Att 7 - CEQA Categorical Exemption Memorandum — San Mateo City Council, August 17, 2026

1 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com

MEMORANDUM
Date
To
From

Su
bject
May 26, 2026
Liz Gagliardi, Associate Planner, City of San Mateo
Maria Kisyova, Project Manager
Akoni Danielsen, President and Principal Project Manager Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Development at 606-616 South B Street – California Environmental Quality Act Categorical Exemption Qualification I. Introduction to Categorical Exemptions
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contain classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are, therefore, exempt from the provisions of CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 – 15333 constitute the list of categorically exempt projects and contain specific criteria that must be met in order for a project to be found exempt. Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 includes a list of exceptions to exemptions, none of which may apply to a project in order for it to qualify for a categorical exemption (i.e., if an exception applies, a project is precluded from being found categorically exempt).

CEQ
A Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects sets forth criteria for projects characterizes as in-fill development, meeting the following conditions:
a. Th
e project is consistent with all applicable general plan and zoning designations, policies, and regulations;
b. The proposed development occurs with city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses
1;
c. The project site has no habitat value for endangered, rare, or threatened species; d. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air or water quality; and
1 The Office of Planning and Research defines in-fill development as buildings within unused and underutilized lands within existing development patterns, typically but not exclusively in urban areas. Source: Office of Planning and Research. “Infill Development.” https://opr.ca.gov/planning/land-use/infill-development/.

2 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com e. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

T
he City of San Mateo, as the Lead Agency, is completing environmental review for the Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project (“project”) in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et. seq.) and the regulations and policies of the City of San Mateo, California. This Exemption Memorandum describes the proposed project and provides evidence to support a determination by the City of San Mateo that the project would be eligible for a Categorical Exemption under CEQA.

II. Project Site Location and Existing Setting
The approximately 27,921 square foot (0.64 acre) site is located at 616 South B Street in San Mateo, California. The site is bordered by 6th Avenue to the north, South B Street to the east, 7th Avenue to the south, and single- and multi-family residential development to the west. West of South B Street, surrounding land uses are predominantly residential, while commercial uses are present along South B Street to the north and south of the site. Refer to Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 for regional, vicinity, and aerial maps of the project site and surrounding area, respectively.

III. General Plan and Zoning
The project site is located in the City of San Mateo’s Downtown Area Plan, has a General Plan land use designation of Mixed-Use Medium II, and is zoned C1-3/R5, Neighborhood Commercial / High Density Multifamily (Mixed Use). The Mixed-Use Medium II land use designation is intended to allow a mix of uses near other mixed-use, commercial, or residential areas, and within Downtown.

It allows a floor area ratio (FAR2) of 4.0 for nonresidential uses, a maximum density range 51 to 99 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) for residential uses, and building heights of four to six stories. The C1-3/R5 zoning district allows for up to 50 du/ac and building heights of 55 feet. 2 FAR is the measurement of a building’s floor area in relation to the size of the lot that the building is located on.

FAR is expressed as a decimal number, and is derived by dividing the total area of the building by the total area of the parcel (Building area divided by lot area).
101
101
101
82 84
82 92
92 92
35 1 280
280
San Francisco Bay
San Bruno
Millbrae
Burlingame
Foster City
San Mateo
Belmont
San Carlos
Redwood City
Half Moon Bay
South San
Francisco
San Bruno
Millbrae
Burlingame
Foster City
San Mateo
Belmont
San Carlos
Redwood City
Half Moon Bay
South San
Francisco
Project SiteProject Site
REGIONAL MAP FIGURE 1
Paciﬁc Ocean
Monterey Bay
San JoséSan José
SunnyvaleSunnyvale
FremontFremont
Redwood CityRedwood City
LivermoreLivermore
OaklandOakland
San FranciscoSan Francisco
Santa CruzSanta Cruz
Mountain ViewMountain View
Morgan HillMorgan Hill
Project SiteProject Site
CuperƟnoCuperƟno
0 .5 1 2 3 5 Miles
3 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Sou
th B
Street
San M
ateo Drive South Rail
road Avenue
South Claremont
Street
Laurel
Avenu
e
El Camin
o Real
South B Street
9th Av
enue
8th A
venue
6th Avenue
East
5th Avenue
West 5th Avenue
East 4th A
venue
3rd
Avenue
2nd Avenue
7th Avenue
9th A
venue
10th Avenue
South Delaware Street
South Eldor
ado Street
South
Fremo
nt Street
U.P .R.R.

South B Street
San Mateo Drive
South Railroad Avenue
South Claremont Street
Laurel Avenue
El Camino Real
South B Street
9th Avenue
8th Avenue
6th Avenue
East 5th Avenue
West 5th Avenue
East 4th Avenue
3rd Avenue
2nd Avenue
7th Avenue
9th A
venue
10th Avenue
SouthDelawareStreet
South Eldorado Street
South Fremont Street
U.P .R.R.

Project Boundary
Base Map: Esri, ArcGIS
0 50 300 400 600 Feet
VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2
4 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
ResidenƟal
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial/
Light Industrial
Oﬃce
Sout
h B St
reet
Laur
el Avenue
South
Railr
oad Avenue
U.P
.R.R.
7th Avenue
6th Avenue
East 5
th Avenue
8th
Aven
ue
South B Street
Laurel Avenue
South Railroad Avenue
U.P .R.R.
7th Avenue
6th Avenue
East 5th Avenue
8th Avenue
Photo Date: Apr . 2024
0 25 100 150 200 Feet
Project Boundary
Aerial Source: Google Earth Pro, May 4, 2026.

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH AND SURROUNDING LAND USES FIGURE 3
5 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com 6 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com IV. Project Description
Overview
The project proposes to demolish the existing improvements on-site to construct an eight-story, approximately 162,119 square-foot mixed-use commercial and residential development. The building would include 7,286 square feet of commercial space on the ground floor, a retail and residential parking garage on levels one through three, and 94 residential units on floors four through eight. As 15 percent of the proposed residential units would be provided as affordable housing, the project would qualify for a density bonus of 50 percent under California’s Density Bonus Law. The project’s components are described below.

Retail and Residential Building
The retail component of the site would be on the first level accessed via South B Street. The residential uses would be accessible from the ground floor from entrances on 7th Avenue and 6th Avenue, which open into the residential lobby and mail room and an interior stairwell, respectively.

The ground floor would include elevators providing access to the residential units, retail and residential trash rooms, two utility storage rooms, and a fire control room. Residential amenities include a gym on the ground floor, and a community room and shaded residential open area on the fourth floor. The project would result in a total FAR of 5.8.3 The project site plan and a ‘birds-eye view’ rendering are shown on Figure 4 and Figure 5, respectively. Exterior elevations from the north & east are shown on Figure 6 and exterior elevations from the south & west are shown on Figure 7.

