposed project, based on construction drawings, is required prior to issuance of a building permit. Additionally, an Elevation Certificate for the built structure, based on finished construction, is required prior to issuance of an occupancy permit.
• If the structure is to be floodproofed, a Floodproofing Certificate (FEMA Form 086-0-34) for each structure, floodproofing details, and if applicable, a Flood Emergency Operation Plan and an Inspection and Maintenance Plan are required prior to the issuance of a Public Works Clearance.
• Building support utility systems such as HVAC, electrical, plumbing, air conditioning equipment, including ductwork, and other service facilities must be elevated above the base flood elevation or protected from flood damage.
The project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact HYD-5: The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. (No Impact)
The project includes LID-based treatment controls and would not obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan. The project site is not located within any designated groundwater recharge areas, and would have a less than significant impact on groundwater supplies. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 130 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.11.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
Regional and Local
Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan As described in Section 4.4 Biological Resources, the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (HCP), which encompasses a study area of 519,506 acres (or approximately 62 percent of Santa Clara County), was adopted by six local entities in Santa Clara County and went into effect in October 2013. The entire 6.23-acre project site is contained within the boundaries of the HCP (the project is located at the northwestern edge of the HCP boundary, as the HCP does not include any of the baylands or tidal areas) and the project would be considered a covered activity.
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to land use and are applicable to the proposed project.
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Land Use Policies
Policies Description
Policy CD-1.1 Require the highest standards of architectural and site design, and apply strong design controls for all development projects, both public and private, for the enhancement and development of community character and for the proper transition between areas with different types of land uses.
CD-1.23 Further the Community Forest Goals and Policies in this Plan by requiring new development to plant and maintain trees at appropriate locations on private property and along public street frontages. Use trees to help soften the appearance of the built environment, help provide transitions between land uses, and shade pedestrian and bicycle areas.
Policy CD-4.9 For development subject to design review, ensure the design of new or remodeled structures is consistent or complementary with the surrounding neighborhood fabric (including but not limited to prevalent building scale, building materials, and orientation of structures to the street).
Policy ER-2.1 Ensure that new public and private development adjacent to riparian corridors in San José are consistent with the provisions of the City’s Riparian Corridor Policy Study and any adopted Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan/ Natural Communities Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP).
Policy ER-2.2 Ensure that a 100-foot setback from riparian habitat is the standard to be achieved in all but a limited number of instances, only where no significant environmental impacts would occur.
Alviso Hotel 131 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Policy ER-2.3 Design new development to protect adjacent riparian corridors from encroachment of lighting, exotic landscaping, noise and toxic substances into the riparian zone.
Policy ER-2.4 When disturbances to riparian corridors cannot be avoided, implement appropriate measures to restore, and/or mitigate damage and allow for fish passage during construction.
Policy ER-2.5 Restore riparian habitat through native plant restoration and removal of nonnative/invasive plants along riparian corridors and adjacent areas.
Alviso Master Plan
The project site is located within the boundaries of the Alviso Village. The Alviso Master Plan, adopted in 1998, designates the site as a Combined Industrial/Commercial land use. Allowed uses under the Combined Industrial/Commercial designation include commercial activities, industrial uses, or a compatible mix. Commercial uses could include retail, restaurant, office, hotel, or other commercial establishments. Other allowed non-industrial uses are primary/secondary schools, freestanding day care centers, churches, and sports, social, or arts centers.
Riparian Corridor Protection and Bird-Safe Design Policy San José Policy 6-34 provides guidance consistent with the City’s Envision San José 2040 General Plan for:
1. protecting, preserving, or restoring riparian habitat;
2. limiting the creation of new impervious surface within Riparian Corridor setbacks to minimize flooding from urban runoff, and control erosion; and
3. encouraging bird-safe design in baylands and riparian habitats of lower Coyote Creek, north of State Route 237.
Riparian projects are defined as any development of activity that is located within 300 feet of a Riparian Corridor’s top of bank or vegetative edge, whichever is greater, and that requires approval of a Development Permit as defined in Chapter 20.200 of Title 20 of the San José Municipal Code (the Zoning Code), except that projects that only require approval of a Single-Family House Permit under the provisions of the Zoning Code are not subject to this policy. The proposed project is subject to Policy 6-34, as it is within 300 feet of a Riparian Corridor. The following riparian guidelines apply to the project:
• For new commercial/institutional buildings, a 100-foot setback from the Riparian Corridor is required.
• New development should use materials and lighting that are designed and constructed to reduce light and glare impacts to Riparian Corridors. For example, the use of bright colors, and glossy, reflective, see through or glare-producing building and material finishes is discouraged on buildings and structures. Lighting should not be directed into Riparian Corridors.
• Project design and implementation should include erosion-control measures in conformance with the City Council Policies 6-29 and 8-14 (Stormwater Policies) to avoid soil erosion and to minimize runoff. Projects that are not subject to the Stormwater Policies should incorporate basic site-design measures such as limiting disturbances of Riparian Corridor Alviso Hotel 132 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
areas, conserving natural areas through the protection of planting of riparian-compatible vegetation, minimizing impervious surfaces, directing runoff to areas outside of and away from Riparian Corridors, and locating trash storage away from Riparian Corridors.
The following bird-safe design guidelines apply to the project:
• Avoid mirrors and large areas of reflective glass.
• Avoid transparent glass skyways, walkways, or entryways, free-standing glass walls, and transparent building corners.
• Avoid funneling open space to a building façade.
• Strategically place landscaping to reduce reflection and views of foliage inside or through glass.
• Avoid or minimize up-lighting and spotlights.
• Turn non-emergency lighting off, or shield it, at night to minimize light from buildings that is visible to birds, especially during bird mitigation season (February – May and August – November).
Existing Conditions
The project site is zoned as CIC(PD) - Planned Development (Combined Industrial/ Commercial Base District.
Development immediately north of the site, across North First Street, includes the George Mayne Elementary School, Alviso Youth Center, Alviso Branch Library, single-family residences, four office buildings (two to three stories in height), three industrial warehouse buildings, and a small strip mall. Development to the west of the site, across Liberty Street, consists of one-story singlefamily residences, a two-story health clinic with associated paved parking area, and a small community center consisting of a one-story structure and landscaped areas. Properties on the east side of Liberty Street contain a towing yard, and one-story single-family residences situated between the Guadalupe River and the western area of the site. Development to the south of the site, across the Guadalupe River, consists of a mobile home community and a two-story commercial office development.
As of January 2020, an active construction site is underway northwest of the project site on North First Street. Once complete, the site will include a 65-foot tall hotel and 54 foot tall parking garage.
4.11.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Physically divide an established community?
2) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
Alviso Hotel 133 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
Impact LU-1: The project would not physically divide an established community. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project proposes to construct a 214-room hotel on an undeveloped, 6.23-acre lot. The project would not physically divide an established community. Access to the site would be provided by a 26- foot wide roadway on the northwestern boundary of the project site. This roadway would connect with two planned roadways from an adjacent approved development, both exiting onto North First Street. The access roadway would also connect with two proposed internal roadways within the project site. The project would not physically divide an established community. (Less than Significant Impact) (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact LU-2: The project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed project would be consistent with the current Combined Industrial/Commercial General Plan land use designation, which allows for hotels as a commercial use with building heights up to 24 stories and densities of up to a FAR of 12, as well as the Alviso Master Plan which allows buildings with a maximum height of 65 feet/five stories. The proposed project would also be consistent with the current CIC(PD) - Planned Development (Combined Industrial/ Commercial Base District zoning.
The project site is located within the boundaries of the HCP, and would be considered a covered activity. As described in Section 4.4 Biological Resources, the project would comply with the requirements of the HCP and Riparian Policy. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 134 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
MINERAL RESOURCES
4.12.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) was enacted by the California legislature in 1975 to address the need for a continuing supply of mineral resources, and to prevent or minimize the negative impacts of surface mining to public health, property, and the environment. As mandated under SMARA, the State Geologist has designated mineral land classifications in order to help identify and protect mineral resources in areas within the state subject to urban expansion or other irreversible land uses which would preclude mineral extraction. SMARA also allowed the State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB), after receiving classification information from the State Geologist, to designate lands containing mineral deposits of regional or statewide significance.
Pursuant to the mandate of the SMARA, the SMGB has designated the Communications Hill Area (Sector EE), bounded generally by the Southern Pacific Railroad, Curtner Avenue, SR 87, and Hillsdale Avenue as containing mineral deposits that are of regional significance as a source of construction aggregate materials. Neither the State Geologist nor the SMGB have classified any other areas in San José as containing mineral deposits of statewide significance or requiring further evaluation.
Existing Conditions
Mineral resources found in Santa Clara County include construction aggregate deposits such as sand, gravel, and crushed stone. The only area in the City of San José that is designated by the State Mining and Geology Board under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) as containing mineral deposits which are of regional significance is Communications Hill.
Communications Hill is located over 11 miles southeast of the project site and generally bound by the Southern Pacific Railroad, Curtner Avenue, State Route 87, and Hillsdale Avenue.55
4.12.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that will be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
55 City of San José. 2011. Envision San José 2040 General Plan Final Program EIR.
Alviso Hotel 135 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
2) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
Impact MIN-1: The project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state. (No Impact)
Based on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) map of mines and mineral resources, the project site is not comprised of known mineral resources or mineral resource production areas.56 Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the residents in the state or region. (No Impact) Impact MIN-2: The project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. (No Impact)
See discussion for Impact MIN-1.
56 United States Geological Survey. Mineral Resources Online Spatial Data: Interactive maps and downloadable data for regional and global Geology, Geochemistry, Geophysics, and Mineral Resources. Available at https://mrdata.usgs.gov/ Accessed November 22, 2019.
Alviso Hotel 136 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
NOISE
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Noise and Vibration Assessment prepared for the project by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. A copy of the report, dated October 2, 2020, is included in Appendix H of this Initial Study.
4.13.1 Environmental Setting
Background Information
Noise
Factors that influence sound as it is perceived by the human ear, include the actual level of sound, period of exposure, frequencies involved, and fluctuation in the noise level during exposure. Noise is measured on a decibel scale, which serves as an index of loudness. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness. Because the human ear cannot hear all pitches or frequencies, sound levels are frequently adjusted or weighted to correspond to human hearing. This adjusted unit is known as the A-weighted decibel, or dBA.
Since excessive noise levels can adversely affect human activities and human health, federal, state, and local governmental agencies have set forth criteria or planning goals to minimize or avoid these effects. Noise guidelines are generally expressed using one of several noise averaging methods, including Leq, DNL, or CNEL.57 These descriptors are used to measure a location’s overall noise exposure, given that there are times when noise levels are higher (e.g., when a jet is taking off from an airport or when a leaf blower is operating) and times when noise levels are lower (e.g., during lulls in traffic flows on freeways or in the middle of the night). Lmax is the maximum A-weighted noise level during a measurement period.
Vibration
Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero.
Vibration amplitude can be quantified using Peak Particle Velocity (PPV), which is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. PPV has been routinely used to measure and assess ground-borne construction vibration. Studies have shown that the threshold of perception for average persons is in the range of 0.008 to 0.012 inches/second (in/sec) PPV.
57 Leq is a measurement of average energy level intensity of noise over a given period of time. Day-Night Level (DNL) is a 24-hour average of noise levels, with a 10 dB penalty applied to noise occurring between 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) includes an additional five dB applied to noise occurring between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Where traffic noise predominates, the CNEL and DNL are typically within two dBA of the peak-hour Leq.
Alviso Hotel 137 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Regulatory Framework
Federal
Federal Transit Administration Vibration Limits
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has developed vibration impact assessment criteria for evaluating vibration impacts associated with transit projects. The FTA has proposed vibration impact criteria based on maximum overall levels for a single event. The impact criteria for groundborne vibration are shown in Table 4.13-1 below. There are established criteria for frequent events (more than 70 events of the same source per day), occasional events (30 to 70 vibration events of the same source per day), and infrequent events (less than 30 vibration events of the same source per day).
These criteria can be applied to development projects in jurisdictions that lack vibration impact standards.
Table 4.13-1: Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria
Land Use Category
Groundborne Vibration Impact Levels
(VdB inch/sec)
Frequent
Event
Occasional
Events
Infrequent
Events
Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere
with interior operations 65 65 65
Category 2: Residences and buildings where people
normally sleep 72 75 80
Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily
daytime use 75 78 83
Source: Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment Manual. September 2018.
State and Local
California Green Building Standards Code
For commercial uses, CalGreen (Section 5.507.4.1 and 5.507.4.2) requires that wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the adjacent roadways have a composite STC rating of at least 50 or a composite OITC rating of no less than 40, with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 or OITC of 30 when the commercial property falls within the 65 dBA Ldn or greater noise contour for a freeway or expressway, railroad, or industrial or stationary noise source. The state requires interior noise levels to be maintained at 50 dBA Leq(1-hr) or less during hours of operation at a proposed commercial use.
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to noise and vibration and are applicable to the proposed project.
Alviso Hotel 138 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Policies Description
Policy EC-1.1 Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for the proposed uses. Consider federal, State and City noise standards and guidelines as a part of new development review. Applicable standards and guidelines for land uses in San José include:
Interior Noise Levels
• The City’s standard for interior noise levels in residences, hotels, motels, residential care facilities, and hospitals is 45 dBA DNL. Include appropriate site and building design, building construction and noise attenuation techniques in new development to meet this standard. For sites with exterior noise levels of 60 dBA DNL or more, an acoustical analysis following protocols in the City-adopted California Building Code is required to demonstrate that development projects can meet this standard. The acoustical analysis shall base required noise attenuation techniques on expected General Plan traffic volumes to ensure land use compatibility and General Plan consistency over the life of this plan.
Exterior Noise Levels
• The City’s acceptable exterior noise level objective is 60 dBA DNL or less for residential and most institutional land uses (refer to Table EC-1 in the General Plan or Table 4.13-2 in this Initial Study). The acceptable exterior noise level objective is established for the City, except in the environs of the San José International Airport and the Downtown, as described below:
For new multi-family residential projects and for the residential component of mixed-use development, use a standard of 60 dBA DNL in usable outdoor activity areas, excluding balconies and residential stoops and porches facing existing roadways. Some common use areas that meet the 60 dBA DNL exterior standard will be available to all residents. Use noise attenuation techniques such as shielding by buildings and structures for outdoor common use areas.
On sites subject to aircraft overflights or adjacent to elevated roadways, use noise attenuation techniques to achieve the 60 dBA DNL standard for noise from sources other than aircraft and elevated roadway segments.
Policy EC-1.2 Minimize the noise impacts of new development on land uses sensitive to increased noise levels (Categories 1, 2, 3 and 6) by limiting noise generation and by requiring use of noise attenuation measures such as acoustical enclosures and sound barriers, where feasible. The City considers significant noise impacts to occur if a project would:
• Cause the DNL at noise sensitive receptors to increase by five dBA DNL or more where the noise levels would remain “Normally Acceptable;” or • Cause the DNL at noise sensitive receptors to increase by three dBA DNL or more where noise levels would equal or exceed the “Normally Acceptable” level.
Policy EC-1.6 Regulate the effects of operational noise from existing and new industrial and commercial development on adjacent uses through noise standards in the City’s Municipal Code.
Alviso Hotel 139 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Policies Description
Policy EC-1.7 Require construction operations within San José to use best available noise suppression devices and techniques and limit construction hours near residential uses per the City’s Municipal Code. The City considers significant construction noise impacts to occur if a project located within 500 feet of residential uses or 200 feet of commercial or office uses would:
• Involve substantial noise generating activities (such as building demolition, grading, excavation, pile driving, use of impact equipment, or building framing) continuing for more than 12 months.
For such large or complex projects, a construction noise logistics plan that specifies hours of construction, noise and vibration minimization measures, posting or notification of construction schedules, and designation of a noise disturbance coordinator who would respond to neighborhood complaints will be required to be in place prior to the start of construction and implemented during construction to reduce noise impacts on neighboring residents and other uses.
EC-2.3 Require new development to minimize continuous vibration impacts to adjacent uses during demolition and construction. For sensitive historic structures, including ruins and ancient monuments or building that are documented to be structurally weakened, a continuous vibration limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV (peak particle velocity) will be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage to a building. A continuous vibration limit of 0.20 in/sec PPV will be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage at buildings of normal conventional construction. Equipment or activities typical of generating continuous vibration include but are not limited to: excavation equipment; static compaction equipment; vibratory pile drivers; pile-extraction equipment; and vibratory compaction equipment. Avoid use of impact pile drivers within 125 feet of any buildings, and within 300 feet of historical buildings, or buildings in poor condition. On a project-specific basis, this distance of 300 feet may be reduced where warranted by a technical study by a qualified professional that verifies that there will be virtually no risk of cosmetic damage to sensitive buildings from the new development during demolition and construction. Transient vibration impacts may exceed a vibration limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV only when and where warranted by a technical study by a qualified professional that verifies that there will be virtually no risk of cosmetic damage to sensitive buildings from the new development during demolition and construction.
Alviso Hotel 140 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.13-2: General Plan Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Land Use Category
Exterior DNL Value in Decibels
55 60 65 70 75 80
1. Residential, Hotels and Motels, Hospitals
and Residential Care1
2. Outdoor Sports and Recreation,
Neighborhood Parks and Playgrounds
3. Schools, Libraries, Museums, Meeting
Halls, and Churches
4. Office Buildings, Business Commercial,
and Professional Offices
5. Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator
Sports
6. Public and Quasi-Public Auditoriums,
Concert Halls, and Amphitheaters
Notes: 1Noise mitigation to reduce interior noise levels pursuant to Policy EC-1.1 is required.
Normally Acceptable:
Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable:
Specified land use may be permitted only after detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements and noise mitigation features included in the design.
Unacceptable:
New construction or development should generally not be undertaken because mitigation is usually not feasible to comply with noise element policies.
Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission Comprehensive Land Use Plan The Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) adopted by the Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) contains standards for projects within the vicinity of San José International Airport, which are relevant to this project:
Policies Description
Policy N-3 Noise impacts shall be evaluated according to the Aircraft Noise Contours presented on Figure 5 (2022 Aircraft Noise Contours).