Parking and Site Access
The project would construct three levels of above ground parking to provide a total of 114 parking spaces. The project would provide a total of 21 spaces for visitors and retail customers on the first level and 93 residential-only spaces on levels two and three. Of the 114 parking spaces, six would be Americans with Disability Act compliant spaces and 79 would be electric vehicle (EV) spaces. Access to the garage would be provided via a ramp located on 7th Avenue and a driveway on 6th Avenue.

A loading zone would be designated adjacent to the parking lot entrance on 6th Avenue.

Lon
g-term bicycle parking would be provided in a residential bike room on the third level of the parking garage and one bike locker for commercial users would be provided on the first level. Bike racks would also be provided along 6th Avenue, S. B Street, and 7th Avenue for short-term parking.

The project would provide a total of 108 short- and long-term bicycle parking spaces. 3 FAR calculated based on the proposed building square footage of 162,119 and the site’s lot area of 27,921 (162,119 sf / 27,921 sf = 5.8 FAR).

Source: ARC TEC, December 22, 2026.

PARKING
NO

PARKING
UP %02
N R UT
AROUND
ELEV 01
##
2 0 VE LE
##
1 0 # R IA T S
##
UP

RO TISIV / LIA TER

PARKING
##

R OTA RE NE G
##

ELECTRICAL
##
FIRE

CONTROL ROOM
##

PARCELS
##
EMR
##

RESIDENTIAL
LOBBY
##
MAIL
##

L I AT E R
##

L I AT E R
TRASH
##
STAIR #02
##
RESI.

FITNESS CENTER
##
P U 10%

LAITNEDISER
TRASH
##
SHAFT
##
DN6.0%
DN% 0 . 5
DN

5.0%
DN5.0%
UP

T E E R T S B H T U O S
)T E E R TS C I LB U P E D I W ' 07(
7 T H A V E N U E(70' WIDE PUBLIC STREET)
6 T H A V E N U E(60' WIDE PUBLIC STREET)
4 19
10 10
1 20
1 15
TYP.
6 6
6 32
53 10
35 TYP.
15 TYP.
14 36
34 33
21 1
10 11
30 29
27 26
12 31
7 28
38 TYP.
1 45'-0"
45'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
45'-0"
45'-0"
3 8
21 22
23 24
23 TYP.
22 TYP.
25 TYP.
49 23
TYP.
8 13
9 21
21 37
20 20
20 17
17 17 17
1717
17 17
'T6'
'T7'
'T5' 'T4'
'T3' 'T9'
'T2'
'T1'
12 9'-0"
36'-0"
24 6
32 21'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
40 110.07'
110.03'
253.71'
253.72'
5'-0"
5'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
5'-0"
5'-0"
3'-0"
5'-0"
5'-0"
39 6'-0"
48 21
21 41
41 41
41 41
41 41
42 42
42 42
43 42
42 42
4445
45 45
46 22'-0"
20'-0"
60'-0"

RIGHT-OF-WAY
70'-0"

RIGHT-OF-WAY
30 47
16'-10"
15'-7"
12'-5"
3'-6" 2'-3"
9'-5" 19'-0"
1'-6" 2'-0"
45 11
3'-9"
12'-10"
49 23
0 5 10 20 30 50 Feet
SITE PLAN FIGURE 4
7 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com The "user(s)" in possession of this documentation acknowledge(s) that ARC TEC's and ARC TEC consultants' drawings, specifications, reports, electronic data and other documentation are instruments of service. ARC TEC and ARC TEC consultants shall be deemed the author and owner of such documentation. The "user(s)" in possession of this documentation shall not use or authorize any other person to use ARC TEC's or ARC TEC consultants' instruments of service. Reuse without ARC TEC's written authorization will be at the user(s) sole risk and without liability to ARC TEC and ARC TEC's consultants. The user(s) possessing this documentation shall indemnify and hold harmless ARC TEC and ARC TEC's consultants and agents and employees from and against all claims, damages losses and expenses, including but not limited to attorneys' fees, arising out of unauthorized reuse of ARC TEC or ARC TEC's consultants instruments of service.

Written dimensions on this drawing shall have precedence over any scaled dimension. DO NOT SCALE THIS DRAWING for accurate dimensions and notify ARC TEC of any discrepancies.
© Copyright ARC TEC, Inc. 2021
In Association with:
www.arctecinc.com
Arizona
2960 East Northern Avenue, Building C
Phoenix, AZ 85028 602.953.2355
California
1731 Technology Drive, Suite 750
San Jose, CA 95110 408.496.0676
A Planning Applicationt For:

NAZARETH VISTA
606 - 616 SOUTH B STREET
SAN MATEO, CA 94401
Source: ARC TEC, December 22, 2026.

RENDERING FIGURE 5
8 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Source: ARC TEC, December 22, 2026.

NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
NORTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS FIGURE 6
9 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Source: ARC TEC, December 22, 2026.

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION
SOUTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS FIGURE 7
10 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com 11 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Landscaping and Stormwater Controls
There are a total of six trees onsite, including one protected heritage tree and one protected street tree. The project proposes to remove all six trees (which would be replaced in accordance with Municipal Code Section 27.71). Landscaping along the ground floor would include street tree wells and raised planters adjacent to the building. The residential open space area of the fourth floor would include 15 trees and vegetated planter boxes. The project would plant 12 new street trees along the project’s street frontage. Runoff from the project site would be directed to silva cells 4 on
the ground level on 6th Avenue. Silva cells located on South B Street and 7th Avenue would treat public right-of-way areas. Excess runoff from the silva cells would be discharged to the City storm drain system.

Utility and Right-of-Way Improvements
Utility services to the proposed project would be provided by the City of San Mateo (storm drain, sanitary sewer), California Water Service (water service), and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) (electricity). The project would install a new 12-inch City storm drain main along 6th Avenue and South B Street and new fire water line on 7th Avenue that would connect to the project. The project would remove the existing gas meter.

T
he project would include a six-foot sidewalk easement on 6th Avenue that would extend to the edge of the sidewalk’s 10-foot-wide pedestrian through zone.

Green Building and Energy Efficiency Measures
The project would be designed for energy efficiency and water conservation in accordance with the latest California Green Building Code (CALGreen). This includes mandatory installation of low-flow plumbing fixtures and low-water use landscaping. The project would be all-electric, provide EV parking spaces, and include solar photovoltaic panels on the roof.

Transportation Demand Management
The City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County’s (C/CAG) TDM Policy Implementation Guide recommends that projects demonstrate a 25 percent trip reduction when the project will generate 100 or more daily vehicle trips. The project would implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to encourage automobile-alternative modes of transportation and reduce vehicle trips to and from the site by 25 percent. The project would incorporate required measures, including TDM education programs; a designated TDM coordinator; participation in a Transportation Management Association (TMA); providing transit or ridesharing passes; providing bicycle storage; and designing adjacent streets to facilitate multimodal travel (i.e., 4 Silva cells are a type of suspended pavement that prevent soil from compacting around tree roots and support on-site stormwater runoff absorption and treatment.
12 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com pedestrian and cyclist amenities on the ground floor such as public seating and bike parking). The project would incorporate additional recommended measures including a carpool or vanpool program; delivery amenities; family-supportive amenities (such as on-site storage of car seats and strollers); on-site car, bicycle, and scooter share; active transportation subsidies; and a bike repair station.

Construction
Construction of the project is anticipated to last approximately 22 months. Construction phases of the proposed project would include site clearing and demolition, excavation and off haul of excess soil, utility connections, building construction, frontage improvements, and landscaping. Equipment used during construction activities would include saws, excavators, dozers, tractors/loaders/backhoes, graders, cranes, forklifts, welders, air compressors, cement/mortar mixers, pavers, and rollers. No pile driving is proposed. Consistent with Section 7.30.060 of the City’s Municipal Code, construction would take place between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays, and 12 p.m. to 4 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. The project would not import any soil and would export 450 cubic yards of soil associated with excavation, building footings, grading, and trenching activities, which would extend to a maximum depth of eight feet.

Concessions and Waivers
As mentioned, the project qualifies for the State Density Bonus Law because it would provide 15 percent affordable units. The project applicant requests waivers to deviate from the site’s land use designation and zoning FAR, density, building height, ramp slope, and setback requirements. The project applicant also includes a concession requesting relief from the City’s Objective Design Standard requiring that new development in the Downtown area implement a Spanish Colonial Revival architectural style.
13 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com V. Environmental Review
The purpose of this section is to document whether any of the exceptions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to the project and assess the project’s eligibility for a Categorical Exemption from CEQA under Section 15332 (Class 32) In-Fill Development Projects.

Section 15300.2 – Exceptions
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply to all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.

Th
is exception only applies to Class 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 exemptions. The proposed project is categorically exempt under Class 32; therefore, this exception is not applicable to the project. (b) C
umulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.

Ag
ricultural and Mineral Resources
There are no agricultural, forestry, or mineral resources present on-site or in the surrounding area; therefore, the project would not have any cumulative impacts to these resources.

Loca
lized Resources
Within the localized area of effect (immediately adjacent from the project site), there are no approved or future projects that are reasonably foreseeable. Therefore, the project would have no cumulative impacts to localized environmental factors, specifically including aesthetics, biological and cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, and vibration.

Air Q
uality and Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Within approximately 1,000 feet of the project site, the cumulative area of effect for air quality and hazards/hazardous materials, there are seven pending or foreseeable projects. The projects are listed and described in Table 1 below.

14 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Table 1: List of Cumulative Projects
Cumulative Project
Location
Description of Project Approximate Distance
from Project Site
1 East 4th Avenue Mixed-use office, commercial, and residential development 1,400 feet west 222 East 4th Avenue Mixed-use office, commercial, and residential development 400 feet west 445 South B Street Mixed-use office, commercial, and residential development 350 feet northwest 477 9th Avenue Mixed-use office and residential development 500 feet east 500 East 3rd Avenue Mixed-use office and residential development 1,000 feet northeast 500 East 4th Avenue Mixed-use office and residential development 750 feet northeast 668 East 3rd Avenue Multi-family residential development 1,100 feet northeast

These projects (including those over 1,000 feet from the site for a conservative analysis) were accounted for in the cumulative Air Quality analysis provided below, which concluded that the cumulative conditions from all projects would not result in a significant effect on air quality.

With regard to hazardous materials, none of the aforementioned addresses are included on any lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, and the proposed uses on both project sites do not generate hazardous emissions or involve the handling of any acutely hazardous materials. Therefore, the project would not have a cumulative impact with regard to air quality or hazardous materials in conjunction with the seven projects listed above.

Noise
The cumulative area of effect for noise impacts is 500 feet. The noise analysis for the project accounted for the projects at 477 9th Avenue, 222 East 4th Avenue, and 445 South B Street. The noise analysis concluded that implementation of construction noise and vibration conditions of approval for each individual project (such as those listed previously) would ensure construction noise impacts are reduced. Therefore, the project would not have a cumulative noise impact in conjunction with the 477 9th Avenue, 222 East 4th Avenue, or 445 South B Street Mixed-Use projects.

Land Use and Population and Housing
Citywide, the project would not have a cumulative impact on land use and planning or population and housing, since there is no existing housing on-site. With the application of a 50 percent density bonus, the project would be consistent with the site’s General Plan land use designation and zoning district. The San Mateo 2040 General Plan EIR found that buildout of the General Plan would have a less than significant impact on these environmental factors. The project would also not have a cumulative impact on traffic, since the analysis of the project’s individual impacts on traffic (discussed below) factored in trips generated by existing, approved, and reasonably foreseeable future development through the year 2040. The analysis of the project’s impacts on utilities and

15 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com public services (provided below) determined the project would not have a significant effect on these resources. Further, the San Mateo 2040 General Plan EIR found that buildout of the General Plan (including the project) would not result in cumulatively considerable public service or utilities impacts.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Because a project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions do not have localized impacts, but instead contribute to the global climate change effect, a project’s GHG impact is inherently cumulative.

GHG impacts are analyzed using the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (Air District’s) CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, which 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 (which encompasses San Mateo) utilize the thresholds and methodology for assessing GHG impacts developed by the Air District within the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. The guidelines include information on legal requirements, Air District rules, methods of analyzing impacts, and recommended mitigation measures.

The Air District’s CEQA Guidelines also include thresholds of significance for greenhouse gas emissions. For land use projects, the Air District developed plan- and project-level thresholds that evaluate the significance of operational GHG emissions based on its effect on the State’s efforts to meet the identified long-term climate goals. Pursuant with the Air District, for land use projects to result in a less than significant GHG emissions impact, the land use project would need to comply with threshold A or B below.

A. Projects must include, at a minimum, the following design elements:
a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development).
b. The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b)of the State CEQA Guidelines.
c. Achieve a reduction in project-generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill (SB) 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research's Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts. d. Achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2.

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

The City’s 2024 Climate Action Plan (CAP) sets quantifiable emission reduction goals of 49 percent below 2005 emission levels by 2030 and 87 percent below 2005 emission levels by 2045. The CAP is

16 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com a qualified GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b); therefore, compliance with the CAP would result in a less than significant operational GHG emissions impact pursuant to the Air District guidance. A specific project proposal is considered consistent with the City’s CAP if it complies with the required GHG reduction measures in the adopted CAP. The project’s consistency with the City’s CAP reduction measures is summarized in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Summary of Project CAP Consistency
Reduction Measure and Applicable Standard Project Compliance Reduction Measure BE 1. All new development: The
project does not have natural gas connections and
does not have any natural gas appliances or other
equipment installed.