Policy N-4 No residential or transient lodging construction shall be permitted within the 65 dB CNEL contour boundary unless it can be demonstrated that the resulting interior sound levels will be less than 45 dB CNEL and there are no outdoor patios or outdoor activity areas associated with the residential portion of a mixed use residential project or a multi-unit residential project. (Sound wall noise mitigation measures are not effective in reducing noise generated by aircraft flying overhead.) Alviso Hotel 141 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Existing Conditions
Existing noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity include Mayne Elementary School, the Alviso Branch Library, single-family residences north of North First Street, and the Summerset Mobile Estates west of the Guadalupe River.
Due to Shelter-in-Place restrictions implemented by the State of California at the time of this study, traffic volumes along the surrounding roadways were lower. A noise monitoring survey was not completed to document ambient noise levels during this time period because resultant noise levels would not be representative of typical conditions. In order to establish the environmental baseline for the project, noise data contained in the City of San José General Plan were reviewed along with noise data from the nearby approved Topgolf development (File Number: PD16-034/PDC16-013) that was subject to noise monitoring during normal traffic conditions. 58 A review of these data indicates that
the noise environment in the project vicinity is primarily the result of vehicular traffic along Highway 237 and North First Street. The General Plan noise contour information shows that noise levels at boundaries of the project site nearest to Highway 237 are approximately 65 dBA DNL. Noise levels along Highway 237 are not projected to measurably increase by 2035.
Noise data quantified by Bollard Acoustical Consultants for the nearby Topgolf development in 2015 indicate that ambient noise levels ranged from 65 to 66 dBA DNL at Location A, which is representative of the noise environment at the nearest residences on North First Street, and from 62 to 64 dBA DNL at Location B, which is representative of residences west of the Guadalupe River (See Figure 4.13-1).
58 Noise data quantified by Bollard Acoustical Consultants for the Topgolf development in 2015
Southbay Freeway
N 1st Street
Wilson Way
Nortech Pwky
Disk Dr
Cursor Ct
Syntax Ct
Guadalupe River
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND SURROUNDING LAND USES FIGURE 2.0-3 Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, Feb. 5, 2020 Photo Date: Aug. 9, 2018 0 50’ 300’ 600’ 900’
Future Commercial
A Noise Measurement Location
B
C
A
Project Boundary
NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS FIGURE 4.13-1
Alviso Hotel 143 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.13.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project result in:
1) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
2) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels?
3) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Impact NOI-1: The project would not result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant Impact) Temporary Construction Noise
Policy EC-1.7 of the City’s General Plan requires all construction operations within the City to use best available noise suppression devices and techniques. The policy also requires projects to limit construction hours near residential uses per the Municipal Code allowable hours, which are between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday when construction occurs within 500 feet of a residential land use. Further, the City considers significant construction noise impacts to occur if a project located within 500 feet of residential uses or 200 feet of commercial or office uses involves substantial noise-generating activities (such as building demolition, grading, excavation, pile driving, use of impact equipment, or building framing) that continue for more than 12 months.
Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during earth-moving activities when heavy equipment is used. The construction of the proposed project would involve grading, excavation to lay foundations, trenching, building erection, and paving. The hauling of imported and exported soil and materials would generate truck trips on local roadways as well.
Grading of the site would import approximately 1,000 cubic yards of fill. Construction activities would last approximately 24 months, beginning in fall of 2021.
The nearest noise-sensitive educational and residential land uses would be located approximately 900 feet from the acoustic center of the construction site. Construction noise levels at 900 feet would Alviso Hotel 144 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
range from 53 to 64 dBA Leq with all pertinent equipment present at the site. The nearest commercial or office uses would be located approximately 600 feet from the acoustic center of the construction site.59 Construction noise levels at 600 feet would range from 57 to 68 dBA Leq with all pertinent equipment present at the site. Per General Plan Policy EC-1.7, temporary noise increases due to project construction would be considered less than significant if the construction activity would occur more than 500 feet from the nearest sensitive residential uses and more than 200 feet from the nearest commercial or office uses. Therefore, the project would not result in generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project.
Operational Noise
A significant impact would result if traffic generated by the project would substantially increase noise levels at sensitive receptors in the vicinity. A substantial increase would occur if: a) the noise level increase is five dBA DNL or greater, with a future noise level of less than 60 dBA DNL, or b) the noise level increase is three dBA DNL or greater, with a future noise level of 60 dBA DNL or greater. The existing noise environment in the surrounding area would exceed 60 dBA DNL; therefore, a significant impact would occur if project-generated traffic would permanently increase noise levels by three dBA DNL. For reference, a three dBA DNL noise increase would be expected if the project would double existing traffic volumes along a roadway.
For the proposed project, peak hour turning movements were provided for seven study intersections.
Existing plus project traffic volumes were compared to existing volumes to estimate the project’s contribution to permanent noise level increases expected in the project vicinity. Upon comparison of these traffic conditions, traffic noise increases of less than one dBA DNL were estimated for the roadways serving the site. Thus, the project would not have a significant impact on ambient noise levels due to traffic generated by the project.
On-site noise sources, including mechanical equipment for heating, ventilation, and cooling purposes, exhaust fans, and other similar equipment, parking lots, truck deliveries, etc., would not occur in areas near noise-sensitive receptors. No noise-generating sources are anticipated for this project that would exceed the applicable noise limits over 600 feet from the project site. Such noise sources would produce noise levels well below ambient noise levels in the area resulting from vehicle traffic, aircraft, and other commercial and industrial operations. This is a less than significant impact. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
The project would not result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. (Less than Significant Impact)
59 The approved adjacent commercial project currently being constructed northwest of the site would also be within 600 feet of the project’s acoustic center. The closest portion of the adjacent project to the proposed project’s acoustic center would be the outfield of the Topgolf golfing facility where people would not occupy. Temporary noise increases at the adjacent site due to project construction would be considered less than significant.
Alviso Hotel 145 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact NOI-2: The project would not result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. (Less than Significant Impact) According to Policy EC-2.3 of the City of San José General Plan, a vibration limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV shall be used to minimize the potential for cosmetic damage to sensitive historical structures, and a vibration limit of 0.20 in/sec PPV shall be used to minimize damage at buildings of normal conventional construction. Construction vibration may at times be perceptible at the common property lines of the project site but would be minimal and dissipate rapidly with distance from the construction activity occurring at the time. The project site is located over 200 feet from the nearest buildings, none of which are considered historic, and no vibration-related impacts are identified at any of the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site. Therefore, the project would not result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact NOI-3: The project would not be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. The project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. (Less than Significant Impact)
Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport is a public-use airport located approximately 3.5 miles south-southeast of the project site. The project site lies well outside the 2037 60 dBA CNEL noise contour of the airport, according to the City’s new Airport Master Plan Environmental Impact Report60. Future exterior noise levels due to aircraft would not exceed 60 dBA CNEL/DNL at the project site. According to Policy EC-1.11 of the City’s General Plan, the required safe and compatible threshold for exterior noise levels would be at or below 65 dBA CNEL/DNL for aircraft.
Similarly, Moffett Federal Airfield is located approximately four miles west of the project site, and this airport produces considerably less environmental noise as compared to Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport. Noise levels produced by Moffett Federal Airfield aircraft are insignificant at the site and are not considered excessive. Therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels due to airport activity. (Less than Significant Impact)
4.13.3 Non-CEQA Effects
Per BIA v. BAAQMD, effects of the environment on the project are not considered CEQA impacts.
The following discussion is included for informational purposes only because the City of San José has policies (General Plan Policies 1.1, 1.2, 1.7, and 2.3) that address existing noise conditions affecting a proposed project.
60 David J. Powers & Associates, Inc., Integrated Final Environmental Impact Report, Amendment to Norman Y.
Mineta San José International Airport Master Plan, April 2020.
Alviso Hotel 146 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Future Exterior Noise Environment
The exterior noise threshold established in the General Plan for new hotel projects is 60 dBA DNL at usable outdoor activity areas, excluding private balconies and porches. The project would include a small amenity deck south of the hotel lobby that would be exposed to future exterior noise levels of approximately 65 dBA DNL. Exterior noise levels at the amenity deck would exceed the City’s 60 dBA DNL threshold at the center of the outdoor use area by up to five dBA DNL and would be considered to be “conditionally acceptable” with respect to the noise environment. Due to the limited size and open nature of this amenity deck, the City could allow the outdoor use area without additional measures to reduce noise levels because future exterior noise levels would fall within the conditionally acceptable noise level range for hotels. However, if the City does not allow the amenity deck in a conditionally acceptable noise environment, noise control measures would be required to meet the City’s normally acceptable threshold of 60 dBA DNL.
Methods available to reduce exterior noise levels at the amenity deck include site planning alternatives (e.g., using the proposed buildings as noise barriers), the construction of traditional noise barriers, or a combination of the above. A noise barrier with a minimum height of five-feet, as measured from the base elevation of the deck, could be constructed along the southern perimeter of the amenity deck to reduce noise levels by five dBA. With the implementation of this barrier, the exterior noise environment at the amenity deck would be maintained at or below 60 dBA DNL.
Future Interior Noise Environment
The City of San José requires that interior noise levels within hotels be maintained at 45 dBA DNL or less. Interior noise levels would vary depending upon the design of the buildings (relative window area to wall area) and the selected construction materials and methods. Standard hotel construction methods provide approximately 25 dBA of exterior-to-interior noise reduction assuming windows are closed. In noise environments ranging from 65 to 70 dBA DNL, interior noise levels can typically be maintained below 45 dBA DNL with the incorporation of an adequate forced-air mechanical ventilation system in each hotel room, allowing the windows to be closed to control noise. In noise environments exceeding 70 dBA DNL, a combination of forced-air mechanical ventilation and sound-rated construction methods is often necessary to meet the interior noise level limit.
The southern façade of the proposed hotel building facing SR 237 would receive the highest traffic noise exposure. At 830 feet from the center of SR 237, the southern-facing hotel rooms would be exposed to future exterior noise levels up to 65 dBA DNL. Rooms located along the northern, eastern, and western building façades would be exposed to lower traffic noise levels due to acoustical shielding provided by the hotel building itself and setback of the building from North First Street. In addition to the traffic noise exposure, the northern and western building façades would be exposed to operational noise associated with the Topgolf project. Topgolf noise levels would reach 60 dBA Leq at the hotel building, and the worst-case DNL noise level, estimated assuming this worst-case noise level during operational hours (9:00 am to 2:00 am), would reach 63 dBA. Based on the future exterior noise exposure anticipated at the site, interior noise levels attributable to exterior environmental noise sources would exceed 45 dBA DNL assuming windows are open for ventilation.
In order to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA DNL or less in hotel rooms, the project shall provide a suitable form of forced-air mechanical ventilation, as determined by the local building official, for all hotel rooms, so that windows can be kept closed to control noise.
Alviso Hotel 147 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
POPULATION AND HOUSING
4.14.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Housing-Element Law
State requirements mandating that housing be included as an element of each jurisdiction’s general plan is known as housing-element law. The Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) is the statemandated process to identify the total number of housing units (by affordability level) that each jurisdiction must accommodate in its housing element. California housing-element law requires cities to: 1) zone adequate lands to accommodate its RHNA; 2) produce an inventory of sites that can accommodate its share of the RHNA; 3) identify governmental and non-governmental constraints to residential development; 4) develop strategies and a work plan to mitigate or eliminate those constraints; and 5) adopt a housing element and update it on a regular basis.61 The City of San José Housing Element and related land use policies were last updated in 2015.
Regional and Local
Plan Bay Area 2040
Plan Bay Area 2040 is a long-range transportation, land-use, and housing plan intended to support a growing economy, provide more housing and transportation choices, and reduce transportationrelated pollution and GHG emissions in the Bay Area. Plan Bay Area 2040 promotes compact, mixed-use residential and commercial neighborhoods near transit, particularly within identified Priority Development Areas (PDAs).62 The subject site is not located within a PDA.
ABAG allocates regional housing needs to each city and county within the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area, based on statewide goals. ABAG also develops forecasts for population, households, and economic activity in the Bay Area. ABAG, MTC, and local jurisdiction planning staff created the Regional Forecast of Jobs, Population, and Housing, which is an integrated land use and transportation plan through the year 2040 (upon which Plan Bay Area 2040 is based).
Existing Conditions
The population of San José was estimated to be approximately 1,049,187 in January 2020 with an average of 3.19 persons per household. 63 The City currently has approximately 336,507 housing 61 California Department of Housing and Community Development. “Regional Housing Needs Allocation and Housing Elements” Accessed November 22, 2019. http://hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/index.shtml. 62 Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “Project Mapper.” http://projectmapper.planbayarea.org/.
63 State of California, Department of Finance. “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2018.” Accessed December 6, 2019. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/.
Alviso Hotel 148 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
units64 and, by 2040, the City’s population is projected to reach 1,357,845 with 448,310 households.65
The City of San José currently has a higher number of employed residents than jobs (approximately
0.8 jobs per employed resident), but this trend is projected to reverse with full build out under the General Plan.
4.14.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
2) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Impact POP-1: The project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure). (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed project would result in a net increase of 20 jobs in the City. As noted above, San José currently has a higher number of employed residents than jobs. The increase in jobs will incrementally decrease the overall jobs/housing imbalance within the City. The project site is within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary and Urban Service Area and is served by utilities and infrastructure previously extended to the site. The project would not generate demand for housing at a rate that was not envisioned in the General Plan FEIR. The project proposes to construct 214 hotel rooms with no permanent residences. The project, therefore, would not induce substantial population growth. (Less than Significant Impact)
64 State of California, Department of Finance. “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2020.” Accessed December 6, 2019. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ 65 Association of Bay Area Governments. 2019 Projections Data. May 1, 2019.
Alviso Hotel 149 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact POP-2: The project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. (Less than Significant Impact)
The site is not currently developed and has not been used for residential purposes in the recent past; therefore, the proposed development would not displace existing housing or people. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 150 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
PUBLIC SERVICES
4.15.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Government Code Section 66477
The Quimby Act (included within Government Code Section 66477) requires local governments to set aside parkland and open space for recreational purposes. It provides provisions for the dedication of parkland and/or payment of fees in lieu of parkland dedication to help mitigate the impacts from new residential developments. The Quimby Act authorizes local governments to establish ordinances requiring developers of new residential subdivisions to dedicate parks, pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication, or perform a combination of the two.
Government Code Section 65995 through 65998
California Government Code Section 65996 specifies that an acceptable method of offsetting a project’s effect on the adequacy of school facilities is the payment of a school impact fee prior to the issuance of a building permit. Government Code Sections 65995 through 65998 set forth provisions for the payment of school impact fees from new development by “mitigating impacts on school facilities that occur (as a result of the planning, use, or development of real property” (Section 65996[a]). The legislation states that the payment of school impact fees “are hereby deemed to provide full and complete school facilities mitigation” under CEQA (Section 65996[b]).
Developers are required to pay a school impact fee to the school district to offset the increased demands on school facilities caused by the proposed residential development project. The school district is responsible for implementing the specific methods for mitigating school impacts under the Government Code.
Regional and Local
Countywide Trails Master Plan
The Santa Clara County Trails Master Plan Update is a regional trails plan approved by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors. It provides a framework for implementing the County’s vision of providing a contiguous trail network that connects cities to one another, cities to the county’s regional open space resources, County parks to other County parks, and the northern and southern urbanized regions of the County. The plan identifies regional trail routes, sub-regional trail routes, connector trail routes, and historic trails.
Alviso Hotel 151 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Existing Conditions
Fire Protection Services
Fire protection services for the project site are provided by the San José Fire Department (SJFD). The SJFD responds to all fires, hazardous materials spills, and medical emergencies (including injury accidents) in the City. The closest fire stations to the project site are Station No. 25 located at 5215 Wilson Way, approximately 0.2 miles north of the project site and Station No. 29 at 199 Innovation Drive (2.1 miles southeast of the project site).
For fire protection services, the City has a total response time goal of eight minutes and a total travel time goal of four minutes for 80 percent of emergency incidents (per General Plan Policy ES-3.1).
Police Protection Services
Police protection services for the project site are provided by the San José Police Department (SJPD), which is headquartered at 201 West Mission Street, approximately six miles southeast of the project site. SJPD is divided into four geographic divisions: Central, Western, Foothill, and Southern. The project site is directly served by the SJPD Central Division, which includes three lieutenants, four patrol officers and two crime prevention specialists. For the last several years, the most frequent calls for service in the City have dealt with larceny, burglary, vehicle theft, and assault.
For police protection services, SJPD has a service goal of six minutes or less for 60 percent of all Priority 1 (emergency) calls and 11 minutes or less for 60 percent of all Priority 2 (non-emergency) calls (per General Plan Policy ES-3.1).
Parks
The City of San José owns and maintains approximately 3,435 acres of parkland, including neighborhood parks, community parks, and regional parks. The City also has 54 community centers and neighborhood centers. Other recreational facilities include five public pools, six public skate parks and over 55 miles of trails.
The City’s Department of Parks, Recreation, and Neighborhood Services is responsible for development, operation, and maintenance of all City park facilities. Nearby City park and recreational facilities include the Guadalupe River trail, which forms the southern boundary of the project site, Alviso Park, and Alviso Branch Library and Community Center (across North First Street from the project site). Other facilities include the San Francisco Bay Trail at Sunnyvale Baylands Park (1.6 miles northwest of the project site) and Alviso Marina County Park (0.6 miles northwest of the project site).
Schools and Libraries
The project area is served by the Santa Clara Unified School District and residences near the site are assigned to George Mayne Elementary School (located at 5030 North First Street, across from the project site), Don Callejon Middle School (located at 4176 Lick Boulevard, Santa Clara, approximately 1.9 miles southeast of the project site), and Adrian Wilcox High School (located at Alviso Hotel 152 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
3250 Monroe Street, Santa Clara, approximately four miles south of the project site). The nearest library to the project site is Alviso Branch Library and Community Center, located at 5050 North First Street, San José, directly across from the project site.
4.15.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
the need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance objectives for
any of the public services:
1) Fire Protection?
2) Police Protection?
3) Schools?
4) Parks?
5) Other Public Facilities?
Impact PS-1: The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services. (Less than Significant Impact) The proposed hotel development on the project site is accounted for in the planned growth for the City. The project would incrementally increase demand for fire services. This increase in demand would not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with a need for new facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of services or performance objectives.