The project proposes all electric systems and no
natural gas appliances are proposed. Therefore, the
project complies with this measure.

Reduction Measure RE 2. All new developments with
residential units: The project includes an on-site
renewable energy system that meets or exceeds the
minimum requirements of the California State Building
Code.

All new developments with residential units: The
project includes an on-site energy storage system,
such as a battery.

The project proposes a rooftop solar photovoltaic
system that would serve both the residential and
nonresidential uses proposed by the project.

Furthermore, the project is required to meet the
minimum requirements of the most recent California
State Building Code.

The proposed project will not provide an on-site
energy storage system. The photovoltaic
infrastructure system for energy generation will not
provide enough energy to warrant on-site energy
storage. Therefore, this reduction measure is not
applicable to the project.

Reduction Measure RE 3. All new developments with
nonresidential space: The project includes an on-site
renewable energy system that meets or exceeds the
minimum requirements of the California State Building
Code.

All new developments with nonresidential space: The
project includes an on-site energy storage system,
such as a battery.

The project proposes a rooftop solar photovoltaic
system that would serve both the residential and
nonresidential uses proposed by the project.

Furthermore, the project is required to meet the
minimum requirements of the most recent California
State Building Code.

Reduction Measure EE 3. All new developments with
residential units: The project includes trees that
provide shade to residences.

The proposed project cannot comply with the above
requirements. The project is an infill mixed use
project, with the proposed residential units located on the upper building levels, above the canopies of most
trees in an urban environment. As such, there is not

17 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Reduction Measure and Applicable Standard Project Compliance an opportunity to provide a substantial number of
trees and the resulting shade to these residential
units. Therefore, this measure is infeasible to
implement and not applicable to the project.

Reduction Measure CF 1 (a). All new development
with dedicated off-street parking: The project includes parking spaces with installed electric vehicle (EV)
chargers or are pre-wired for EV chargers, consistent
with state and any local regulations.

The project would provide a total of 114 parking
spaces for both residents and retail customers. Of the
114 parking spaces, 79 would be EV spaces. The
project would also provide 108 bicycle parking spaces.

Therefore, the project complies with this measure.

Reduction Measure ST 6. New developments of at
least six multifamily units and or 10,000 square feet of nonresidential space: Implement TDM strategies to
comply with the appropriate trip reduction target
identified in applicable area plans and San Mateo
Citywide TDM Plan.

The project applicant has committed to implementing
TDM measures documented in a completed C/CAG
TDM Checklist. The project would achieve a 25
percent trip reduction as required by C/CAG.

Therefore, the project complies with this measure.

Reduction Measure ST 7. All new development: Be
located along El Camino Real, within one-half mile of
any Caltrain station, or in the Rail Corridor Transit
Oriented Development or Hillsdale Station Area Plan
areas.

The project site is located less than a half mile from
the Caltrain Downtown San Mateo Station. Therefore,
the project complies with this measure.

Reduction Measure SW 1. All developments with
multifamily units or nonresidential space: Provide an
area of sufficient space to store and allow access to a compost bin.

The project would include composting chutes at the
residential levels of the proposed building and
composting bins in the residential and retail trash
rooms on the ground floor. Therefore, the project
complies with this measure.

Reduction Measure WW 3. All new development:

Include a greywater system.

The project cannot comply with this requirement.

There is a lack of infrastructure for greywater in
downtown San Mateo. Furthermore, the project
would not produce enough greywater internally to
feasibly require the construction of the needed
infrastructure in downtown San Mateo. It is
considered infeasible for the project until such time
that the infrastructure for greywater exists in
downtown San Mateo. Therefore, this measures does
not apply to the project.

As discussed in in Table 2, the proposed project would comply with the applicable measures from the City’s CAP and therefore result in a less than significant impact from operational GHG emissions.

Neither the City nor the Air District have an adopted threshold of significance for construction related GHG emissions. However, the project would implement Air District construction best management practices (BMPs) to restrict idling of construction equipment and utilize energy- efficient equipment, which would in turn reduce GHG emissions. 18 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com B
ased on the above discussion, the project would comply with the latest Air District qualitative GHG thresholds, would comply with the City’s Climate Action Plan, and would not have a cumulative impact on energy or GHG emissions. Therefore, the cumulative impact exclusion does not apply to the project.
(c
) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a r
easonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

T
he proposed project does not include any elements that are atypical for a mixed-use commercial and residential development in a downtown area. The proposed uses are consistent with commercial and residential uses that are present throughout the surrounding area in all directions.

Further, the project site itself does not contain any unusual characteristics. As documented below, the site is not on any lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code or mapped within a Very High Wildfire Hazard Zone, there are no historic resources on-site or nearby historic districts, and there is no habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The project site is also mapped by the City within a “Low Sensitivity Zone” for archaeological resources, and any undiscovered subsurface archaeological (including tribal cultural) or paleontological resources present would be protected with adherence to the conditions of approval identified in Section IV Project Description, above, as well as in discussion (f) below.

G
iven that the site is fully developed with commercial uses and a surface parking lot within a heavily urbanized area, there are no agricultural, forestry, or mineral resources present on-site. Further, a Geotechnical Investigation (dated October 2025) prepared by Summit Engineering for the project determined that there were no unique or unusual geological issues that would prevent development of the site as proposed. A copy of the Geotechnical Investigation is attached to this Exemption Memorandum as Appendix A.

A
s discussed under Section 15332 – In-Fill development Projects below, the project would not have any significant effects on traffic, noise/vibration, air or water quality, utilities, or public services.

Therefore, there are no unusual circumstances present that could result in the project having a significant effect on the environment, and the significant impact due to unusual circumstances exclusion does not apply to the project.

19 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com (d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.

There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the project area. The nearest officially designated state highway is Interstate 280, which is located approximately three miles west of the project site and is not visible from the project site.
5 The project, therefore, would not damage
scenic resources within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway, and no exception to the exemption applies under 15300.2(d).

(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

The following analysis is based, in part, on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) dated October 2020 prepared by PIERS Environmental Services for the property at 616 South B Street, and a Phase I ESA dated August 2021 prepared by SOMA Environmental Engineering, Inc. prepared for the property at 606 South B Street. Copies of these reports are attached to this Exemption Memorandum as Appendices B and C.

The Phase I ESA for 616 South B Steet determined a Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC) is associated with the site due to previous uses. The site is listed as a closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) case for a former tire facility’s removal of underground hoists. The site is also listed on the LUST, HAZMAT, GENERATORS, and HAZNET databases for the former tire facility being a closed LUST case, and for the existing commercial use (paint company) being a chemical storage facility generating hazardous waste. Following removal of the underground hoists, the site was excavated and contaminated soil was removed. The LUST case was closed, and no further action was deemed necessary by the City. The Phase I ESA for 606 South B Street determined the site was not listed on any hazardous waste sites. Because the project site is not listed as an active case on any lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, no exception to the exemption applies under 15300.2.
6 (f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

The following analysis is based, in part, on a Historic Resource Evaluation Report (HRE), dated July 29, 2022, prepared by Architecture + History, LLC., and an Archaeological Literature Review (ALR),

5 California Department of Transportation. “California State Scenic Highway System Map”. Accessed April 24, 2026. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. 6 California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources”. Accessed April 24, 2026. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/.

20 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com dated January 30, 2023, prepared by Basin Research Associates. A copy of the HRE is attached to this Exemption Memorandum as Appendix D. The ALR contains sensitive information about cultural resources in the area and is on file with the City of San Mateo.

The existing commercial buildings on-site at 616 South B. Street and 606 South B. Street were constructed 67 and 51 years ago, respectively. Though over 50 years old, the existing buildings are not listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register or Historic Resources (CRHR) because they are not associated with events that made a significant contribution to local, regional, state, or national history; are not associated with the lives of persons important to local, state, or national history; do not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction; and were not designed by a master builder or architect. In addition, there are no historic resources adjacent to the project site that are listed on the NRHP or CRHR.
7,8

The City of San Mateo’s Archaeological Survey Map shows the project site is located in an area of low sensitivity for buried prehistoric archaeological resources. 9 The project would be required to
implement the following conditions of approval to avoid impacts to archaeological resources, if encountered during construction.

Conditions of Approval:
a. Archaeological Resources. In the event of the discovery of archaeological resources whether on-site or in the public right-of-way, the applicant shall halt all construction activities, notify the Planning Manager and/or Project Planner, and retain a qualified archaeologist. The archaeologist shall evaluate the uniqueness of the find, contact local Native American and Historical organizations for proposed recommendations for continuing construction, and submit a summary of findings to the Project Planner. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the local Native American and Historical organizations when continuing construction.
b. Cultural Resources. In the event of the discovery of human remains whether on-site in the public right-of-way, the applicant shall halt all activity within 50 feet of the discovery and notify the Planning Manager and/or Project Planner. The applicant shall also immediately notify San Mateo County Coroner to have a determination made as to whether the remains are of Native American origin or whether an investigation into the cause of death is required. Treatment of human remains and any associated or unassociated funerary objects discovered during any soil-disturbing activity within the project site shall comply with applicable State laws. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) immediately. Once the NAHC identifies the most likely descendants, the descendants will make recommendations

7 Architecture + History, LLC. Historic Resource Evaluation Report, 600-606 and 616 South B Street. July 19, 2022. 8 Basin Research Associates. Archaeological Literature Review in Support of Environmental Clearance of 616 S. B Street (Nazareth Vista), Mixed-Use Development. January 30, 2023. 9 City of San Mateo. City of San Mateo Historic Resources Figure C/OS-5. April 2022. 21 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com regarding proper burial, which will be implemented in accordance with Section 15064.5(e) of the CEQA Guidelines.
c. Cultural Resources Monitor. Should construction monitoring be required, the applicant shall su
bmit a scope of work with a cultural resources monitor as prescribed by the Archaeological Monitoring Plan. The scope of work shall indicate that, in the event of a d
iscovery, the monitor:
i. Has stop-work authority to halt all construction activities; ii. Will notify the Planning Manager and/or Project Planner; iii. Will evaluate the discovery to determine whether additional treatment is w
arranted; and,
iv. Will determine adequacy of the evaluation of the discovery prior to authorization of construction activities to resume.
d. Paleontological Resources. In the event of the discovery of paleontological resource s
(
fossils) whether on-site or in the public right-of-way, the applicant shall halt all construction activities within 50 feet of the discovery, notify the Planning Manager and/or Project Planner, and retain a qualified paleontologist to determine the significance of the discovery.

The paleontologist shall evaluate the uniqueness of the find, prepare a written report documenting the find and recommending further courses of action, and submit a summary o
f findings to the Project Planner. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the paleontologist when continuing construction.

F
or the reasons described above, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, and no exception to the exemption applies under 15300.2(f).

Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects
Section 15332, or Class 32, applies to projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described below:
(a
) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

A
s discussed in Section III General Plan and Zoning, the project site is designated Mixed-Use Medium II and zoned C1-3/R5. This land use designation and zoning district both permit a wide range of uses, including commercial and residential. Therefore, the proposed commercial and residential mixed-use project is consistent with the uses allowed on the project site.

T
he proposed development’s height, as measured to the top plate line (eight stories and 85 feet) exceeds the six-story and 55-foot height limits of the land use designation and zoning district. The project’s FAR of 5.8 also exceeds the allowable FAR of 4.0. Since 15 percent of the project’s residential units would be affordable units, however, the project’s height and FAR would be 22 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com permitted under the State Density Bonus Law. Further, the City has reviewed the proposed project and found it compliant with all applicable policies and regulations set forth in the San Mateo General Plan and San Mateo Municipal Code with State Density Bonus Law concessions and waivers applied. Therefore, the project meets the conditions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(a). (b
) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres sub
stantially surrounded by urban uses.

T
he proposed development would occur on a 0.64-acre site within the limits of the City of San Mateo that, as documented in Section II Project Site Location and Existing Setting and shown on Figure 3, is surrounded by urban uses. Thus, the project meets the conditions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(b).
(c
) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

A
s previously documented, the project site is fully developed with commercial buildings and a surface parking lot. Further, the project site and surrounding area are not identified in areas of special-status plant or animal species on Figures 4.3-1 or 4.3-2 of the San Mateo 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
10 Therefore, the project does not provide any habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

Whi
le the project site does not provide any habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species, the project would remove six trees, including two protected trees, that could be used by urban-adapted raptors or other protected birds as nesting and foraging habitat. Raptors and nesting birds are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW). Noise and vibration generated by construction activities have the potential to disturb raptors and nesting birds, which could potentially lead to nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort, both of which are prohibited by the MBTA and CDFW. As required by the MBTA and CDFW, the project would be subject to the following measures to prevent construction activities from disturbing nesting birds and raptors.

C
onditions of Approval:
a. Ne
sting Birds and Migratory Raptors. All potential nesting substrates (e.g., bushes, trees, g
rasses, and other vegetation) that are planned to be removed by the project shall be removed prior to February 1 or after August 31, unless the applicant or his/her designee complies with the following procedures:
i. Should construction activities be scheduled between February 1 and August 31, pre- construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified ornithologist to ensure that 10 City of San Mateo. 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report. SCH# 2022010160. August 2023. Pages 4.3- 16 and 4.3-17.