The proposed project would be constructed in accordance with current building codes and would be required to be maintained in accordance with applicable City policies identified in the General Plan to avoid unsafe building conditions and promote public safety. The proposed development would not require new fire stations to be constructed or existing fire stations to be expanded to serve the proposed development. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 153 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact PS-2: The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection services. (Less than Significant Impact) The proposed hotel development on the project site is accounted for in the planned growth for the City. The project would incrementally increase demand for police services. This increase in demand would not result in a substantial adverse physical impact associated with a need for new facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of services or performance objectives. The proposed development would not require new police stations to be constructed or existing police stations to be expanded to serve the proposed development. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact PS-3: The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools. (No Impact)
The project proposes a 214-room hotel and would not introduce new students to the community.
Therefore, the project would not impact school facilities in San José. (No Impact) Impact PS-4: The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks. (Less than Significant Impact)
While employees and hotel guests may utilize nearby parks and trails, they would not place a physical burden or a substantial increase in demand on these facilities such that it would result in the need for new facilities. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 154 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact PS-5: The project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities. (Less than Significant Impact) While employees and hotel guests may utilize nearby public facilities, they would not place a physical burden or a substantial increase in demand on these facilities such that it would result in the need for new facilities. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 155 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
RECREATION
4.16.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Government Code Section 66477
The Quimby Act (included within Government Code Section 66477) requires local governments to set aside parkland and open space for recreational purposes. It provides provisions for the dedication of parkland and/or payment of fees in lieu of parkland dedication to help mitigate the impacts from new residential developments. The Quimby Act authorizes local governments to establish ordinances requiring developers of new residential subdivisions to dedicate parks, pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication, or perform a combination of the two.
Existing Conditions
The City of San José owns and maintains approximately 3,435 acres of parkland, including neighborhood parks, community parks, and regional parks. The City also has 54 community centers and neighborhood centers. Other recreational facilities include five public pools, six public skate parks and over 55 miles of trails.
As discussed in Section 4.14 Public Services, the City’s Department of Parks, Recreation, and Neighborhood Services is responsible for development, operation, and maintenance of all City park facilities. Nearby City park and recreational facilities include the existing Guadalupe River Trail (adjacent to the southern boundary of the project site), and Alviso Park and Alviso Branch Library and Community Center (adjacent to the project site across North First Street). Other facilities include the San Francisco Bay Trail at Sunnyvale Baylands Park (approximately 1.9 miles northwest of the project site) and Alviso Marina County Park (approximately 0.6 miles northwest of the project site).
4.16.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
1) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility will occur
or be accelerated?
2) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Alviso Hotel 156 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact REC-1: The project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project is not anticipated to place a physical burden on existing nearby parks and recreational facilities. While employees and hotel guests may utilize nearby parks and trails, the use of these facilities would not result in substantial physical deterioration. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact REC-2: The project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. (Less than Significant Impact) As described previously, employees and hotel guests could utilize nearby recreational facilities such as parks and trails. Implementation of the project would not result in the need for new recreational facilities or physically alter existing public parks or recreation facilities. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 157 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
TRANSPORTATION
The following discussion is based, in part, on a Transportation Analysis Report prepared for the project by Fehr & Peers. A copy of this report, dated July 2020, is included in Appendix I of this Initial Study.
4.17.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Regional Transportation Plan
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the transportation planning, coordinating, and financing agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area, including Santa Clara County.
MTC is charged with regularly updating the Regional Transportation Plan, a comprehensive blueprint for the development of mass transit, highway, airport, seaport, railroad, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities in the region. MTC and ABAG adopted Plan Bay Area 2040 in July 2017, which includes a Regional Transportation Plan to guide regional transportation investment for revenues from federal, state, regional and local sources through 2040.
Senate Bill 743
SB 743 establishes criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts using a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) metric intended to promote the reduction of GHG emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. Specifically, SB 743 requires the replacement of automobile delay – described solely by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion – with VMT as the recommended metric for determining the significance of transportation impacts. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) approved the CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 743 on December 28, 2018. Local jurisdictions were required to implement a VMT policy by July 1, 2020.
SB 743 did not authorize OPR to set specific VMT impact thresholds, but it did direct OPR to develop guidelines for jurisdictions to utilize. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(1) describes factors that might indicate whether a development project’s VMT may be significant. Notably, projects located within 0.50 mile of transit should be considered to have a less than significant transportation impact based on OPR guidance.
Regional and Local
Congestion Management Program
VTA oversees the Congestion Management Program (CMP), which is aimed at reducing regional traffic congestion. The relevant state legislation requires that urbanized counties in California prepare a CMP in order to obtain each county’s share of gas tax revenues. State legislation requires that each CMP define traffic LOS standards, transit service standards, a trip reduction and transportation demand management plan, a land use impact analysis program, and a capital improvement element.
VTA has review responsibility for proposed development projects that are expected to affect CMPdesignated intersections.
Alviso Hotel 158 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Transportation Analysis Policy (City Council Policy 5-1) As established in City Council Policy 5-1, Transportation Analysis Policy (2018), the City of San José uses VMT as the metric to assess transportation impacts from new development. According to the policy, an employment (e.g., office or research and development) project’s transportation impact would be less than significant if the project VMT is 15 percent or more below the existing average regional per capita VMT. The threshold for a retail project is whether it generates net new regional VMT, as new retail typically redistributes existing trips and miles traveled as opposed to inducing new travel. Screening criteria have been established to determine which projects require a detailed VMT analysis. If a project meets the relevant screening criteria, it is considered to a have a less than significant VMT impact.
If a project’s VMT does not meet the established thresholds, mitigation measures would be required, where feasible. The policy also requires preparation of a Local Transportation Analysis to analyze non-CEQA transportation issues, including local transportation operations, intersection level of service, site access and circulation, and neighborhood transportation issues such as pedestrian and bicycle access and recommend transportation improvements. The VMT policy does not negate Area Development policies and Transportation Development policies approved prior to adoption of Policy 5-1. Policy 5-1 does, however, negate the City’s Protected Intersection policy as defined in Policy 5-
3. City of San José Bike Plan
The City of San José Bike Plan 2020, adopted in 2009, contains policies for guiding the development and maintenance of bicycle and trail facilities within San José. The plan also includes the following goals for improving bicycle access and connectivity: 1) complete 500 miles of bikeways; 2) achieve a five percent bike mode share; 3) reduce bicycle collision rates by 50 percent; 4) add 5,000 bicycle parking spaces; and 5) achieve Gold-Level Bicycle Friendly Community Status. The Bike Plan defines a 500-mile network of bikeways that focuses on connecting off-street bikeways with on-street bikeways. The City is in the process of preparing the San José Better Bike Plan 2025, an update to the Bike Plan 2020.66
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts resulting from planned development projects with the City. The following policies are specific to transportation and are applicable to the proposed project.
Envision San José 2040 Relevant Transportation Policies Policies Description
Policy LU-2.2 Include within the Land Use/Transportation Diagram significant job and housing growth capacity within the following identified growth areas:
66 City of San José. “San José Better Bike Plan 2025.” Accessed October 14, 2020. https://www.bikesanJosé.com/ Alviso Hotel 159 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• Specific Plan Areas – The City’s Specific Plans provide significant residential growth capacity and opportunities for mixed-use development.
Policy TR-1.1 Accommodate and encourage use of non-automobile transportation modes to achieve San José’s mobility goals and reduce vehicle trip generation and vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Policy TR-1.2 Consider impacts on overall mobility and all travel modes when evaluating transportation impacts of new developments or infrastructure projects.
Policy TR-1.7 Require that private streets be designed, constructed and maintained to provide safe, comfortable, and attractive access and travel for motorists and for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users of all ages, abilities, and preferences.
Policy TR-2.2 Provide a continuous pedestrian and bicycle system to enhance connectivity throughout the City by completing missing segments. Eliminate or minimize physical obstacles and barriers that impede pedestrian and bicycle movement on City streets
Policy TR-2.8 Require new development where feasible to provide on-site facilities such as bicycle storage and showers, provide connections to existing and planned facilities, dedicate land to expand existing facilities or provide new facilities such as sidewalks and/or bicycle lanes/paths, or share in the cost of improvements.
Policy TR-2.18 Provide bicycle storage facilities as identified in the San José Bicycle Master Plan.
Policy TR-5.5 Require that new development, which includes new public or private streets, connect these streets with the existing public street network and prohibit the gating of private streets with the intention of restricting public access. Furthermore, where possible, require that the street network within a given project consists of integrated short blocks to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian travel and access.
Existing Conditions
Roadway Facilities
Regional Access
Regional access to the project site is provided via SR 237. This roadway is described below:
• SR 237 is an east-west freeway that connects El Camino Real in Mountain View to I-680 in Milpitas. The freeway has two mixed-flow lanes plus one Express Lane in each direction within the project vicinity. Express Lanes provide toll-free travel to carpools, motorcycles, and buses and provide solo drivers the choice to pay a toll to use the lanes during weekdays from 5:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Access to the project site is provided at the Great America Parkway interchange and North First Street interchange.
Local Access
Local access to the project site is provided via Gold Street, Great America Parkway, Nortech Parkway, North First Street, and Trinity Park Drive. These roadways are described below:
Alviso Hotel 160 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• Gold Street is a north-south street with one travel lane in each direction and a two-way leftturn lane between Moffat Street and North Taylor Street. It provides access to surrounding residential, commercial, and office land uses. Gold Street connects SR 237 west of the project site and North First Street.
• Great America Parkway is a north-south street with three travel lanes in each direction and a center median. It provides access to the commercial corridor southwest of the project site, and connects to SR 237 west of the project site.
• Nortech Parkway is an east-west street with two travel lanes in each direction and a two-way left-turn lane. It provides access to surrounding office, commercial, and industrial uses.
Nortech Parkway connects to North First Street south of the project site. • North First Street is a north-south street with a northwest-southeast orientation within the project vicinity. It has three travel lanes in each direction south of the SR 237 eastbound ramps, two lanes in each direction between the SR 237 eastbound ramps and Tony P. Santos Street, and one lane in each direction north of Tony P. Santos Street. North First Street provides access to residential, commercial, office, and industrial uses. It provides direct access to the project site driveways at Trinity Park Drive/Anderson Alley and proposed Bay Vista Drive driveway.
• Trinity Park Drive-Anderson Alley is an east-west street that turns into a north-south oriented street when it meets North First Street. Trinity Park Drive is a residential street with one travel lane in each direction that serves a residential community northwest of the project site.
Anderson Alley is a driveway that provides access to the project site.
Bicycle Facilities and Pedestrian Facilities
Bicycle Facilities
Existing bicycle facilities in the project vicinity are shown in Figure 4.17-1. Bicycle connectivity to the project site includes Class II bike lanes67 present along the project frontage on both sides of North First Street that extend from Liberty Street in the north and East Brokaw Road in the south. Bike lanes are also provided on Nortech Parkway and Disk Drive northwest of the project site. Great America Parkway has on-street bicycle lanes that extend from SR 237 past US 101 until Central Expressway. Off-street bicycle trails along SR 237 connect bicyclists to business districts along North First Street. There are also off-street bicycle trails along the Guadalupe River and San Tomas Aquino Creek that provide access to central San José and Santa Clara.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian connectivity (shown in Figure 4.17-1) is provided by a mostly complete network of sidewalks and crosswalks that serve the adjacent Alviso neighborhoods. The approved Topgolf development adjacent to the project site closed the sidewalk gaps along the southern side of North First Street between Liberty Street and Tony P. Santos Street; the segment directly fronting the project site. The Topgolf development provides a connection from the project site to the surrounding pedestrian facilities. Pedestrian facilities at study intersections are described below:
67 Class II bike lanes are dedicated lanes for bicyclists generally adjacent to the outer vehicle travel lanes. These lanes have special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Bicycle lanes are typically five feet wide.
Adjacent vehicle parking and vehicle/pedestrian cross-flow are permitted.
Alviso Hotel 161 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
• Intersection 1 (North First Street and Trinity Park Drive) is a side-street stop-controlled intersection with a marked stop-controlled crosswalk on the east leg crossing Trinity Drive. • Intersection 2 (North First Street and Bay Vista Drive) is an intersection that does not yet exist, and would be constructed as part of the adjacent Topgolf development and connect to the proposed project.
• Intersection 3 (North First Street and Nortech Parkway) is a signalized intersection with marked crosswalks and pedestrian signals on all legs.
• Intersection 4 (North First Street and SR 237 Westbound Ramps) is a signalized intersection with marked crosswalks and pedestrian signals on north and west legs. • Intersection 5 (North First Street and SR 237 Eastbound Ramps) is a signalized intersection with marked crosswalks and pedestrian signals on south and west legs. • Intersection 6 (Great America Parkway and SR 237 Westbound Ramps) is a signalized intersection with marked crosswalks and pedestrian signals on north and west legs. • Intersection 7 (Great America Parkway and SR 237 Eastbound Ramps) is a signalized intersection with marked crosswalks and pedestrian signals on south and west legs.
Transit Facilities
Bus and light rail transit (LRT) service in Santa Clara County is operated by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The project site is directly served by VTA local bus route 59. The project site is within walking distance (approximately 750 feet) to the Route 59 bus stops on both sides of North First Street at Tony P. Santos Street. Transfers to bus route 59 include VTA Route 55, Rapid 57, as well as the Blue, Green, and Orange LRT Lines and the ACE Green shuttle. These routes are shown on Figure 4.17-2.
Don
Edwards
NWR
Sunnyvale
Baylands Park
SUNNYVALE
SAN JOSE
SANTA CLARA
Persian Dr
Great America Way
Lick Mill Blvd
Lafayette St
Great America Pkwy
Old Mountain View-Alviso Rd
Gold St
Nortech Pkwy
East Tasman Dr
Disk Dr
Caribbean Dr
Lawrence Expwy
Zanker Rd
Vista Montaña
N 1st St
Holger Way
West Tasman Dr
Headquarters Dr
Paci c Ave
Rio Robles Dr
Baypointe Pkwy
Los Esteros Rd
Grand Blvd
Reamwood Ave
TrinityPark Dr
·237
3 4
1 2
5 6
7 Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Figure 6
SJ20-1997_1_StudyArea
Project Site
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Existing Bike Facilities Existing Bike Facilities
Class I Bike Path Trails
Class II Bike Lane
Class III Bike Route Source: Fehr & Peers, July 2020.
EXISTING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES FIGURE 4.17-1 Don
Edwards
NWR
Sunnyvale
Baylands Park
SUNNYVALE
SAN JOSE
SANTA CLARA
Persian Dr
Great America Way
Lick Mill Blvd
Lafayette St
Great America Pkwy
Old Mountain View-Alviso Rd
Gold St
Nortech Pkwy
East Tasman Dr
Disk Dr
Caribbean Dr
Lawrence Expwy
Zanker Rd
Vista Montaña
N 1st St
Holger Way
West Tasman Dr
Headquarters Dr
Paci c Ave
Rio Robles Dr
Baypointe Pkwy
Los Esteros Rd
Grand Blvd
Reamwood Ave
TrinityPark Dr
·237
59 55 57
59 3
4 1
2 5
Existing Transit Service
Figure 5
SJ20-1997_1_StudyArea
Project Site Local Bus Route/Bus Stop
Frequent Bus
Light Commuter Rail
Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) Green Shuttle Route/Stop 0 0.25 0.5
Miles
57 55 59
Source: Fehr & Peers, July 2020.
EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE FIGURE 4.17-2
Alviso Hotel 164 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.17.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadways, bicycle lanes, and
pedestrian facilities?
2) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
3) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible land
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
4) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Impact TRN-1: The project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle lanes, and pedestrian facilities. (Less than Significant Impact) Transit Facilities
The project site is near VTA bus lines that would support multi-modal travel to and from the site.
The project would not physically remove or inhibit access to any bus stops in the area, nor would the project conflict with any planned transit improvements throughout the Alviso area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing transit facilities.
Roadways
As described in Section 4.17.2.2 below, the proposed project would result in a less than significant increase in vehicle trips on the surrounding roadways. The project’s effect on vehicle delay on nearby roadways would not be considered a significant transportation impact under CEQA, as VMT is the City’s adopted standard for assessing transportation impacts. For a discussion of the project’s VMT impacts, refer to checklist Impact Question Two, below. The project would not conflict with any planned or ongoing roadway improvements throughout the Alviso area. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing roadways.
Bicycle Facilities
The project would not remove or inhibit access to any existing bicycle facilities. The project includes an on-site connection to the Guadalupe River Trail at the southern limits of the site and currently proposes 20 long-term and three short-term bicycle parking spaces.
Alviso Hotel 165 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Pedestrian Facilities
The project would not inhibit pedestrian flow through the area by reducing sidewalk width or eliminating sidewalks to accommodate vehicular flow. Within the project site, sidewalks would provide hotel access to and from the parking garage and surface parking areas The project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing pedestrian facilities.
The project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle lanes, and pedestrian facilities. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact TRN-2: The project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). (Less than Significant Impact) The City of San José’s Transportation Analysis Handbook describes the screening criteria used to determine whether a detailed CEQA transportation analysis would be required. Projects that meet the screening criteria “are expected to result in less than significant VMT impacts based on project description, characteristics, and/or location.”
The project would result in 1,642 daily trip estimates (see Section 4.17.3 Non-CEQA Effects). The size of a comparable local-serving retail project was calculated68 to be approximately 44,000 square feet. Thus, a local-serving retail project producing the same number of trips as the proposed hotel would be less than 100,000 square feet in size and therefore, a detailed analysis is not required per City Council Policy 5-1. The project is not expected to have an increase on overall VMT within the City. It will likely shorten existing trips currently occurring to other similar uses, thereby reducing overall VMT. Similar to the characteristics of a “local serving retail” land use, the hotel has less potential to generate new trips or VMT; it is more likely rather to divert trips from an existing use, because this new development is in some way more attractive in its location, setting, or otherwise to the traveler. In the case of the proposed project, the hotel would attract existing hotel trips from the surrounding office developments Thus, the project would be consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact TRN-3: The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). (Less than Significant Impact) Project Driveways
Vehicle Access
Vehicle site access will be provided via two driveways traversing adjacent private property (currently under construction) to access North First Street at Trinity Park Drive and Bay Vista Drive. The Trinity Park Drive intersection will be signalized with the Topgolf development and will provide full 68 The square footage of a comparable retail project was back-calculated by dividing the daily trip estimate of 1,642 trips by the daily average rate of 37.75, taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (Land Use Code 820, Shopping Center).