23 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com no nests will be disturbed during project implementation. These surveys shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the initiation of construction. During this survey, the ornithologist shall inspect all trees and other potential nesting habitats within 250 feet of the limits of construction activities. If an active nest is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by these activities, the ornithologist shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone (typically 250 feet for raptors and 50 feet for other species), to ensure that nests of species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Department of Fish & Wildlife shall not be disturbed during project implementation. These buffers may be increased or decreased, as appropriate, depending on the bird species and the level of disturbance anticipated near the nest with the permission of the ornithologist. ii. The applicant shall submit a report prepared by a qualified ornithologist indicating the results of the survey and any designated buffer zones to the City’s Planning Division subject to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, or his/her designee.

Adherence with these conditions would ensure that all potential nesting substrates on-site would be removed prior to the beginning of nesting season (February 1), and that any active nests within 250 feet of construction activities would be protected by a construction-free buffer zone.

Implementation of these conditions would prevent nesting birds and raptors from being disturbed such that no nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort would occur. Therefore, the project meets the conditions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(c).

(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

Traffic
The following analysis is based, in part, on a Transportation Analysis (dated December 2025) prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. A copy of this report is attached to this memorandum as Appendix E.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
With the passage of SB 743, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) replaced level of service (LOS) as the criteria for determining the significance of traffic impacts. As required by SB 743 and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), the City of San Mateo incorporated VMT policies and thresholds of significance into its Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines (dated August 17, 2020).

The City’s TIA Guidelines include screening criteria which, if met by a project, would result in the project having a less than significant VMT impact under CEQA. Under the High-Quality Transit Area

24 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com screening criteria, projects that are within a half mile of a high-quality transit station and meet the following criteria are considered to have a less than significant VMT impact11:

• Have a floor area ratio greater than 0.75;
• Include less parking for residents, customers, and employees than required by the jurisdiction;
• Are consistent with Plan Bay Area 2050;
• Do not replace affordable housing units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units.

The proposed project is located 0.3 miles from the San Mateo Caltrain station and 0.3 miles from the El Camino Real bus service, both of which are considered high-quality transit stops under the City’s TIA Guidelines. As documented in Section IV Project Description, the proposed development would have a FAR of 5.8. Under the City’s Municipal Code, the project would be required to provide 109 parking spaces. The project would meet the requirement by providing 114 parking spaces.

The project would be consistent with the goals of Plan Bay Area 2050, such as building affordable housing, creating healthy and safe streets by building a complete streets network, and reducing climate emissions, because it would provide land use growth and affordable housing near high- quality transit while promoting alternative modes of travel (walking/biking) through implementation of the TDM Plan. Lastly, the existing project site is only developed with commercial uses, and the proposed demolition of the existing development and construction of new commercial and residential uses would result in a net increase in affordable housing. Therefore, the project satisfies the City’s High-Quality Transit Area screening criteria and therefore would have a less than significant VMT impact.

Level of Service
As previously discussed, SB 743 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(a) prohibit the use of LOS as a metric to identify traffic impacts under CEQA. However, the San Mateo 2040 General Plan includes policies addressing potential project effects on intersection operations. The City maintains a LOS standard of mid-level LOS D for all intersections. A development project may be required to fund off-site circulation improvements which are needed as a result of project-generated traffic if:

• The LOS at the intersection drops below mid-level LOS D (average delay of more than 45 seconds) when the project is added, and
• An intersection that operates below its LOS standard under the base year conditions experiences an increase in delay of four or more seconds, and

11 The City’s TIA Guidelines define a high-quality transit station as a Caltrain station or bus stop that provides service on 15-minute headways during peak commute hours. 25 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com • The needed improvement of the intersection(s) is not funded in the applicable five-year City Capital Improvement Program from the date of application approval.

Whi
le an impact on LOS is no longer considered an impact under CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines require lead agencies to assess the direct and indirect physical impacts of projects. As such, if a project’s effects on intersection LOS and/or roadway operations would necessitate the construction or funding of physical improvements, the law requires an analysis of the potential adverse effects on the environment that could be caused by the construction of these physical improvements. The Transportation Analysis analyzed the project’s impact in conjunction with existing and reasonably foreseeable future development on nine nearby intersections and the roadway network under existing, existing plus project, cumulative, and cumulative plus project conditions. The analysis determined that the project would not have any adverse effects on intersection LOS or roadway operations (see Appendix E for more details). Therefore, the project would not necessitate the construction or funding of any physical improvements.

S
ite Access and Circulation
The proposed driveway locations were evaluated to determine if the sight distance would be adequate. The Transportation Analysis recommended modifications to remove tall vegetation within the sight triangle and prohibit parking for at least 15 feet on either side of the project driveway; include mirrors at the corners of ramps to improve visibility around corners; install a gate at the residential garage on 7th Avenue to limit the garage to resident access only; allocate tandem parking spaces to the same residential unit. These modifications would not impede traffic operations.

S
ince the project would have a less than significant VMT impact, and all physical improvements to the transportation network as a result of the project would not result in adverse effects on the environment, the project would not have any significant effects relating to traffic.

Noise and Vibration
The following analysis is based, in part, on a Noise and Vibration Assessment dated November 2023 (for a previous iteration of the proposed project) and an Addendum to the Assessment dated April 2026 prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Copies of these reports are attached to this memorandum as Appendices F and G.

Pr
oject Construction
Construction Noise
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 7.30.060, construction activities that would occur outside the permitted hours of construction (weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., and Sundays and holidays between 12:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m.) or would

26 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com generate noise exceeding 90 dBA at adjacent property lines would have a significant construction- related noise impact.

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

Construction activities would generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during earth- moving activities when heavy equipment is used. During each stage of construction, there would be a different mix of equipment operating, and noise levels would vary by stage and vary within stages, based on the amount of equipment in operation and the location at which the equipment is operating.

As described in Section IV Project Description, construction of the project is anticipated to last approximately 22 months. Construction activities would occur on weekdays between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and Saturdays between 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Construction phases of the proposed project would include site clearing and demolition, excavation and off haul of excess soil, utility connections, building construction, frontage improvements, and landscaping. Equipment used during construction activities would include saws, excavators, dozers, tractors/loaders/backhoes, graders, cranes, forklifts, welders, air compressors, cement/mortar mixers, pavers, and rollers. No pile driving is proposed.

The Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Noise Model was used to calculate the hourly average noise levels for each stage of construction, assuming every piece of equipment would operate simultaneously, which would represent the worst-case scenario. Table 3 below shows the calculated construction noise levels at the surrounding land uses shown on Figure 3.

Additional information on the methodology and assumptions used to estimate the project’s construction noise levels is available in Appendices F and G.