Alviso Hotel 166 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
access to the site. The Bay Vista Drive intersection provides a northbound left-turn into the project site but is designed not to allow left-turn movements exiting Bay Vista Drive, decreasing potential hazards that could be created by exiting vehicles. Any northbound trips leaving the project site would be required to use the Trinity Park Drive and North First Street intersection. Therefore, the project would not substantially increase hazards due to vehicles entering and exiting the project site. (Less than Significant Impact)
Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
Bicycle access would be provided via North First Street, where Class II bike lanes currently exist along the project frontage. Upon entering the project site at the Bay Vista driveway, a two-way path is provided along the east side of Bay Vista Drive. The path continues through the project site and provides access to the Guadalupe River Trail. This path would help prevent vehicle-bicycle conflicts on the project site. Pedestrian access would be provided via this path also. Within the project site, sidewalks would provide hotel access to and from the parking garage and surface parking areas. The project would not substantially increase hazards due to bicycles or pedestrians entering and exiting the project site. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact TRN-4: The project would not result in inadequate emergency access. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project’s Fire Access Plan provided vehicle turning movements that demonstrate adequate circulation of fire trucks and larger vehicles through the site’s internal roadways. The Fire Access Plan includes removable bollards to allow larger trucks to access the EVA/trail connection. In addition to the two driveways traversing adjacent private property to access North First Street (Anderson Alley and Bay Vista Drive), an emergency access driveway will be provided at Moffat Street. The project would not result in inadequate emergency access. (Less than Significant Impact)
4.17.3 Non-CEQA Effects
While the evaluation of project CEQA impacts on the transportation system is focused on VMT, in accordance with the City of San José Transportation Policy (Council Policy 5-1), the following discussion is included for informational purposes. The City Council Policy 5-1 requires preparation of a Local Transportation Analysis (LTA) to analyze non-CEQA transportation issues, including local transportation operations, intersection level of service, site access and circulation, and neighborhood transportation issues such as pedestrian and bicycle access, and recommend needed transportation improvements.
Project Trip Generation
Vehicle trip generation estimates for the proposed hotel were generated using rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition). Rates for the Hotel (ITE Land Use Code 310), were used. Then, a location-based adjustment was calculated using the City of San José VMT Evaluation Tool based on the 44,000 square feet of comparable retail space used for the VMT analysis (see Impact TRN-2). The project with the location-based adjustments is expected to add 1,642 daily trips, including 93 AM and 118 PM peak hour trips. A summary of the trip generation estimates can be seen below in Table 4.17-1.
Alviso Hotel 167 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.17-1: Trip Generation Estimates
Land Use Rooms
Weekday AM Trips Weekday PM Trips Daily Trips
In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total
Hotel1214 60 42 102 66 63 129 899 899 1,798
Deduction with
Location Based
Adjustment of
91.2%2
(5) (4) (9) (6) (5) (11) (78) (78) (156)
Total 55 38 93 60 58 118 821 821 1,642
Notes:
1. Hotel land use code 310, ITE, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017. Trip estimates calculated using average rates.
Daily rate = 8.36; In = 50%; Out = 50%
AM rate = 0.47; In = 59%; Out = 41%
PM rate = 0.6; In = 51%; Out = 49%
2. Location based adjustment calculated using City of San José VMT Evaluation Tool based on 44,600 square feet of retail space at the project site (APN 015-48-060).
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2020.
Intersection Traffic Operations
Intersection LOS was evaluated against the standards of the City of San José. Currently, all the intersections studied operate LOS C or better. Background Conditions traffic volumes were calculated by adding projected traffic from the City’s Approved Trips Inventory of approved but not yet built/occupied developments in the area to existing volumes. The intersection traffic operations that would be affected by the project are summarized below in Table 4.17-2.
The approved Topgolf development (which has since been developed since the time that the Transportation Analysis was completed) is conditioned to install a traffic signal at the North First Street and Trinity Park Drive intersection, which is currently side-street stop-controlled but will serve as the Topgolf development’s main project access point once it is developed. Thus, the intersection was assumed to be signal controlled in this analysis.
Table 4.17-2: Intersection Traffic Operations
Intersection Control Peak
Hour
Background Background Plus Project
Average
Delay LOS Average Delay LOS
Net
Change
in Crit.
Delay
Signal AM 16.8 B 17.8 B 0.1
Alviso Hotel 168 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Table 4.17-2: Intersection Traffic Operations
Intersection Control Peak
Hour
Background Background Plus Project
Average
Delay LOS Average Delay LOS
Net
Change
in Crit.
Delay
North First St.
& Trinity
Park Dr.
PM 18.6 B- 19.7 B- 0.2
North First St.
& Bay Vista
Dr.
SSSC
AM
Exists only with project
0.5 B 0.5
PM 0.6 B 0.6
North First St.
& Nortech
Pkwy
Signal
AM 21.8 C+ 21.8 C+ -0.2
PM 38.0 D+ 39.4 D 1.7
North First St.
& SR 237
WB Ramps*
Signal
AM 27.0 C 29.0 C 3.1
PM 134.1 F 140.2 F 8.8
North First St.
& SR 237 EB
Ramps*
Signal
AM 38.8 D+ 39.9 D 1.4
PM 35.5 D+ 37.3 D+ 3.0
Great
America
Pkwy & SR
237 WB
Ramps*
Signal
AM 16.8 B 16.8 B 0.1
PM 24.1 C 24.1 C 0.0
Great
America
Pkwy & SR
237 EB
Ramps*
Signal
AM 14.6 B 14.8 B 0.2
PM 13.8 B 14.1 B 0.2
*indicates that intersection is under the jurisdiction of the CMP and thus the applicable minimum LOS threshold is E or higher. All other intersections have a minimum LOS threshold of D or higher.
SSSC = Side street stop-controlled; signal = signalized Bold text indicates intersection operates at an unacceptable level of service Table 4.17-2 shows that all intersection operations operate at acceptable levels with or without the project, except for the North First Street and SR 237 Westbound Ramps. The intersection of North First Street and SR 237 Westbound Ramps operates at an unacceptable LOS F both with and without the project during the PM peak hour.
The intersection of North First Street and SR 237 Westbound Ramps is located with the boundary of the NSJADP. On December 17, 2013, the City Council modified the NSJADP to allow projects Alviso Hotel 169 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
outside the policy area boundary (such as the proposed project) that contribute trips to intersections within the policy area to pay the TIF to pay fair share fees to fund traffic mitigation. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the proposed project to pay the NSJ impact fee for its contribution to impacted intersections within the NSJADP boundary, even though the project is not within the NSJADP boundary. The payment of the NSJ impact fee would provide a proportional fair share payment toward the required improvements to the North First Street and SR 237 intersection.
Additionally, the addition of project trips would result in an adverse impact to this intersection during the PM peak hour. Mitigation of the adverse impact would be addressed by the project paying its fair share of traffic impact fees (TIF) into the North San Jose Area Development Policy (NSJADP) based on 26 project PM peak hour trips traveling into the NSJADP.
Left Turn Storage Analysis
The addition of project traffic along the roadway network has the potential to add vehicles to left-turn movements such that the left-turn queues would exceed the turn pocket storage lengths. Queues that exceed the turn pocket storage length can impede through traffic movement along an approach.
Potentially affected intersections were selected for this evaluation based on where the project would add a minimum of ten vehicles to a dedicated left-turn movement in at least one of the peak hours, which includes the following signalized intersections:
• North First Street and Trinity Park Drive (northbound left-turn pocket) • North First Street and Bay Vista Drive (northbound left-turn pocket) • North First Street and SR 237 EB Ramps (southbound left-turn pocket) • Great America Parkway and SR 237 EB Ramps (eastbound left-turn pocket) The 95th percentile queues from the TRAFFIX LOS analysis were used to evaluate the projected queues at the identified left-turn movements for the Background and Background Plus Project Conditions. The results revealed that the southbound left-turn pocket at the intersection of North First Street and SR 237 EB Ramps exceeds the available storage length during the PM peak hour under Background No Project Conditions. The project adds 15 trips to that movement during the PM peak hour, resulting in an addition of one car, or about 25 feet, to the 95th percentile left-turn vehicle queue. The queuing issue at this intersection is attributed primarily to other background projects because the project only adds 15 trips to the southbound left-turn movement during the PM peak hour and the queue length already exceeds the storage capacity under Background No Project Conditions. All other intersections analyzed have sufficient capacity to support project vehicle queue lengths at left-turn pockets.
On-Site Circulation
The on-site circulation was reviewed by City engineering staff and the traffic consultant Fehr & Peers in accordance with generally accepted traffic engineering standards. Interior roadways aisles are generally 26 feet in width and accommodate two-way traffic and access to 90-degree surface parking spaces. The site layout provides continuous circulation through all the parking areas with no dead-end aisles. A trash pick-up and turning area is provided adjacent to the parking garage. Overall, the on-site circulation is generally considered to be acceptable.
Alviso Hotel 170 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Parking
Vehicle Parking
The project proposes to include a surface parking lot with 21 spaces throughout the northeastern section of the site and a four-story parking garage with 213 spaces, for a total of 234 parking spaces (19 spaces would be designated for clean air vehicles and nine spaces would be ADA parking spaces). The City’s vehicle parking requirement for a hotel is a minimum of one space per room, plus one space per employee (20 employees are proposed by the project), resulting in a required 235 parking spaces including 19 spaces for clean air vehicles (eight percent) and seven ADA spaces. The project meets the requirements for overall parking and exceeds the ADA parking space requirement.
Bicycle Parking
The City’s bicycle parking requirement for a hotel is one space, plus one space per ten guest rooms.
Of the minimum required bicycle parking, 20 percent must be long-term bicycle parking facilities and 80 percent must be short-term bicycle parking facilities. Thus, the project would be required to provide a minimum of 23 bicycle parking spaces, including five long-term bicycle parking spaces and 18 short-term spaces. The project currently proposes three short-term bicycle spaces and 20 longterm spaces. Thus, the project exceeds the long-term bicycle parking requirement, but does not meet the requirement for short-term bicycle parking spaces.
Alviso Hotel 171 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.18.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
Assembly Bill 52
AB 52, effective July 2015, established a new category of resources for consideration by public agencies called Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs). AB 52 requires lead agencies to provide notice of projects to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area if they have requested to be notified. Where a project may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, consultation is required until the parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource or until it is concluded that mutual agreement cannot be reached.
Under AB 52, TCRs are defined as follows:
• Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are also either:
o Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historic Resources, or
o Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).
• A resource determined by the lead agency to be a TCR.
Existing Conditions
At the time of the release of the NOP for the Downtown Strategy 2040 DEIR on September 28, 2020, no tribes had provided AB 52 project notification requests to the City of San José except for projects in Coyote Valley (approximately 14 miles to the southeast of the project site). Andrew Galvan representing the Ohlone Tribe, has requested notification of all projects in the Downtown core. No request for the project was received.69 The City routinely notifies all tribes who are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the City based on the latest list from the NAHC when project documents are available for public review.
69 Personal Communication. Maira Blanco. March 17, 2021.
Alviso Hotel 172 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
4.18.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is:
1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
Impact TCR-1: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). (Less than Significant Impact)
No known tribal cultural resources are presented on-site. No tribes have provided AB 52 project notification requests to the City of San José except for projects in Coyote Valley (approximately 14 miles to the southeast of the project site). As discussed in Section 4.5 Cultural Resources, in the unlikely event that human remains or other TCRs are discovered during construction activities, implementation of Standard Condition of Approval listed under Impact CUL-3 would reduce the project’s impact to a less than significant level. (Less than Significant Impact) Alviso Hotel 173 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact TCR-2: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. (Less than Significant Impact)
As discussed under Impact TCR-1, there are no known tribal cultural resources on-site, and no tribes have provided AB 52 project notification requests to the City of San José except for projects in Coyote Valley (approximately 14 miles to the southeast of the project site). As discussed in Section
4.5 Cultural Resources, in the unlikely event that human remains or other tribal cultural resources are discovered during construction activities, implementation of Standard Condition of Approval listed under Impact CUL-3 would reduce the project’s impact to a less than significant level. (Less than Significant Impact)
Alviso Hotel 174 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
4.19.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
State
California Green Building Standards Code Compliance for Construction, Waste Reduction, Disposal, and Recycling
In January 2010, the State of California adopted the California Green Building Standards Code (“CALGreen”), establishing mandatory green building standards for all buildings in California. The code covers five categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material conservation and resources efficiency, and indoor environmental quality.
These standards include the following mandatory set of measures, as well as more rigorous voluntary guidelines, for new construction projects to achieve specific green building performance levels:
• Reducing indoor water use by 20 percent;
• Reducing wastewater by 20 percent;
• Recycling and/or salvaging 65 percent of non-hazardous construction and demolition (“C&D”) debris, or meeting the local construction and demolition waste management ordinance, whichever is more stringent (see San José-specific CALGreen building code requirements in the local regulatory framework section below); and • Providing readily accessible areas for recycling by occupants.
State Water Code
Pursuant to the State Water Code, water suppliers providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-feet (approximately 980 million gallons) of water annually must prepare and adopt an urban water management plan (UWMP) and update it every five years. As part of a UWMP, water agencies are required to evaluate and describe their water resource supplies and projected needs over a 20-year planning horizon, water conservation, water service reliability, water recycling, opportunities for water transfers, and contingency plans for drought events. The City of San José Municipal Water Department adopted its most recent UWMP in June 2015.
Assembly Bill 939
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, or AB 939, established the Integrated Waste Management Board, required the implementation of integrated waste management plans, and mandated that local jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of solid waste generated (from 1990 levels), beginning January 1, 2000, and divert at least 75 percent by 2010. Projects that would have an adverse effect on waste diversion goals are required to include waste diversion mitigation measures.
Assembly Bill 341
AB 341 sets forth the requirements of the statewide mandatory commercial recycling program Businesses that generate four or more cubic yards of garbage per week and multi-family dwellings Alviso Hotel 175 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
with five or more units in California are required to recycle. AB 341 sets a statewide goal for 75 percent disposal reduction by the year 2020.
Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The bill grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target that at least 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025.
Local
Envision San José 2040 General Plan
The General Plan includes policies for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating impacts from planned development in the City. The policies below are specific to utilities and service systems and are applicable to the proposed project:
Policy Description
MS-3.1 Require water-efficient landscaping, which conforms to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, for all new commercial, institutional, industrial, and developer-installed residential development unless for recreation needs or other area functions.
MS-19.4 Require the use of recycled water wherever feasible and cost-effective to serve existing and new development.
IN-1.5 Require new development to provide adequate facilities or pay its fair share of the cost for facilities needed to provide services to accommodate growth without adversely impacting current service levels.
California Green Building Standards Code Compliance for Construction, Waste Reduction, Disposal and Recycling
The City of San José requires 75 percent diversion of nonhazardous construction and demolition debris for projects that quality under CALGreen, which is more stringent than the state requirement of 65 percent (San José Municipal Code Section 9.10.2480).
Construction and Demolition Diversion Deposit Program
The Construction and Demolition Diversion Deposit Program (CDDD) requires projects to divert at least 50% of total projected project waste to be refunded the deposit. Permit holders pay this fully refundable deposit upon application for the construction permit with the City if the project is a demolition, alteration, renovation, or a certain type of tenant improvement. The minimum project valuation for a deposit is $2,000 for an alteration-renovation residential project and $5,000 for a nonresidential project. There is no minimum valuation for a demolition project and no square footage limit for the deposit applicability. The deposit is fully refundable if C&D materials were reused, donated, or recycled at a City-certified processing facility. Reuse and donation require acceptable Alviso Hotel 176 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
documentation, such as photos, estimated weight quantities, and receipts from donations centers stating materials and quantities.
Though not a requirement, the permit holder should consider conducting an inventory of the existing building(s), determining the material types and quantities to recover, and salvaging materials during deconstruction.
San José Zero Waste Strategic Plan/Green Vision
The Zero Waste Strategic Plan outlines policies to help the City of San José foster a healthier community. The Green Vision provides a comprehensive approach to achieve sustainability through new technology and innovation, including 75 percent waste diversion by 2013 and zero waste by 2022. The Green Vision also includes ambitious goals for economic growth, environmental sustainability and an enhanced quality of life for San José residents and businesses.
Existing Conditions
Water Service
Potable water service to the project site is provided by the City of San José Municipal Water Department. The water provided comes from a mix of imported surface water and groundwater. The site is currently undeveloped and does not use water provided by the City.
Sanitary Sewer/Wastewater Treatment
Sanitary sewer lines in the area are owned and maintained by the City of San José. The project area is currently served by a six-inch sanitary sewer pipe in North First Street Wastewater in the project’s surrounding area is treated at the San José/Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (the Facility) in Alviso. The Facility has capacity to treat 167 million gallons per day (mgd) of sewage during dry weather flow.25F
70 The City’s share of the Facility’s treatment capacity is approximately 108.6 mgd.
Based on the average dry weather flows from sources in San José (approximately 69.8 mgd), the City current has approximately 38.8 mgd of available treatment capacity at the Facility. 71 The resulting
fresh water from the Facility is discharged to the South San Francisco Bay or delivered to the South Bay Water Recycling Project for distribution.
The project site is undeveloped and currently does not generate wastewater.
Storm Drainage System
The City of San José Public Works Department operates and maintains the storm drainage system that serves the project site. The project site is currently served by a 48-inch storm main in North First Street. The site is currently undeveloped and largely pervious, with 7,175 square feet of impervious surfaces.72
70 City of San José. San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility. Accessed December 16, 2019. https://www.sanJoséca.gov/your-government/environment/water-utilities/regional-wastewater-facility 71 City of San José. General Plan FPEIR. September 2011. Page 648. 72 The site contains a small portion of concrete.
Alviso Hotel 177 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Solid Waste
Santa Clara County’s Integrated Waste Management Plan (IWMP) was approved by the California IWMB in 1996 and was reviewed in 2004 and 2007. Based on the IWMP, the County has adequate landfill capacity. In October 2007, the San José City Council adopted a Zero Waste Resolution which set a goal of 75 percent waste diversion by 2013 and zero waste by 2022. The Newby Island Landfill (NISL) receives approximately 350,000 tons per year from San José. The total permitted landfill capacity of the five operating landfills in the City is approximately 5.3 million tons per year.
According to the IWMP, the County has adequate disposal capacity beyond 2030.72F 73 The total
permitted landfill capacity of the five operating landfills in the City is approximately 5.3 million tons per year.
All municipal solid waste in San José is landfilled at NISL. The City has an existing contract with NISL through 2041. The City has an annual disposal allocation for 395,000 tons per year. As of May 2018, NISL had approximately 16.9 million cubic yards of capacity remaining.74 The site is undeveloped, and therefore does not currently generate solid waste. 75 4.19.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
1) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction
or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
2) Have insufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
3) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it does not have adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
4) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
73 Santa Clara County. Five-Year CIWMP/RAIWMP Review Report. June 2016. 74 Ibid.
75 CalEEMod. “Table 10.1 Solid Waste Disposal Rates.” 2016. City park land use sub type.
Alviso Hotel 178 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project:
5) Be noncompliant with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Impact UTL-1: The project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project would install new domestic water, fire water, sanitary sewer, fiber, and natural gas lines on-site that would connect with the existing City infrastructure systems located along North First Street through connections with the adjacent commercial development. The impacts associated with these proposed installments have been incorporated into the construction assumptions for the project that have been analyzed throughout this application.
As discussed under Impact UTL-2, the project’s increase in water demand is consistent with the growth projections and future water demand assumed in the preparation and analysis of the City’s Envision 2040 General Plan. As a result, the project would not require new or expanded water facilities.
As discussed under Impact UTL-3, the project would generate wastewater that would continue to allow the RWF to operate below the required 120 million gallons per day constraint and would not increase the need for wastewater treatment beyond the capacity of the RWF.
The project would result in an increase in the amount of impervious area on the site. Storm drainage runoff from the site’s impervious surfaces would be directed to treatment systems before being collected in a series of pipes sized for a 10-year storm event in accordance with the City’s design requirements. These pipes would ultimately leave the site, connecting to storm drainage pipes being constructed in the planned adjacent development and then to the existing City storm drainage pipes in North First Street. No new off-site storm drain facilities would be required to serve the project site.
The City prepared a sanitary sewer model run to determine the capacity of the adjacent pipelines to accommodate the proposed project’s sewage. The model determined that there is adequate capacity to serve the project. As a result, no new off-site sanitary sewer facilities would be required.
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) supplies electricity and natural gas to the project area. The project would connect to the existing PG&E lines located along North First Street through connections with the adjacent commercial development currently under construction. The proposed project would not require the construction of any additional off-site facilities.
Alviso Hotel 179 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
The analysis in the following sections discusses the potential impacts of the project on existing facilities. Based on the following analysis, no relocation of existing or construction of new facilities are needed to serve the proposed project; as the project would connect to facilities approved by the City and currently under construction adjacent to the site. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact UTL-2: The project would not have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years. (Less than Significant Impact)
The San José General Plan FEIR determined that the three water suppliers for the City could serve the planned growth under the Envision 2040 General Plan until 2025. Water demand could exceed water supply with implementation of the General Plan during dry and multiple dry years after 2025.
The General Plan has specific policies to reduce water consumption including expansion of the recycled water system and implementation of water conservation measures. The General Plan FEIR concluded that with implementation of existing regulations and adopted General Plan policies, full build out under the General Plan would not exceed the available water supply. The project, at 214 hotel rooms, is not considered a ‘water demand project’ pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15155, which defines a hotel with more than 500 rooms as a water demand project.
The proposed project is consistent with planned growth in the Alviso area under the Envision 2040 General Plan. Additionally, the project would utilize recycled water for landscape irrigation.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not create the need for major new utility or water supply infrastructure and would have a less than significant impact on the City’s water supply. (Less than Significant Impact)
Impact UTL-3: The project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. (Less than Significant Impact)
The project would require a connection to the adjacent commercial development currently under construction, and then to an existing six-inch sanitary sewer line in North First Street. Sewer upsizing of these lines may be required after further flow monitoring of existing surrounding sanitary mains is conducted. The improvements for the sanitary sewer connection would occur on-site and within the existing right-of-way of North First Street. The project would implement the identified improvements and standard permit conditions to reduce construction-related impacts to a less than significant level.
The RWF has the capacity to treat 167 million gallons of wastewater per day.76 Currently, the RWF is operating under a 120 million gallon per day dry weather effluent flow constraints. With implementation of the project, the RWF would still operate below the required 120 million gallons per day constraint and would not increase the need for wastewater treatment beyond the capacity of the RWF. (Less than Significant Impact)
76 City of San José. San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility. Accessed December 18, 2019:
http://sanJoséca.gov/index.aspx?nid=1663.
Alviso Hotel 180 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact UTL-4: The project would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. (Less than Significant Impact)
The proposed project would increase the total solid waste generated by the project site compared to existing conditions. The General Plan FEIR concluded that the increase in solid waste generated by full build out under the General Plan would not cause the City to exceed the capacity of existing landfills that serve the City. Future increases in solid waste generation from development allowed under the General Plan would be avoided with ongoing implementation of the City’s Zero Waste Strategic Plan. This plan, in combination with existing regulations and programs, would ensure that full build out of the General Plan would not result in significant impacts from the provision of landfill capacity to accommodate the City’s increased service population.
The proposed project would generate an increase of approximately 118 tons of solid waste per year compared to existing conditions at the project site.77 As mentioned previously, the NISL had approximately 14.6 million cubic yards of capacity remaining in December 2019. Given NISL’s remaining capacity, the City’s contract with NISL, the amount of waste the City disposes of at NISL, and the amount of waste the project is expected to generate, there is sufficient capacity at NISL to service the project. Furthermore, the proposed project is consistent with the development assumptions in the General Plan. Therefore, development of the project site would have a less than significant impact on solid waste disposal capacity. (Less than Significant Impact) Impact UTL-5: The project would not be noncompliant with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. (Less than Significant Impact)
Per CALGreen requirements, the project would be required to provide on-site recycling facilities, develop a construction waste management plan, salvage at least 75 percent of nonhazardous construction/demolition debris (by weight), and implement other waste reduction measures. The project would comply with the City’s Zero Waste Strategic Plan. The Zero Waste Strategic Plan, in combination with existing regulations and programs, would ensure that the proposed project would not result in significant impacts on solid waste disposal capacity in excess of State or local standards or in excess of NISL capacity. (Less than Significant Impact) 77 Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. The Estuary @ Terra Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment. October 2, 2020.
Alviso Hotel 181 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
WILDFIRE
4.20.1 Environmental Setting
Regulatory Framework
Existing Conditions
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) is required by law to map areas of significant fire hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. Referred to as Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), these maps influence how people construct buildings and protect property to reduce risk associated with wildland fires. The project site is not located in a FHSZ.78
4.20.2 Impact Discussion
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
1) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
2) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
3) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
4) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
The project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones; therefore, the project would not result in wildfire impacts. 78 California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps. Accessed October 22, 2020. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire-prevention-planning-engineering/wildland-hazards-building-codes/firehazard-severity-zones-maps/ Alviso Hotel 182 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
1) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
2) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
3) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Impact MFS-1: The project does not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) As discussed in the previous sections of this Initial Study, the proposed project would not degrade the quality of the environment with the implementation of the identified mitigation measures and Standard Permit Conditions. As discussed in Section 4.4 Biological Resources, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures (MM BIO-1.1 through MM BIO-1.3, MM BIO-2.1, MM BIO
3.1 through MM BIO-3.2, and MM BIO-4.1 through MM BIO-4.2) and Standard Permit Conditions, the project would not significantly impact sensitive habitats or species. As discussed in Section 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emission, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures (MM GHG-1.1 through MM GHG-1.4) the project would not significantly degrade the quality of the environment.
As discussed in Section 4.5 Cultural Resources, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures (MM CUL-1.1 through MM CUL-1.8), the project would result in a less than significant impact on archaeological, historic, and paleontological resources.
Alviso Hotel 183 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Impact MFS-2: The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Projects recently approved, reasonably foreseeable, or under development in the surrounding area include: Topgolf at 4701 North First Street and 1561 and 1537 Liberty Street (an entertainment and recreation development northwest of the project site), 237 @ First Street (an office development southeast of the project site), and 237 Industrial Center at 1657 Alviso-Milpitas, NW Hwy 237 and McCarthy (an industrial project east of the project site)79. While these individual projects may result in significant impacts in particular issue areas, it is assumed that the projects will comply with existing regulations and statutes, and will incorporate measures to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level, if necessary. For example, all projects are required to incorporate best management practices and comply with local and regional regulations to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent feasible. With the proposed project’s adherence to the Land Use, Air Quality, Noise, Energy, and Water Policies described in the City’s General Plan, project impacts would not contribute to cumulatively considerable impacts. Given the project’s location and proposed operation, areas of particular concern for cumulative impacts include biological resources, cultural resources, and GHG emissions. These impact areas are discussed in further detail below.
Biological Resources
As described in Section 4.4 Biological Resources, the project could affect sensitive biological resources in both the short- and long-term. The project would implement a number of measures to reduce impacts on biological resources. Additionally, all projects are required to implement best management practices and comply with all federal, state, regional and local regulations described in Section 4.4. Therefore, the project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts on biological resources.
Cultural Resources
The geographic area for cultural resources is the city boundaries as cultural resource impacts are typically localized and generally limited to the immediate area in which a given cultural resources is located.
As described in Section 4.5 Cultural Resources, the project would include disturbance of native soils for trenching, site grading, and other construction activities. While there are no recorded archaeological or historic sites on the project site, there is a potential for buried archaeological resources to occur on the site. Construction of the proposed project could impact unknown buried archaeological resources and human remains, if present on-site. The project would implement a number of measures to reduce impacts on cultural resources. Additionally, all projects are required to implement best management practices and comply with all federal, state, and local regulations described in Section 4.5. Therefore, the project would not significantly contribute to cumulative impacts on cultural resources.
79 City of San José. Key Economic Development Projects. Accessed January 20, 2021. https://gis.sanjoseca.gov/maps/devprojects/
Alviso Hotel 184 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Similar to regulated air pollutants, GHG emissions and global climate change also represent cumulative impacts. The project’s contribution to global climate change is discussed in Section 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions in terms of the project’s GHG emissions. With implementation of the efficiency measures and mitigation measures proposed, the project would not conflict with plans, policies or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.
The project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Impact MFS-3: The project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Consistent with Section 15065(a)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that the project has the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Under this standard, a change to the physical environment that might otherwise be minor must be treated as significant if people would be significantly affected. This factor relates to adverse changes to the environment of human beings generally, and not to effects on particular individuals. While changes to the environment that could indirectly affect human beings would be represented by all of the designated CEQA issue areas, those that could directly affect human beings include constructionrelated air quality, hazardous materials, and noise. Implementation of mitigation measures identified in Section 4, however, would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. No other direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings have been identified. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)
Alviso Hotel 185 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 5.0 REFERENCES
The analysis in this Initial Study is based on the professional judgement and expertise of the environmental specialists preparing this document, based upon review of the site, surrounding conditions, site plans, and the following references:
Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “Project Mapper.” http://projectmapper.planbayarea.org/.
Association of Bay Area Governments. 2019 Projections Data. May 1, 2019.
BAAQMD. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19, 2017. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plansandclimate/air-quality-plans/current-plans.
Bollard Acoustical Consultants. Top Golf Project. 2015.
CalEEMod. “Table 10.1 Solid Waste Disposal Rates.” 2016. City park land use sub type.
CalEPA. Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed October 23. 2020. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/
California Air Resources Board. “Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health.” Accessed June 16, 2018. https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/diesel/diesel-health.htm.
California Air Resources Board. “The Advanced Clean Cars Program.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/acc.htm.
California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. Fire Hazard Severity Zones Maps. Accessed October 22, 2020. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire-prevention-planningengineering/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/ California Building Standards Commission. “California Building Standards Code.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Codes#@ViewBag.JumpTo.
California Department of Conservation, Santa Clara County Important Farmland Map 2016. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2016/scl16.pdf California Department of Conservation. “Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program.” Accessed April 26, 2019. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Index.aspx.
California Department of Conservation. “Williamson Act.” http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/lca.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. “Fire and Resource Assessment Program.” Accessed October 22, 2020. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Santa Clara County FHSZ Map. November 6, 2007. Accessed October 22, 2020. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6766/fhszs_map43.pdf California Department of Housing and Community Development. “Regional Housing Needs Alviso Hotel 186 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Allocation and Housing Elements” Accessed November 22, 2019. http://hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/index.shtml.
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. “Net Taxable Gasoline Gallons.” Accessed October 21, 2020.
https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/dataportal/dataset.htm?url=VehicleTaxableFuelDist.
California Department of Transportation. ”Scenic Highways.” Accessed December 13, 2019. http://www.dot.ca.gov/design/lap/livability/scenic-highways/index.html.
California Energy Commission (CEC). “2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/buildingenergy-efficiency-standards/2019-building-energy-efficiency.
California Energy Commission. “Natural Gas Consumption by County.” Accessed October 21, 2020. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx.
California Energy Commission. Energy Consumption Data Management System. “Electricity Consumption by County.” Accessed October 21, 2020.
http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx.
California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.
California Gas and Electric Utilities. 2019 California Gas Report. Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/documents/cgr/2019_CGR_Supplement_7-1-19.pdf.
California Geological Survey. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Accessed January 7, 2019. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/ap/Pages/main.aspx.
California Office of Historic Preservation. “CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(3) and California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6.” March 14, 2006.
California Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)
California Public Resources Code Section 4526)
City of San José. Key Economic Development Projects. Accessed January 20, 2021. https://gis.sanjoseca.gov/maps/devprojects/
City of San José. “San José Better Bike Plan 2025.” Accessed October 14, 2020. https://www.bikesanJosé.com/
City of San José. 2011. Envision San José 2040 General Plan Final Program EIR.
City of San José. Assessment of Infrastructure for the Integrated Waste Management Zero Waste Strategic Plan Development. 2008.
City of San José. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Envision San José 2040 General Plan. SCH# 2009072096. Page 515.
Alviso Hotel 187 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
City of San José. General Plan FPEIR. September 2011. Page 648.
City of San José. San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility. Accessed December 16, 2019. https://www.sanJoséca.gov/your-government/environment/water-utilities/regionalwastewater-facility.
City of San José. San José-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility. Accessed December 18, 2019:
http://sanJoséca.gov/index.aspx?nid=1663.
County of Santa Clara. County Geologic Hazard Zones. Map 11. October 2012.
David J. Powers & Associates, Inc., Integrated Final Environmental Impact Report, Amendment to Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport Master Plan, April 2020.
Geologica, Inc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment: Pin High Golf Center & 3 Adjacent Parcels.
November 10, 2015.
Government Code Section 51104(g).
Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. The Estuary @ Terra Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment.
Attachment 2. October 2, 2020.
Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport. 2027 CNEL Contours for Airport Master Plan.
Amended June 8, 2010. Map.
Office of Planning and Research. “Changes to CEQA for Transit Oriented Development – FAQ.” October 14, 2014. Accessed December 13, 2019. http://www.opr.ca.gov/ceqa/updates/sb743/transit-oriented.html.
Public Law 110–140—December 19, 2007. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed October 21, 2020. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ140/pdf/PLAW110publ140.pdf.
Santa Clara County, Santa Clara County Geologic Hazard Zones, Map 20. Accessed January 7, 2020. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/DocsForms/Documents/GEO_GeohazardATLAS.pdf.
Santa Clara County. Five-Year CIWMP/RAIWMP Review Report. June 22, 2016.
Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program. Accessed October 20, 2020. http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/hmp_maps.htm
Section 450.216 or 450.322 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations.” State of California, Department of Finance. “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2018.” Accessed December 6, 2019. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/.
State of California, Department of Finance. “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2020.” Accessed December 6, 2019. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/ Alviso Hotel 188 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Streets and Highway Code, Sections 260 through 263.
The of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (Land Use Code 820, Shopping Center).
United States Department of Energy. Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007. Accessed October 21, 2020. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/eisa.
United States Department of the Interior. “Memorandum M-37050. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act Does Not Prohibit Incidental Take.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/m-37050.pdf.
United States Energy Information Administration. “State Profile and Energy Estimates, 2017.” Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Summary of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summaryresource-conservation-and-recovery-act.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Superfund: CERCLA Overview.” Accessed October 22, 2020. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cercla-overview.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. “The 2018 EPA Automotive Trends Report:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Fuel Economy, and Technology since 1975.” March 2019.
United States Geological Survey. Mineral Resources Online Spatial Data: Interactive maps and downloadable data for regional and global Geology, Geochemistry, Geophysics, and Mineral Resources. Accessed November 22, 2019.https://mrdata.usgs.gov/ US Army Corps of Engineers San Francisco District, Port of Oakland. Oakland Harbor Navigation Improvement (-50 foot) Project SCH No. 97072051 Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report, May 1998, updated January 2000.
US EPA. Explanation of Significant Differences to the Record of Decision - South Bay Asbestos Superfund Site Operable Unit 2 - Overall Site. September 28, 2011.
US Geological Survey. UCERF3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California’s Complex Fault System. Fact Sheet 2015 – 3009. March 2015. Accessed January 7, 2020. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2015/3009/pdf/fs2015-3009.pdf
Alviso Hotel 189 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 6.0 LEAD AGENCY AND CONSULTANTS
LEAD AGENCY
Maira Blanco (Planner II)
City of San José, Department of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3rd Floor
San José, CA 95113
408.535.7837
[email protected]
Alec Atienza
City of San José, Department of Planning, Building & Code Enforcement 200 East Santa Clara Street, 3rd Floor
San José, CA 95113
408.535.7688
[email protected]
CONSULTANTS
David J. Powers & Associates, Inc.
Environmental Consultants and Planners
Akoni Danielsen, Principal Project Manager
Michael Lisenbee, Senior Project Manager
Desiree Dei Rossi, Associate Project Manager
Connor Tutino, Assistant Project Manager
Matthew Moore, Assistant Project Manager
Ryan Osako, Graphic Artist
ERAS Environmental, Inc.
Environmental Consultants – Hazardous Materials
Tim R. Smith, Staff Geologist
David Siegel, Senior Program Manager
Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants
Traffic Consultants
Shane Russel, Transportation Engineer
Franziska Church, Principal
Geologica, Inc.
Environmental Consultants – Hazardous Materials
Brian F. Aubry, P.G., C.E.G., C Hg, Principal
Mark Hallee, P.G., Senior Geologist
Daniel W. Matthews, P.G., Associate Hydrogeologist
Alviso Hotel 190 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
Holman & Associates
Architectural Historians
Sunshine Psota, M.A., RPA, Architectural Historian
Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.
Air Quality and Noise Consultants
James Reyff, Principal
Casey Divine, Air Quality Consultant
Michael Thill, Principal
WRA, Inc.
Biology Consultants
Bianca Clarke, Associate Regulatory Permitting Specialist Brian Kearns, Wildlife Biologist
Scott Batiuk, Plant Biologist
Rei Scampavia, Biologist
Alviso Hotel 191 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SECTION 7.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
2017 CAP Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
amsl Above mean sea level
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BCDC San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission BMPs Best Management Practices
Btu British thermal units
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEMA California Emergency Management Agency
CALGreen California Green Building Code
Cal/OSHA California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CARE Community Air Risk Evaluation
CBC California Building Standards Code
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFCs Chlorofluorocarbons
CGS California Geological Survey
CH4 Methane
CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan
CMP Congestion Management Plan
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CWA Clean Water Act
Alviso Hotel 192 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones
FIRMs Flood Insurance Rate Maps
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GWP Global Warming Potential
HFCs Hydrofluorocarbons
HI Hazard Index
HMMP Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
HMP Hydromodification Management Plan
HRI City of San Jose’s Historic Resources Inventory
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LID Low Impact Development
LOS Level of Service
LTA Local Transportation Analysis
LTR Light Rail Transit
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MEI Maximally Exposed Individual
Mgd Million gallons per day
MLD Most Likely Descendant
MMTCO2e Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
MRP Municipal Regional Permit
MSL Mean sea level
MT Metric Tons
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Committee
Alviso Hotel 193 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
N2O Nitrous oxide
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NOD Notice of Determination
NOI Notice of Intent
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx Nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
O3 Ground-level Ozone
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
PDAs Priority Development Areas
PFCs Perfluorocarbons
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PM Particulate Matter
PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter
PM10 Coarse Particulate Matter
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
RHNA Regional Housing Need Allocation
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SCVHCP Santa Clara Valley Habitat Conservation Plan
SF6 Sulfur hexafluoride
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas
SHMA Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
SJCE San José Clean Energy
SJFD San José Fire Department
SJPD San José Police Department
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SMGB State Mining and Geology Board
Alviso Hotel 194 Initial Study
City of San José October 2021
SOx Sulfur Oxides
SSC Species of Special Concern
SR State Route
SWQCB State Water Quality Control Board
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TACs Toxic Air Contaminants
TCMs Treatment Control Measures
TCRs Tribal Cultural Resources
TDM Transportation Demand Management
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VTA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
ZNE Zero Net Carbon Emissions
THE ESTUARY @ TERRA
AIR QUALITY & GREENHOUSE
GAS ASSESSMENT
San José, California
October 2, 2020
Prepared for:
Desiree Dei Rossi
Assistant Project Manager
David J. Powers & Associates, Inc.
1736 Franklin Street, Suite 300
Oakland, CA 94612
Prepared by:
Casey Divine
James A. Reyff
429 East Cotati Avenue
Cotati, CA 94931
(707) 794-0400
I&R Project#: 19-189
1 Introduction
The purpose of this report is to address air quality, community health risk, and greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts associated with the proposed hotel project located south of N. 1st Street and north of State Route 237 (S.R. 237) in the Alviso area of San José, California. The air quality impacts and GHG emissions would be associated with the construction of new building and infrastructure and operation of the project. Air pollutant and GHG emissions associated with the construction and operation of the project were predicted using appropriate computer models. In addition, the potential project health risk impact (includes construction and operation) and the impacts of existing toxic air contaminant (TAC) sources affecting the nearby sensitive receptors were evaluated. This analysis addresses those issues following the guidance provided by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).1
Project Description
The project site (APN 015-39-020) is currently an approximately 6.23-acre undeveloped lot. The site is bound by the Guadalupe River to the south, State-owned open space to the east, and privately-owned parcels to the north and west. The site is within the boundaries of the Alviso Master Plan. The project proposes construction of a 108,702 square foot (sf), 215-room hotel in a five-story building. The northeastern corner of the site would include a surface parking lot with 43 parking spaces, and a four-story, 70,574-sf parking garage with 192 spaces, for a total of 235 parking spaces. There would be 14 electrical vehicle parking spaces. The total landscaped area proposed would be 187,792 square-feet.
Setting
The project is located in Santa Clara County, which is in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin.
Ambient air quality standards have been established at both the State and federal level. The Bay Area meets all ambient air quality standards with the exception of ground-level ozone, respirable particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).
Air Pollutants of Concern
High ozone levels are caused by the cumulative emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOX). These precursor pollutants react under certain meteorological conditions to form high ozone levels. Controlling the emissions of these precursor pollutants is the focus of the Bay Area’s attempts to reduce ozone levels. The highest ozone levels in the Bay Area occur in the eastern and southern inland valleys that are downwind of air pollutant sources. High ozone levels aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, and increase coughing and chest discomfort.
Particulate matter is another problematic air pollutant of the Bay Area. Particulate matter is assessed and measured in terms of respirable particulate matter or particles that have a diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10) and fine particulate matter where particles have a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5). Elevated concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 are the result of both 1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, May 2017. 2 region-wide (or cumulative) emissions and localized emissions. High particulate matter levels aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, reduce lung function, increase mortality (e.g., lung cancer), and result in reduced lung function growth in children.
Toxic Air Contaminants
TACs are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (usually because they cause cancer) and include, but are not limited to, the criteria air pollutants. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., diesel particulate matter [DPM] near a freeway). Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, State, and federal level.
Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about threequarters of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the Bay Area average). According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complicated scientific issue. Some of the chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by the CARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under the State's Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. The most recent Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) risk assessment guidelines were published in February of 2015.2 See Attachment 1 for a detailed
description of the community risk modeling methodology used in this assessment.
Regulatory Agencies
Federal Regulations
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets nationwide emission standards for mobile sources, which include on-road (highway) motor vehicles such trucks, buses, and automobiles, and non-road (off-road) vehicles and equipment used in construction, agricultural, industrial, and mining activities (such as bulldozers and loaders). The EPA also sets nationwide fuel standards. California also has the ability to set motor vehicle emission standards and standards for fuel used in California, as long as they are the same or more stringent than the Federal standards.
In the past decade the EPA has established a number of emission standards for on- and non-road heavy-duty diesel engines used in trucks and other equipment. This was done in part because diesel engines are a significant source of nitrogen oxides, or NOX, and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and because the EPA has identified diesel particulate matter as a probable carcinogen.
Implementation of the heavy-duty diesel on-road vehicle standards and the non-road diesel engine standards are estimated to reduce PM and NOX emissions from diesel engines up to 95 percent in 2 OEHHA, 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
February.
3 2030 when the heavy-duty vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty vehicles that comply with these emission standards.3
In concert with the diesel engine emission standards, the EPA has also substantially reduced the amount of sulfur allowed in diesel fuels. The sulfur contained in diesel fuel is a significant contributor to the formation of particulate matter in diesel-fueled engine exhaust. The new standards reduced the amount of sulfur allowed by 97 percent for highway diesel fuel (from 500 parts per million by weight [ppmw] to 15 ppmw), and by 99 percent for off-highway diesel fuel (from about 3,000 ppmw to 15 ppmw). The low sulfur highway fuel (15 ppmw sulfur), also called ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD) is currently required for use by all vehicles in the U.S.
All of the above Federal diesel engine and diesel fuel requirements have been adopted by California, in some cases with modifications making the requirements more stringent or the implementation dates sooner.
State Regulations
To address the issue of diesel emissions in the state, CARB developed the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles4. In addition to requiring more stringent emission standards for new on-road and off-road mobile sources and stationary diesel-fueled engines to reduce particulate matter emissions by 90 percent, a significant component of the plan involves application of emission control strategies to existing diesel vehicles and equipment. Many of the measures of the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan have been approved and adopted, including the Federal on-road and non-road diesel engine emission standards for new engines, as well as adoption of regulations for low sulfur fuel in California.
CARB has adopted and implemented a number of regulations for stationary and mobile sources to reduce emissions of DPM. Several of these regulatory programs affect medium and heavy-duty diesel trucks that represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. CARB regulations require on-road diesel trucks to be retrofitted with particulate matter controls or replaced to meet 2010 or later engine standards that have much lower DPM and PM2.5 emissions.
This regulation will substantially reduce these emissions between 2013 and 2023. While new trucks and buses will meet strict federal standards, this measure is intended to accelerate the rate at which the fleet either turns over so there are more cleaner vehicles on the road or i s retrofitted to meet similar standards. With this regulation, older, more polluting trucks would be removed from the roads sooner.
CARB has also adopted and implemented regulations to reduce DPM and NOX emissions from inuse (existing) and new off-road heavy-duty diesel vehicles (e.g., loaders, tractors, bulldozers, backhoes, off-highway trucks, etc.). The regulations apply to diesel-powered off-road vehicles 3 USEPA, 2000. Regulatory Announcement, Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements. EPA420-F-00-057. December. 4 California Air Resources Board, 2000. Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from DieselFueled Engines and Vehicles. October. 4 with engines 25 horsepower (hp) or greater. The regulations are intended to reduce particulate matter and NOX exhaust emissions by requiring owners to turn over their fleet (replace older equipment with newer equipment) or retrofit existing equipment in order to achieve specified fleetaveraged emission rates. Implementation of this regulation, in conjunction with stringent Federal off-road equipment engine emission limits for new vehicles, will significantly reduce emissions of DPM and NOX.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
BAAQMD has jurisdiction over an approximately 5,600-square mile area, commonly referred to as the San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area). The District’s boundary encompasses the nine San Francisco Bay Area counties, including Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Marin County, San Francisco County, San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Napa County, southwestern Solano County and southern Sonoma County.
BAAQMD is the lead agency in developing plans to address attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and California Ambient Air Quality Standards. The District also has permit authority over most types of stationary equipment utilized for the proposed project. The BAAQMD is responsible for permitting and inspection of stationary sources; enforcement of regulations, including setting fees, levying fines, and enforcement actions; and ensuring that public nuisances are minimized.
The BAAQMD California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Guidelines5 were
prepared to assist in the evaluation of air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed within the Bay Area. The guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential air impacts during the environmental review process consistent with CEQA requirements including thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information. They also include assessment methodologies for air toxics, odors, and greenhouse gas emissions. In June 2010, the BAAQMD’s Board of Directors adopted CEQA thresholds of significance and an update of their CEQA Guidelines. In May 2011, the updated BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines were amended to include a risk and hazards threshold for new receptors and modify procedures for assessing impacts related to risk and hazard impacts.
City San José Envision 2040 General Plan
The San José Envision 2040 General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions to reduce exposure of the City’s sensitive population to exposure of air pollution and toxic air contaminants or TACs.
The following goals, policies, and actions are applicable to the proposed project:
Applicable Goals – Air Pollutant Emission Reduction
Goal MS-10 Minimize air pollutant emissions from new and existing development.
Applicable Policies – Air Pollutant Emission Reduction
MS-10.1 Assess projected air emissions from new development in conformance with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines and relative 5 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2011. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. May. (Updated May 2017) 5 to state and federal standards. Identify and implement feasible air emission reduction measures.
MS-10.2 Consider the cumulative air quality impacts from proposed developments for proposed land use designation changes and new development, consistent with the region’s Clean Air Plan and State law.
Applicable Goals – Toxic Air Contaminants
Goal MS-11 Minimize exposure of people to air pollution and toxic air contaminants such as ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, and particulate matter.
Applicable Policies – Toxic Air Contaminants
MS-11.2 For projects that emit toxic air contaminants, require project proponents to prepare health risk assessments in accordance with BAAQMD-recommended procedures as part of environmental review and employ effective mitigation to reduce possible health risks to a less than significant level. Alternatively, require new projects (such as, but not limited to, industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities) that are sources of TACs to be located an adequate distance from residential areas and other sensitive receptors.
MS-11.4 Encourage the installation of appropriate air filtration at existing schools, residences, and other sensitive receptor uses adversely affected by pollution sources.
MS-11.5 Encourage the use of pollution absorbing trees and vegetation in buffer areas between substantial sources of TACs and sensitive land uses.
Actions – Toxic Air Contaminants
MS-11.7 Consult with BAAQMD to identify stationary and mobile TAC sources and determine the need for and requirements of a health risk assessment for proposed developments.
MS-11.8 For new projects that generate truck traffic, require signage which reminds drivers that the State truck idling law limits truck idling to five minutes.
Applicable Goals – Construction Air Emissions
Goal MS-13 Minimize air pollutant emissions during demolition and construction activities Applicable Policies – Construction Air Emissions
MS-13.1 Include dust, particulate matter, and construction equipment exhaust control measures as conditions of approval for subdivision maps, site development and planned development permits, grading permits, and demolition permits. At minimum, conditions shall conform to construction mitigation measures recommended in the current BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines for the relevant project size and type.
6 Applicable Actions – Construction Air Emissions
MS-13.4 Adopt and periodically update dust, particulate, and exhaust control standard measures for demolition and grading activities to include on project plans as conditions of approval based upon construction mitigation measures in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines.
Sensitive Receptors
There are groups of people more affected by air pollution than others. CARB has identified the following persons who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 16, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, and elementary schools. For cancer risk assessments, infants and children are the most sensitive receptors, since they are more susceptible to cancer causing TACs. Residential locations are assumed to include infants and small children. The closest sensitive receptors to the project site are the children at the Mayne Elementary School (3 years and older) and the single-family residences to the north opposite N. 1st Street. There are additional residences west and south of the site at further distances. This project would not introduce new sensitive receptors.
Significance Thresholds
In June 2010, BAAQMD adopted thresholds of significance to assist in the review of projects under CEQA and these significance thresholds were contained in the District’s 2011 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. These thresholds were designed to establish the level at which BAAQMD believed air pollution emissions would cause significant environmental impacts under CEQA. The thresholds were challenged through a series of court challenges and were mostly upheld.
BAAQMD updated the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines in 2017 to include the latest significance thresholds that were used in this analysis are summarized in Table 1.
7 Table 1. BAAQMD Air Quality and GHG Significance Thresholds Criteria Air
Pollutant
Construction Thresholds Operational Thresholds
Average Daily Emissions
(lbs./day)
Average Daily
Emissions
(lbs./day)
Annual Average
Emissions
(tons/year)
ROG 54 54 10
NOx 54 54 10
PM10 82 (Exhaust) 82 15
PM2.5 54 (Exhaust) 54 10
CO Not Applicable 9.0 ppm (8-hour average) or 20.0 ppm (1-hour average)
Fugitive Dust
Construction Dust Ordinance or
other Best Management
Practices
Not Applicable
Health Risks and
Hazards
Single Sources Within
1,000-foot Zone of
Influence
Combined Sources (Cumulative from all
sources within 1,000-foot zone of
influence)
Excess Cancer Risk >10.0 per one million >100 per one million Hazard Index >1.0 >10.0
Incremental annual PM2.5 >0.3 µg/m3 >0.8 µg/m3
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Land Use Projects –
direct and indirect
emissions
Compliance with a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy
OR
1,100 metric tons annually or 4.6 metric tons per capita (for 2020) * Note: ROG = reactive organic gases, NOx = nitrogen oxides, PM10 = course particulate matter or particulates with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers (µm) or less, PM2.5 = fine particulate matter or particulates with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5µm or less. GHG = greenhouse gases. *BAAQMD does not have a recommended post-2020 GHG threshold. 8 Air Quality Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact AIR-1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
BAAQMD is the regional agency responsible for overseeing compliance with State and Federal laws, regulations, and programs within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB).
BAAQMD, with assistance from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), prepares and implements specific plans to meet the applicable laws, regulations, and programs. The most recent and comprehensive of which is the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan.
6 The primary goals of the Clean Air Plan are to attain air quality standards, reduce population exposure and protect public health, and reduce GHG emissions and protect the climate. The BAAQMD has also developed CEQA guidelines to assist lead agencies in evaluating the significance of air quality and GHG impacts. In formulating compliance strategies, BAAQMD relies on planned land uses established by local general plans. Land use planning affects vehicle travel, which, in turn, affects region-wide emissions of air pollutants and GHGs.
The 2017 Clean Air Plan, adopted by BAAQMD in April 2017, includes control measures that are intended to reduce air pollutant emissions in the Bay Area either directly or indirectly. Plans must show consistency with the control measures listed within the Clean Air Plan. At the project-level, there are no consistency measures or thresholds. The proposed project would not conflict with the latest Clean Air planning efforts since 1) project would have emissions below the BAAQMD thresholds (see below), 2) the project would be considered urban infill, and 3) the project would be located near transit with regional connections.
Impact AIR-2: 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? The Bay Area is considered a non-attainment area for ground-level O3 and PM2.5 under both the Federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act. The area is also considered non-attainment for PM10 under the California Clean Air Act, but not the federal act. The area has attained both State and Federal ambient air quality standards for carbon monoxide. As part of an effort to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards for O3, PM2.5 and PM10, the BAAQMD has established thresholds of significance for these air pollutants and their precursors. These thresholds are for O3 precursor pollutants (ROG and NOx), PM10, and PM2.5 and apply to both construction period and operational period impacts.
Construction Period Emissions
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2016.3.2 was used to estimate emissions from on-site construction activity, construction vehicle trips, and evaporative emissions.
The project land use types and size, and anticipated construction schedule were input to CalEEMod. The CARB EMission FACtors 2017 (EMFAC2017) model was used to predict 6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. 9 emissions from construction traffic, which includes worker travel, vendor trucks, and haul trucks.7 The CalEEMod model output along with construction inputs are included in Attachment 2 and EMFAC2017 vehicle emissions modeling outputs are included in Attachment 3.
CalEEMod Inputs
Land Use Inputs
The proposed hotel project land uses were input into CalEEMod as follows:
215 rooms and 108,702-sf entered as “Hotel” on 1.92 acres, 192 spaces and 70,757-sf entered as “Unenclosed Parking with Elevator”, 43 spaces entered as “Parking Lot”,
22,973-sf entered as “Other Asphalt Surfaces” to capture the remaining paved areas, and 187,792-sf entered as “Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces” on 4.31 acres to capture the landscaped areas.
Construction Inputs
CalEEMod computes annual emissions for construction that are based on the project type, size and acreage. The model provides emission estimates for both on-site and off-site construction activities. On-site activities are primarily made up of construction equipment emissions, while offsite activity includes worker, hauling, and vendor traffic. The construction build-out scenario, including equipment list and schedule, were based on construction information provided by the project applicant.
The CalEEMod construction equipment worksheet provided by the applicant included the schedule for each phase. Within each phase, the quantity of equipment to be used along with the average hours per day and total number of workdays was provided. Since different equipment would have different estimates of the working days per phase, the hours per day for each phase was computed by dividing the total number of hours that the equipment would be used by the total number of days in that phase. The construction schedule assumed that the earliest possible start date would be February 2021 and the project would be built out over a period of approximately 15 months, or 343 construction workdays. The first full year of operation was assumed to be 2023.
Construction Truck Traffic Emissions
The latest version of the CalEEMod model is based on the older version of the CARB EMFAC2014 motor vehicle emission factor model. This model has been superseded by the EMFAC2017 model; however, CalEEMod has not been updated to include EMFAC2017.
Construction would produce traffic in the form of worker trips and truck traffic. The traffic-related emissions are based on worker and vendor trip estimates produced by CalEEMod and haul trips that were computed based on the estimate of demolition material to be exported, soil material imported and/or exported to the site, and the estimate of cement and asphalt truck trips. CalEEMod provides daily estimates of worker and vendor trips for each applicable phase. The total trips for 7 See CARB’s EMFAC2017 Web Database at https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/2017/ 10 those were computed by multiplying the daily trip rate by the number of days in that phase. The number of concrete and asphalt total round haul trips were either estimated provided or calculated by square footage for the project and converted to total one-way trips, assuming two trips per delivery.
The construction traffic information was combined with EMFAC2017 motor vehicle emissions factors. EMFAC2017 provides aggregate emission rates in grams per mile for each vehicle type.
The vehicle mix for this study was based on CalEEMod default assumptions, where worker trips are assumed to be comprised of light-duty autos (EMFAC category LDA) and light duty trucks (EMFAC category LDT1and LDT2). Vendor trips are comprised of delivery and large trucks (EMFAC category MHDT and HHDT) and haul trips, including cement trucks, are comprised of large trucks (EMFAC category HHDT). Travel distances are based on CalEEMod default lengths, which are 10.8 miles for worker travel, 7.3 miles for vendor trips and 20 miles for hauling (demolition material export and soil import/export). Since CalEEMod does not address cement or asphalt trucks, these were treated as vendor travel distances. Each trip was assumed to include an idle time of 5 minutes. Emissions associated with vehicle starts were also included. On-road emission rates from calendar year 2021-2022 for Santa Clara County were used. Table 2 provides the traffic inputs that were combined with the EMFAC2017 emission factors to compute vehicle emissions.
Table 2. Construction Traffic Data Used for EMFAC2017 Model Runs CalEEMod Run/Land Uses
and Construction Phase
Trips by Trip Type
Notes
Total
Worker1
Total
Vendor1 Total Haul2
Vehicle mix1
71.5% LDA
6.4% LDT1
22.1% LDT2
38.1% MHDT
61.9% HHDT 100% HHDT
Trip Length (miles) 10.8 7.3 20.0 (Demo/Soil)
7.3 (Cement/Asphalt)
CalEEMod default
distance with 5 Minute
Truck Idle Time
Site Preparation 55 - - CalEEMod default
worker trips
Grading 572 - 112
900-cy import.
CalEEMod default
worker trips
Trenching 520 - - CalEEMod default
worker trips
Building Construction 24,282 9,514 200
Estimated 100 cement
roundtrips. CalEEMod
default worker and
vendor trips
Architectural Coating 2,890 - - CalEEMod default
worker trips
Paving
104 - 48
200-cy asphalt.
CalEEMod default
worker trips
Notes: 1 Based on 2021-2022 EMFAC2017 light-duty vehicle fleet mix for Santa Clara County. 2 Includes grading trips estimated by CalEEMod based on amount of material to be removed. 11 Summary of Computed Construction Period Emissions
Average daily emissions were annualized for each year of construction by dividing the annual construction emissions by the number of active workdays during that year. Table 4 shows average daily construction emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10 exhaust, and PM2.5 exhaust during construction of the project. As indicated in Table 3, predicted construction period emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds.
Table 3. Construction Period Emissions
Year ROG NOx PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5
Exhaust
Construction Emissions Per Year (Tons)
2021 0.07 0.66 0.04 0.03
2022 0.65 0.17 0.01 0.01
Average Daily Construction Emissions Per Year (pounds/day) 2021 (240 construction workdays) 0.59 5.50 0.35 0.25
2022 (103 construction workdays) 12.59 3.21 0.23 0.14
BAAQMD Thresholds (pounds per day) 54 lbs./day 54 lbs./day 82 lbs./day 54 lbs./day Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Construction activities, particularly during site preparation and grading, would temporarily generate fugitive dust in the form of PM10 and PM2.5. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site and trucks carrying uncovered loads of soils. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines consider these impacts to be less-than-significant if best management practices are implemented to reduce these emissions. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would implement BAAQMD-recommended best management practices.
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Include measures to control dust and exhaust during construction.
During any construction period ground disturbance, the applicant shall ensure that the project contractor implement measures to control dust and exhaust. Implementation of the measures recommended by BAAQMD and listed below would reduce the air quality impacts associated with grading and new construction to a less-than-significant level. Additional measures are identified to reduce construction equipment exhaust emissions. The contractor shall implement the following best management practices that are required of all projects:
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph). 12 5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]).
Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
Effectiveness of Mitigation Measure AQ-1
The measures above are consistent with BAAQMD-recommended basic control measures for reducing fugitive particulate matter that are contained in the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines.
Operational Period Emissions
Operational air emissions from the project would be generated primarily from autos driven by future guests, employees, and vendors. Evaporative emissions from architectural coatings and maintenance products (classified as consumer products) are typical emissions from these types of uses. CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions from operation of the proposed project assuming full build-out.
CalEEMod Inputs
Land Uses
The project land uses were entered into CalEEMod as described above for the construction period modeling.
Model Year
Emissions associated with vehicle travel depend on the year of analysis because emission control technology requirements are phased-in over time. Therefore, the earlier the year analyzed in the model, the higher the emission rates utilized by CalEEMod. The earliest full year of operation 13 would be 2023 if construction begins in 2021. Emissions associated with build-out later than 2023 would be lower.
Trip Generation Rates
CalEEMod allows the user to enter specific vehicle trip generation rates. Therefore, the projectspecific daily trip generation rates for the hotel land use was provided by the traffic consultant was entered into the model.8
The daily trip rate for the hotel use accounted for the location-based reduction The Saturday and Sunday trip rates were assumed to be the weekday rate adjusted by multiplying the ratio of the CalEEMod default rates for Saturday and Sunday trips to the default weekday rate. The default trip lengths and trip types specified by CalEEMod were used.
EMFAC2017 Adjustment
The vehicle emission factors and fleet mix used in CalEEMod are based on EMission FACtors from 2014 (EMFAC2014), which is an older CARB emission inventory for on road and off road mobile sources. Since the release of CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2, new emission factors have been produced by CARB. EMFAC2017 became available for use in March 2018 and approved by the EPA in August 2019. It includes the latest data on California’s car and truck fleets and travel activity. Additionally, CARB has recently released EMFAC off-model adjustment factors to account for the Safer Affordable Efficient (SAFE) Vehicle Rule Part one.9,10 The SAFE vehicle Rule Part One revoked California’s authority to set its own GHG emission standards and set zero emission vehicle mandates in California. As a result of this ruling, mobile criteria pollutant and GHG emissions would increase. Therefore, the CalEEMod vehicle emission factors and fleet mix were updated with the emission rates and fleet mix from EMFAC2017, which were adjusted with the CARB EMFAC off-model adjustment factors. More details about the updates in emissions calculation methodologies and data are available in the EMFAC2017 Technical Support Document.11
Climate Smart San José
Climate Smart San José is a plan to reduce air pollution, save water, and create a stronger and healthier community. The City approved goals and milestones in February 2018 to ensure the City can substantially reduce GHG emissions through reaching the following goals and milestones:
All new residential buildings will be Zero Net Carbon Emissions (ZNE) by 2020 and all new commercial buildings will be ZNE by 2030 (Note that ZNE buildings would be all electric with a carbon-free electricity source).
8 Fehr & Peers, Alviso Hotel Transportation Analysis Report, July 2020. 9 California Air Resource Board, 2019. EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Part One. November. Web: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/emfac_off_model_adjustment_factors_final_draft.pdf 10 California Air Resource Board, 2020. EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Carbon Dioxide (CO20 Emissions to Accounts for the SAFE Vehicles Rule Part One and the Final SAFE Rule. June. Web:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/emfac_off_model_co2_adjustment_factors_06262020- final.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery 11 See CARB 2018: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/roaddocumentation/msei-modeling-tools-emfac 14 San Jose Clean Energy (SJCE) will provide 100-percent carbon-free base power by 2021. One gigawatt of solar power will be installed in San Jose by 2040. 61 percent of passenger vehicles will be powered by electricity by 2030.
The California Energy Commission (CEC) updates the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards every three years, in alignment with the California Code of regulations. Title 24 Parts 6 and 11 of the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) address the need for regulations to improve energy efficiency and combat climate change. The 2019 CAL Green standards include substantial changes intended to increase the energy efficiency of buildings. For example, the code encourages the installation of solar and heat pump water heaters in low-rise residential buildings. The 2019 California Code went before City Council in October 2019 for approval, with an effective date of January 1, 2020. As part of this action, the City adopted a “reach code” that requires development projects to exceed the minimum Building Energy Efficiency requirements.12 The City’s reach code applies only to new residential and non-residential construction in San José. It incentivizes all-electric construction, requires increased energy efficiency and electrification-readiness for those choosing to maintain the presence of natural gas. The code requires that non-residential construction include solar readiness. It also requires additional EV charging readiness and/or electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) installation for all development types.
Energy
CalEEMod defaults for energy use were used, which include the 2016 Title 24 Building Standards.13 GHG emissions modeling includes those indirect emissions from electricity consumption. The electricity produced emission rate was modified in CalEEMod. CalEEMod has a default emission factor of 641.3 pounds of CO2 per megawatt of electricity produced, which is based on PG&E’s 2008 emissions rate. PG&E published in 2019 emissions rates for 2010 through 2017, which showed the emission rate for delivered electricity had been reduced to 210 pounds CO2 per megawatt of electricity delivered in the year 2017.14 This intensity factor was used in the model along with the assumption that the project would use electricity supplied by San José Clean Energy (SJCE). SJCE would provide electricity that would be 100-percent carbon free by 2021 before the project becomes operational.15
Other Inputs
Default model assumptions for emissions associated with solid waste generation and water/wastewater use were applied to the project. Water/wastewater use was changed to 100% aerobic conditions to represent wastewater treatment plant conditions. No hearths were assumed. 12 City of San Jose Transportation and Environmental Committee, Building Reach Code for New Construction Memorandum, August 2019.
13 An update to CalEEMod to include new 2019 Title 24 standards that include more energy efficient buildings has not been completed as of the September 18, 2020.
14 PG&E, 2019. Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Report. Web:
http://www.pgecorp.com/corp_responsibility/reports/2019/assets/PGE_CRSR_2019.pdf 15See: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/environmental-services/climate-smart-sanjos/2019-reach-code-initiative 15 Existing Uses
The project would be built on a parcel that is vacant. Therefore, existing land use emissions would not exist, nor used to offset proposed project conditions.
Summary of Computed Operational Period Emissions
Annual emissions were predicted using CalEEMod and daily emissions were estimating assuming 365 days of operation. Table 4 shows average daily emissions of ROG, NOX, total PM10, and total PM2.5 during operation of the project. The operational period emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds.
Table 4. Operational Period Emissions
Scenario ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
2023 Project Operational Emissions (tons/year) 1.10 tons 1.02 tons 1.14 tons 0.32 tons BAAQMD Thresholds (tons /year) 10 tons 10 tons 15 tons 10 tons Exceed Thresholds? No No No No
2023 Project Operational Emissions (lbs./day)
1 6.01 lbs. 5.60 lbs. 6.26 lbs. 1.78 lbs.
BAAQMD Thresholds (lbs./day) 54 lbs. 54 lbs. 82 lbs. 54 lbs.
Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Notes: 1 Assumes 365-day operation.
Impact AIR-3: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Project impacts related to increased community risk can occur either by introducing a new source of TACs with the potential to adversely affect existing sensitive receptors in the project vicinity or by significantly exacerbating existing cumulative TAC impacts. This project would introduce new sources of TACs during construction (i.e. on-site construction and truck hauling emissions) and operation (i.e. mobile sources).
Project construction activity would generate dust and equipment exhaust that would affect nearby sensitive receptors. The project would not include the installation of any emergency generators powered by diesel engines which would produce TAC and air pollutant emissions. The project would generate some traffic, consisting of light-duty vehicles. However, the number of net daily trips generated by the project are small (i.e. 1,642 daily trips16) and emissions from automobile traffic generated by the project would be spread out over a broad geographical area and not localized. Project traffic was not considered a source of substantial TACs or PM2.5.
Therefore, project impacts to existing sensitive receptors were addressed for temporary construction activities only. There are also several sources of existing TACs and localized air pollutants in the vicinity of the project. The impact of the existing sources of TAC was also assessed in terms of the cumulative risk that includes the project contribution, as well as the risk on the new sensitive receptors introduced by the project. 16 Fehr & Peers, Alviso Hotel Transportation Analysis Report, July 2020. 16 Community Risk Methodology for Construction and Operation Community risk impacts were addressed by predicting increased cancer risk, the increase in annual PM2.5 concentrations and computing the Hazard Index (HI) for non-cancer health risks. The risk impacts from the project are the combination of risks from construction and operation sources.
These sources include on-site construction activity, construction truck hauling, and increased traffic from the project. To evaluate the increased cancer risks from the project, a 30-year exposure period was used, per BAAQMD guidance,17 with the sensitive receptors being exposed to both project construction and operation emissions during this timeframe.
The project increased cancer risk is computed by summing the project construction cancer risk and operation cancer risk contributions. Unlike, the increased maximum cancer risk, the annual PM2.5 concentration and HI values are not additive but based on the annual maximum values for the entirety of the project. The project maximally exposed individual (MEI) is identified as the sensitive receptor that is most impacted by the project’s construction and operation.
The methodology for computing community risks impacts is contained in Attachment 1. This involved the calculation of TAC and PM2.5 emissions, dispersion modeling of these emissions, and computations of cancer risk and non-cancer health effects.
Modeled Sensitive Receptors
Receptors for this assessment included locations where sensitive populations would be present for extended periods of time (i.e., chronic exposures). This includes the existing elementary school and residences to the north and residences to the west and south of the project site, as shown in Figure 1. Residential receptors are assumed to include all receptor groups (i.e. infants, children, and adults) with almost continuous exposure to project emissions. Community risks were also computed for children (3 years and older) at the Mayne Elementary School.
Community Health Risk from Project Construction
Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a known TAC. These exhaust air pollutant emissions would not be considered to contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations. Construction exhaust emissions may still pose health risks for sensitive receptors such as surrounding residents. The primary community risk impact issue associated with construction emissions are cancer risk and exposure to PM2.5. Diesel exhaust poses both a potential health and nuisance impact to nearby receptors. A health risk assessment of the project construction activities was conducted that evaluated potential health effects to nearby sensitive receptors from construction emissions of DPM and PM2.5. 18 This
assessment included dispersion modeling to predict the offsite and onsite concentrations resulting from project construction, so that lifetime cancer risks and non-cancer health effects could be evaluated.
17 BAAQMD, 2016. BAAQMD Air Toxics NSR Program Health Risk Assessment (HRA) Guidelines. December 2016.
18 DPM is identified by California as a toxic air contaminant due to the potential to cause cancer. 17 Construction Emissions
The CalEEMod model provided total annual PM10 exhaust emissions (assumed to be DPM) for the off-road construction equipment and for exhaust emissions from on-road vehicles, with total emissions from all construction stages as 0.0281 tons (56 pounds). The on-road emissions are a result of haul truck travel during demolition and grading activities, worker travel, and vendor deliveries during construction. A trip length of one mile was used to represent vehicle travel while at or near the construction site. It was assumed that these emissions from on-road vehicles traveling at or near the site would occur at the construction site. Fugitive PM2.5 dust emissions were calculated by CalEEMod as 0.0181 tons (36 pounds) for the overall construction period.
Dispersion Modeling
The U.S. EPA AERMOD dispersion model was used to predict concentrations of DPM and PM2.5 concentrations at sensitive receptors (residences) in the vicinity of the project construction area.
The AERMOD dispersion model is a BAAQMD-recommended model for use in modeling analysis of these types of emission activities for CEQA projects.19 Construction Sources
The majority of construction activity for this project would be concentrated around the proposed hotel and parking garage. Minimal construction activities would occur near the borders of the site where mostly landscaping activities would occur. Therefore, the construction areas in this analysis were centrally located on the site.
To represent the construction equipment exhaust emissions, an area source emission release height of 20 feet (6 meters) was used for the area sources.20 The release height incorporates both the physical release height from the construction equipment (i.e., the height of the exhaust pipe) and plume rise after it leaves the exhaust pipe. Plume rise is due to both the high temperature of the exhaust and the high velocity of the exhaust gas. It should be noted that when modeling an area source, plume rise is not calculated by the AERMOD dispersion model as it would do for a point source (exhaust stack). Therefore, the release height from an area source used to represent emissions from sources with plume rise, such as construction equipment, should be based on the height the exhaust plume is expected to achieve, not just the height of the top of the exhaust pipe.
For modeling fugitive PM2.5 emissions, a near-ground level release height of 7 feet (2 meters) was used for the area source. Fugitive dust emissions at construction sites come from a variety of sources, including truck and equipment travel, grading activities, truck loading (with loaders) and unloading (rear or bottom dumping), loaders and excavators moving and transferring soil and other materials, etc. All of these activities result in fugitive dust emissions at various heights at the point(s) of generation. Once generated, the dust plume will tend to rise as it moves downwind across the site and exit the site at a higher elevation than when it was generated. For all these 19 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2012, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 3.0. May.
20 California Air Resource Board, 2007. Proposed Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicles, Appendix D:
Health Risk Methodology. April. Web: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ordiesl07/ordiesl07.htm 18 reasons, a 7-foot release height was used as the average release height across the construction site.
Emissions from the construction equipment and on-road vehicle travel were distributed throughout the modeled area sources.
AERMOD Inputs and Meteorological Data
The modeling used a 5-year meteorological data set (2013-2017) from the San José International Airport prepared for use with the AERMOD model by the BAAQMD. This airport is approximately three and a half miles south of the project site. Annual DPM and PM2.5 concentrations from construction activities during the 2021-2022 period were calculated using the model. DPM and PM2.5 concentrations were calculated at nearby sensitive receptors. Receptor heights of 5 feet (1.5 meters) used to represent the breathing heights of residences and a receptor breathing height of 3 feet (1 meter) was used for the children attending the school.21 Construction emissions were modeled as occurring daily between 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., when the majority of construction activity would occur. The emission rates used for dispersion modeling were calculated using the total annual construction emissions computed using CalEEMod (based on construction occurring 5 days per week) and dividing by 9 hours per day for 365 days (i.e., normalizing the emissions to an annualized pound per hour emission rate over the period being modeled). The dispersion modeling was conducted assuming emissions would occur 9 hours per day Monday through Friday using the variable emission option in the U.S. EPA AERMOD dispersion model.
Summary of Construction Community Risk Impacts
The increased cancer risk calculations were based on applying the BAAQMD recommended age sensitivity factors to the TAC concentrations, as described in Attachment 1. Age-sensitivity factors reflect the greater sensitivity of infants and small children to cancer causing TACs. Infant and adult exposures were assumed to occur at all residences during the entire construction period. At the school, children ages three years and older were assumed. It was also assumed that the children would be at the school for 250 days a year, which aligns with BAAQMD’s recommendation for worker schedules.22 This exposure frequency was used since children would be at the school when parents are at work.
The maximum modeled annual PM2.5 concentration was calculated based on combined exhaust and fugitive concentrations. The maximum computed HI values was based on the ratio of the maximum DPM concentration modeled and the chronic inhalation refence exposure level of 5 µg/m3.
The maximum modeled annual DPM and PM2.5 concentrations, which includes both the DPM and fugitive PM2.5 concentrations, were identified at nearby sensitive receptors (as shown in Figure 1) 21 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2012, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 3.0. May. Web: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/risk-modeling-approach-may-2012.pdf?la=en 22 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2016, BAAQMD Air Toxics NSR Program Health Risk Assessment (HRA) Guidelines. January.
19 to find the MEI. Results of this assessment indicated that the construction MEI was located on the first floor (5 feet above ground) of the residence to the north of the project site. The unmitigated maximum increased cancer risks, PM2.5 concentration, and HI from construction do not exceed their respective BAAQMD single-source thresholds.
The construction community risks were also computed and predicted at the elementary school.
Table 5 summarizes the community risks from construction at all these locations. Attachment 4 to this report includes the emission calculations used for the construction modeling and the cancer risk calculations.
Table 5. Construction Risk Impacts at the Off-site Receptors Source Cancer Risk
(per million)
Annual PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Construction Unmitigated 0.3 (infant) <0.01 <0.01 BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No
Mayne Elementary School Student Receptors
Project Construction Unmitigated 0.1 (child) <0.01 <0.01 BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceeds Threshold? Unmitigated No No No
20 Figure 1. Project Construction Site, Locations of Off-Site Sensitive Receptors and Maximum TAC Impacts
Community Risks from Project Operation
Operation of the project would have long-term emissions from mobile sources (i.e., traffic) and stationary sources (i.e., generator). While these emissions would not be as intensive at or near the site as construction activity, they would contribute to long-term effects to sensitive receptors.
Operational Traffic
Per BAAQMD recommended risks and methodology, a road with less than 10,000 total vehicle per day is considered a low-impact source of TACs.23 This project would generate 1,642 daily trips24 with a majority of the trips being from light-duty vehicles (i.e. passenger cars), which is less than 10,000 daily vehicles. BAAQMD considers roadways that have less than 10,000 average daily trips (ADT) to be low-impact sources of TACs and do not need to be considered in the CEQA 23 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2012, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 3.0. May. Web: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-andresearch/ceqa/risk-modeling-approach-may-2012.pdf?la=en 24 Fehr & Peers, Alviso Hotel Transportation Analysis Report, July 2020 21 analysis.25 Therefore, emissions from project traffic would be negligible and are not included in this analysis.
Operational Stationary Equipment
Stationary equipment that would be permitted by BAAQMD and emit TACs or PM2.5 has not been identified for this project.
Total Project Community Health Risks – Construction and Operation The cumulative risk impacts from a project are the combination of construction activity, projectgenerated traffic, and the operation of project stationary sources. This project impact is computed by adding the construction and operational cancer risk over a 30-year exposure period, assuming exposure at the same MEI. Unlike the increased maximum cancer risk, the annual PM2.5 concentration and HI risks are not additive but based on an annual maximum risk for the entirety of the project. However, in the case of this project, only construction would be a substantial source of risks and hazards. The project is not predicted to increase traffic enough on the local roadways or have any generator emissions to produce a substantial TAC impact.
Cumulative Community Risks of all TAC Sources at Off-Site Construction MEI Community health risk assessments typically look at all substantial sources of TACs that can affect sensitive receptors that are located within 1,000 feet of the project site (i.e. influence area). These sources include railroads, freeways or highways, busy surface streets, and stationary sources identified by BAAQMD. A review of the project area indicates that traffic on S.R. 237 has an ADT of over 10,000 vehicles. All other roadways within the area are assumed to have an ADT that is less than 10,000 vehicles. Two stationary sources were identified within the 1,000-foot influence area using the BAAQMD’s stationary source geographic information systems (GIS) map tool.
Figure 2 shows the sources affecting the MEI and project site. Community risk impacts from these sources upon the MEI are reported in Table 6. Details of the modeling and community risk calculations are included in Attachment 5.
25 BAAQMD, 2012. Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards. May. Web:
https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/ceqa/risk-modeling-approach-may-2012.pdf?la=en 22 Figure 2. Project Site, MEI and Nearby TAC Sources
Highways – S.R. 237
BAAQMD provides raster files with cancer risk and PM2.5 values for all highways/freeways, roadways (ADT > 30,000), and rail lines within the Bay Area. The risk values shown in the raster files were modeled in AERMOD in 20x20-meter grid cells. The files incorporate AADT for the highway using EMFAC 2014 data for fleet mix and include the OEHHA 2015 factor. These raster files were used to screen the S.R. 237 risk values upon the off-site MEI. At the off-site MEI, the cancer risk would be 9.4 per million and the PM2.5 concentration would be 0.19 µg/m3 . No data
was provided for the HI.
BAAQMD Permitted Stationary Sources
Permitted stationary sources of air pollution near the project site were identified using BAAQMD’s Permitted Stationary Sources 2018 GIS website.26 This mapping tool identifies the location of nearby stationary sources and their estimated risk and hazard impacts, including emissions and adjustments to account for new OEHHA guidance. Two permitted facilities were identified nearby 26 BAAQMD,
https://baaqmd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2387ae674013413f987b1071715daa65 23 with both being generators (South Bay Development, LLC [Facility ID #23434] and Verizon Wireless-Alviso [Facility ID #20630]).
The BAAQMD GIS website provided screening risks and hazards for both sources, so a stationary source information request was not required to be submitted to BAAQMD. The screening risks and hazards for the two generators were adjusted for distance using BAAQMD’s Distance Multiplier Tool for Diesel Internal Combustion Engines. Note that no age-sensitivity factors were included in the screening analysis, so risks would be similar or lower if adjustments were included. Community risk impacts from the stationary sources upon the project are reported in Table 6.
Combined Community Risk at Off-site Construction MEI
Table 6 reports both the project and cumulative community risk impacts at the sensitive receptor most affected by construction (i.e. the MEI). Without mitigation, the project’s community risk from project construction activities would not exceed the single-source maximum increased cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, or HI thresholds. In addition, the combined unmitigated cancer risk, PM2.5 concentration, and HI values would not exceed their respective cumulative thresholds.
Table 6. Cumulative Community Risk Impacts from Combined TAC Sources at MEI Source
Maximum
Cancer Risk
(per million)
PM2.5
concentration
(μg/m3)
Hazard
Index
Project Impacts
Project Construction Unmitigated 0.3 (infant) <0.01 <0.01 BAAQMD Single-Source Threshold >10.0 >0.3 >1.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No
Cumulative Sources
S.R. 237 9.4 0.19 --
South Bay Development, LLC (Facility ID #23434,
Generator) MEI Distance at +1,000 feet <0.1 -- --
Verizon Wireless-Alviso (Facility ID #20630,
Generator) MEI Distance at 340 feet 0.3 -- --
Combined Sources Unmitigated 10.1 (infant) <0.20 <0.01
BAAQMD Cumulative Source Threshold >100 >0.8 >10.0
Exceed Threshold? Unmitigated No No No
Impact AIR-4: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The project would generate localized emissions of diesel exhaust during construction equipment operation and truck activity. These emissions may be noticeable from time to time by adjacent receptors. However, they would be localized and are not likely to adversely affect people off-site by resulting in confirmed odor complaints. The project would not include any sources of significant odors that would cause complaints from surrounding uses.
32 Supporting Documentation
Attachment 1 is the methodology used to compute community risk impacts, including the methods to compute lifetime cancer risk from exposure to project emissions.
Attachment 2 includes the CalEEMod output for project construction and operational criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions. The operational outputs for 2030 uses are also included in this attachment. Also included are any modeling assumptions.
Attachment 3 includes the EMFAC2017 emissions modeling. The input files for these calculations are voluminous and are available upon request in digital format.
Attachment 4 is the project community construction risk assessments. AERMOD dispersion modeling files for these assessments, which are quite voluminous, are available upon request and would be provided in digital format.
Attachment 5 includes the cumulative community risk calculations, modeling results, and health risk calculations from sources affecting the construction MEI.
Attachment 1: Health Risk Calculation Methodology
A health risk assessment (HRA) for exposure to Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) requires the application of a risk characterization model to the results from the air dispersion model to estimate potential health risk at each sensitive receptor location. The State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB) develop recommended methods for conducting health risk assessments. The most recent OEHHA risk assessment guidelines were published in February of 2015.37 These guidelines incorporate substantial changes designed to provide for enhanced protection of children, as required by State law, compared to previous published risk assessment guidelines. CARB has provided additional guidance on implementing OEHHA’s recommended methods.38 This HRA used the 2015 OEHHA risk assessment guidelines and CARB guidance. The BAAQMD has adopted recommended procedures for applying the newest OEHHA guidelines as part of Regulation 2, Rule 5: New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants.39 Exposure parameters from the OEHHA guidelines and the recent BAAQMD HRA Guidelines were used in this evaluation.
Cancer Risk
Potential increased cancer risk from inhalation of TACs is calculated based on the TAC concentration over the period of exposure, inhalation dose, the TAC cancer potency factor, and an age sensitivity factor to reflect the greater sensitivity of infants and children to cancer causing TACs. The inhalation dose depends on a person’s breathing rate, exposure time and frequency and duration of exposure. These parameters vary depending on the age, or age range, of the persons being exposed and whether the exposure is considered to occur at a residential location or other sensitive receptor location.
The current OEHHA guidance recommends that cancer risk be calculated by age groups to account for different breathing rates and sensitivity to TACs. Specifically, they recommend evaluating risks for the third trimester of pregnancy to age zero, ages zero to less than two (infant exposure), ages two to less than 16 (child exposure), and ages 16 to 70 (adult exposure). However, CARB and the BAAQMD recommend the use of a residential exposure duration of 30 years for sources with long-term emissions (e.g., roadways). For workers, assumed to be adults, a 25-year exposure period is recommended by the BAAQMD. For school children a 9-year exposure period is recommended by the BAAQMD.
Age sensitivity factors (ASFs) associated with the different types of exposure are an ASF of 10 for the third trimester and infant exposures, an ASF of 3 for a child exposure, and an ASF of 1 for an adult exposure. Also associated with each exposure type are different breathing rates, expressed as liters per kilogram of body weight per day (L/kg-day) or liters per kilogram of body weight per 37 OEHHA, 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.
February.
38 CARB, 2015. Risk Management Guidance for Stationary Sources of Air Toxics. July 23. 39 BAAQMD, 2016. BAAQMD Air Toxics NSR Program Health Risk Assessment (HRA) Guidelines. December 2016. 8-hour period for the case of worker or school child exposures. As recommended by the BAAQMD for residential exposures, 95th percentile breathing rates are used for the third trimester and infant exposures, and 80th percentile breathing rates for child and adult exposures. For children at schools and daycare facilities, BAAQMD recommends using the 95th percentile 8-hour breathing rates for moderate intensity.
Under previous OEHHA and BAAQMD HRA guidance, residential receptors are assumed to be at their home 24 hours a day, or 100 percent of the time. In the 2015 Risk Assessment Guidance, OEHHA includes adjustments to exposure duration to account for the fraction of time at home (FAH), which can be less than 100 percent of the time, based on updated population and activity statistics. The FAH factors are age-specific and are: 0.85 for third trimester of pregnancy to less than 2 years old, 0.72 for ages 2 to less than 16 years, and 0.73 for ages 16 to 70 years. Use of the FAH factors is allowed by the BAAQMD if there are no schools in the project vicinity have a cancer risk of one in a million or greater assuming 100 percent exposure (FAH = 1.0).
Functionally, cancer risk is calculated using the following parameters and formulas:
Cancer Risk (per million) = CPF x Inhalation Dose x ASF x ED/AT x FAH x 106 Where:
CPF = Cancer potency factor (mg/kg-day)-1
ASF = Age sensitivity factor for specified age group
ED = Exposure duration (years)
AT = Averaging time for lifetime cancer risk (years)
FAH = Fraction of time spent at home (unitless)
Inhalation Dose = Cair x DBR* x A x (EF/365) x 10-6
Where:
Cair = concentration in air (μg/m3)
DBR = daily breathing rate (L/kg body weight-day)
8HrBR = 8-hour breathing rate (L/kg body weight-8 hours) A = Inhalation absorption factor
EF = Exposure frequency (days/year)
10-6 = Conversion factor
* An 8-hour breathing rate (8HrBR) is used for worker and school child exposures.
The health risk parameters used in this evaluation are summarized as follows:
Exposure Type Infant Child Adult
Parameter Age Range 3rd
Trimester
0<2 2 < 16 16 - 30
DPM Cancer Potency Factor (mg/kg-day)-1 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 1.10E+00 Daily Breathing Rate (L/kg-day) 80th Percentile Rate 273 758 572 261 Daily Breathing Rate (L/kg-day) 95th Percentile Rate 361 1,090 745 335 8-hour Breathing Rate (L/kg-8 hours) 95th Percentile Rate - 1,200 520 240 Inhalation Absorption Factor 1 1 1 1
Averaging Time (years) 70 70 70 70
Exposure Duration (years) 0.25 2 14 14**
Exposure Frequency (days/year)* 350 350 350 350**
Age Sensitivity Factor 10 10 3 1
Fraction of Time at Home (FAH) 0.85-1.0 0.85-1.0 0.72-1.0 0.73* * Exposure Frequency can change dependent on the type of receptors (i.e. residential, worker, school, daycare). For worker exposures (adult), the exposure duration and frequency are 25 years 250 days/year and FAH is not applicable.
Non-Cancer Hazards
Non-cancer health risk is usually determined by comparing the predicted level of exposure to a chemical to the level of exposure that is not expected to cause any adverse effects (reference exposure level), even to the most susceptible people. Potential non-cancer health hazards from TAC exposure are expressed in terms of a hazard index (HI), which is the ratio of the TAC concentration to a reference exposure level (REL). OEHHA has defined acceptable concentration levels for contaminants that pose non-cancer health hazards. TAC concentrations below the REL are not expected to cause adverse health impacts, even for sensitive individuals. The total HI is calculated as the sum of the HIs for each TAC evaluated and the total HI is compared to the BAAQMD significance thresholds to determine whether a significant non-cancer health impact from a project would occur.
Typically, for residential projects located near roadways with substantial TAC emissions, the primary TAC of concern with non-cancer health effects is diesel particulate matter (DPM). For DPM, the chronic inhalation REL is 5 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).
Annual PM2.5 Concentrations
While not a TAC, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) has been identified by the BAAQMD as a pollutant with potential non-cancer health effects that should be included when evaluating potential community health impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The thresholds of significance for PM2.5 (project level and cumulative) are in terms of an increase in the annual average concentration. When considering PM2.5 impacts, the contribution from all sources of PM2.5 emissions should be included. For projects with potential impacts from nearby local roadways, the PM2.5 impacts should include those from vehicle exhaust emissions, PM2.5 generated from vehicle tire and brake wear, and fugitive emissions from re-suspended dust on the roads.
Attachment 2: CalEEMod Modeling Inputs and Outputs
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - PG&E 2017 Intensity Factor = 210Land Use - Provided land usesConstruction Phase - Provided construction schedule 9/8/2020Off-road Equipment - Provided construction equip & hours 9/8/2020Off-road Equipment - Provided construction equip & hours 9/8/2020 CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr)
210 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.029 N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006
58 Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2023
Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 187.79 1000sqft 4.31 187,792.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 22.97 1000sqft 0.00 22,973.00 0
Hotel 215.00 Room 1.92 108,702.00 0
Unenclosed Parking with Elevator 192.00 Space 0.00 70,757.00 0 Floor Surface Area Population
Parking Lot 43.00 Space 0.00 17,200.00 0
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2