27 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Table 3. Estimated Construction Noise Levels at Adjacent Property Lines Calculated Hourly Average Noise Levels, dBA Leq
Construction Phase Adjoining West
Residences (90
feet)
North Residences
(125 feet)
East Commercial
Uses (175 feet)
South Residences
and Commercial
Uses (125 feet)
Demolition 82 79 76 79
Site Preparation 78 76 73 76
Grading 80 77 74 77
Trenching 79 76 73 76
Building Exterior 81 78 75 78
Building Interior 73 70 67 70
Paving 79 76 73 76
Notes:

The distances shown above were measured from the center of the proposed mixed-use building to the receiving property lines. These levels represent construction noise levels calculated from all equipment per phase operating simultaneously.

The noise levels shown above are from the November 2023 Noise and Vibration Assessment that analyzed a prior version of the proposed project (i.e., a five-story mixed-use building with 48 residential units, 9,199 square feet of retail space, and a garage with one level of underground parking and one level of above-ground parking).

While construction dates have changed from the original analysis, the construction duration, phasing, and equipment type and quantity are consistent with the original project. Therefore, the project would result in the same noise levels.

Sources:

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project Noise and Vibration Assessment. November 8, 2023.

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Addendum Letter to the Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project Noise and Vibration Assessment. April 14, 2026.

A
lthough construction noise levels are not anticipated to exceed 90 dBA at adjacent property lines, the use of construction equipment (specifically saws, cement mixers, cranes, dozers, excavators, graders, and pavers) could generate noise levels in excess of 90 dBA if used within 25 feet of adjacent property lines. General Plan policies N-2.2 through N-2.7 require new development to incorporate measures to minimize their noise impacts. As required by the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code, the project would be required to adhere to the following measures to minimize noise below 90 dBA at adjacent property lines.

T
he applicant and contractor shall place and operate construction equipment to minimize the impact of construction noise on existing sensitive receptors. Construction equipment shall be well- maintained and used judiciously to be as quiet as possible. Additionally, the applicant and contractor shall incorporate the following conditions of approval to reduce noise from construction activities on nearby sensitive land uses:
28 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com C
onditions of Approval:
a. C
onstruction Plan for Noise. The contractor shall prepare and submit a construction plan that complies with all standards and BMPs established in the Noise and Vibration Assessment by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., dated November 8, 2023, showing how noise levels during demolition or construction will not exceed 90 A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA) at distance of 25 feet from the source of noise. The contractor shall submit the construction plan to the City’s Building Division subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, or his/her designee prior to the issuance of any demolition, building ,
an
d site development permit relating to the construction of the superstructure and prior to the pre-construction conference. At minimum, the construction plan for noise shall include:
i. A staging area map, establishing locations that will create the greatest distance between the construction-related noise sources and adjacent residential uses to the west of the project site.
ii. A schedule indicating the stages of construction that will generate high noise levels.

The schedule shall also indicate at which points the contractor or his/her designee will submit verification letters to the Building Division verifying compliance with the plan.
iii. Name and contact information for a designated Disturbance Coordinator(s) responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration.

T
he Noise and Vibration Assessment prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin (refer to Appendices F and G) determined that adherence with the above conditions of approval would ensure noise levels generated during construction of the project would not exceed 90 dBA at adjacent property lines.

Accordingly, the project would not result in any significant effects related to construction noise.

C
onstruction Vibration
The California Department of Transportation recommends a vibration limit of 0.5 in/sec PPV for buildings structurally sound and designed to modern engineering standards, which typically consist of buildings constructed since the 1990s. Conservative vibration limits of 0.3 in/sec PPV has been used for buildings that are found to be structurally sound but where structural damage is a major concern. For historical buildings or buildings that are documented to be structurally weakened, a cautious limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV is often used to provide the highest level of protection.

C
onstruction of the project may generate perceptible vibration when heavy equipment or impact tools (e.g., jackhammers, hoe rams) are used in the vicinity of nearby sensitive land uses. As previously discussed, construction activities would include site clearing and demolition, excavation and off haul of excess soil, utility connections, building construction, frontage improvements, and landscaping. Equipment used during construction activities would include saws, excavators, dozers, tractors/loaders/backhoes, graders, cranes, forklifts, welders, air compressors, cement/mortar

29 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com mixers, pavers, and rollers. Pile driving (which generates substantial vibration) is not proposed as a method of construction.

Based on a review of the NRHP12, CRHP13, and City of San Mateo Historic Building Survey, the nearest historical buildings are located opposite South B Street from the proposed project site (approximately 65 feet from the eastern property line) and more than 200 feet northeast of the project boundary. These buildings would be subject to the 0.08 in/sec PPV threshold, while all other buildings surrounding the site would be of conventional materials and subject to the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold. Based on typical vibration levels generated by construction equipment, the vibration levels from project construction were estimated from the boundary of the project site, which would represent the nearest location for use of vibration generating equipment, at the nearest building facades. Refer to Appendices F and G for more information on the methodology used to calculate vibration levels. Table 4 on the following page summarizes the vibration levels from construction activities at buildings within the project’s area of effect.

12 National Register of Historic Places. “National Register Database and Research. Accessed April 24, 2026. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/database-research.htm 13 California Register of Historic Places. “California Historical Resources”. Accessed April 24, 2026. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/listedresources/

30 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Table 4. Estimated Vibration Levels at Nearby Buildings Equipment PPV (in/sec) at Nearest Building Façades
North Residences (60
feet)
East Commercial
Uses (65 feet)
South
Residences (100
feet)
Adjoining West
Residences (5
feet)
Nearest
Historical
Building (65
feet)
Northeast
Historical Building
(216 feet)
Clam shovel drop 0.077 0.071 0.044 1.186 0.071 0.019
Hydromill in soil 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.047 0.03 0.001
Hydromill in rock 0.006 0.006 0.004 0.100 0.006 0.002
Vibratory roller 0.080 0.073 0.046 1.233 0.073 0.020
Hoe ram 0.034 0.031 0.019 0.523 0.031 0.008
Large bulldozer 0.034 0.031 0.019 0.523 0.031 0.008
Caisson drilling 0.034 0.031 0.019 0.523 0.031 0.008
Loaded trucks 0.029 0.027 0.017 0.446 0.027 0.007
Jackhammer 0.013 0.012 0.008 0.206 0.012 0.003
Small bulldozer 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.018 0.001 0.0003
Notes:

Bolded values indicate an exceedance of the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold.

The vibration levels shown above are from the November 2023 Noise and Vibration Assessment that analyzed a prior version of the proposed project (i.e., a five-story mixed-use building with 48 residential units, 9,199 square feet of retail space, and a garage with one level of underground parking and one level of above-ground parking). While construction dates have changed from the original analysis, the construction duration, phasing, and equipment type and quantity are consistent with the original project. Project construction would also be the same distance from the surrounding buildings. Therefore, the project would result in the same vibration levels.

Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project Noise and Vibration Assessment. November 8, 2023. 31 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com As shown in Table 4, the nearest historical building would not be exposed to vibration levels exceeding the conservative 0.08 in/sec PPV threshold. However, buildings adjoining the site consisting of conventional construction materials would potentially be exposed to vibration levels exceeding the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold. The applicant and contractor would be required to incorporate the following measures to reduce vibration levels from construction activities to below the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold. Infill development commonly involves construction adjacent to sensitive receptors, as is the case for the subject project, and the conditions below represent common restrictions and requirements on construction activity when proposed adjacent to sensitive receptors. The nature of the proposed construction and its effects on adjacent land use do not constitute unusual circumstances.

C
onditions of Approval:
a. Co
nstruction Equipment Vibration. The contractor shall submit a construction vibration plan prepared by a technical expert subject to all standards and BMPs established in the Noise and Vibration Assessment by Illingworth & Rodkin ,
I
nc., dated November 8, 2023, showing how vibration levels during demolition or
construction will not exceed 0.3 in/sec Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) at the conventional buildings within 25 feet of the project site. The contractor shall su
bmit the plan to the City’s Planning and Building Divisions, subject to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, or his/her designee, prior to issuance of a demolition permit. At minimum, the construction vibration plan shall include:
o A list of all heavy construction equipment. The list shall also specify sm
aller equipment (less than 18,000 pounds) to be used near the property lines adjacent to the residential uses to the west of the project site.
o A schedule indicating the stages of construction anticipated to generate high vibration levels. The schedule shall also indicate at which points the contractor or his/her designee will submit reports to the Planning and Building Divisions to verify compliance with the plan. The reports shall in
clude the activities that triggered alerts, the PPV readings, and the actions enacted to reduce the impact, all time and dated stamped.

Reports shall be submitted to the Planning and Building Divisions at a minimum after demolition: shoring and tieback placement; excavation; p
ier placement; compaction activities; and any other activities that create a vibration reaching the threshold of 0.3 in/sec PPV. o A list of demolition methods to be used in order to minimize vibration impacts.
o Name and contact information for a designated Disturbance Coordinator(s) responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration, and coordinating any outreach or noticing to 32 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com inform neighboring properties of activities that may generate high vibration levels.
o A plan to document conditions at all structures located within 25 feet of construction site, where access is granted, prior to, during, and after vibration-generating construction activities.

T
he Noise and Vibration Assessment prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin (refer to Appendices F and G) determined that adherence with the above conditions of approval would ensure vibration generated during construction of the project would not exceed the 0.3 in/sec PPV threshold.

Accordingly, the project would not result in any significant effects related to construction vibration.

P
roject Operation
Project-Generated Traffic
Pursuant to General Plan Policy N-2.4, noise produced by project-generated traffic would result in a significant effect if it caused a permanent noise increase of three dBA Ldn or greater. Based on the traffic volumes provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the project (refer to Appendix E) for the scenarios involving ‘existing no project’, ‘existing plus project’, ‘cumulative no project’, and ‘cumulative plus project’ scenarios, the project would increase noise levels along nearby roadway segments by one dBA Ldn or less. Further, noise levels along these roadways under both cumulative no project and cumulative plus project scenarios would increase by one dBA Ldn or less, and therefore the project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. Accordingly, noise from project-generated traffic would not result in any significant effects.

Mechanical Equipment
General Plan Policy N- 2.3 prohibits new uses that would generate noise levels of 65 dBA Ldn or above at the property line, excluding existing ambient noise levels. Section 7.30.040 of the San Mateo Municipal Code limits noise levels at commercial/office property lines to 65 dBA during daytime hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and 60 dBA during nighttime hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.).

No
ise measurements conducted for the Noise and Vibration Assessment determined that daytime noise levels ranged from 54 to 63 dBA Leq and nighttime noise levels ranged from 42 to 58 dBA Leq along the southwest corner of the project site. Daytime noise levels ranged from 58 to 68 dBA Leq and nighttime noise levels ranged from 44 to 62 dBA Leq along the eastern boundary of the project site. Based on existing ambient noise levels, the noise level thresholds would be 60 dBA during daytime hours and 50 dBA during nighttime hours at the west residences; 63 dBA during daytime hours and 54 dBA during nighttime hours for the north and south residences; and 63 dBA during daytime hours and 55 dBA during nighttime hours for the east commercial uses.

33 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com The proposed project includes an emergency generator; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units; and solar panels. Solar panels would not generate noise levels audible at the property lines. Accordingly, only the emergency generator and HVAC units are analyzed below.

Emergency Generator
The proposed project includes an emergency generator room in the ground level of the proposed building, along the northern building façade. The generator selected (Rehlko KD200) typically generates noise levels up to 71 dB at a distance of 23 feet when soundproofed. Emergency generators are typically tested monthly for a period of 30 minutes to one hour between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. It is assumed that the City’s thresholds would not apply during emergency conditions when the generators may run continuously during daytime and nighttime; however, the City’s threshold of 60 dBA L
50 would apply during testing periods.

With no windows in the generator room, the building would provide about 20 dBA attenuation from the generator for surrounding receptors. Noise levels generated by the generator would not be audible at the property line. Table 5 below summarizes the emergency generator noise that would be propagated to the nearest receptors.

Table 5. Operational Noise Levels from Mechanical Equipment Receptor Distance from
Center of
Generator
Hourly Average Leq,
dBA1
Combined Ldn, dBA1 Noise Level
Increase, dBA Ldn
Adjoining West
Residences
60 feet 43 29 0
North Residences 85 feet 40 26 0
East Commercial
Uses
120 feet 37 23 0
Notes:
1 Conservative 20 dBA noise level reduction is assumed from the building and generator room.

Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Addendum Letter to the Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project Noise and Vibration Assessment. April 14, 2026.

As summarized in Table 5, emergency generator noise would not exceed the City’s threshold of 60 dBA L50, assuming soundproofing is incorporated into the design and 20 dBA attenuation from the building. For all existing receptors, the noise level increase due to testing of the emergency generator would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA Ldn increase).

Rooftop HVAC Equipment
While specific HVAC units have not been identified for the project, the site plan shows at least 90 HVAC units on the rooftop. Typical heat pump condensing units for buildings of this size generate

34 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com noise levels up to 66 dBA at a distance of three feet. Assuming all units operate simultaneously, the total combined noise level would be up to 86 dBA at three feet. These types of units would cycle on and off continuously over a given 24-hour period, and assuming all eight units would run continuously, the day-night average noise level under worst-case conditions would be 92 dBA Ldn at three feet.

The project also proposes a parapet wall surrounding the roof and a mechanical screen surrounding HVAC units. The adjoining receptors to the west and residential building to the north would have elevated receptors up to five stories high. The rooftop equipment on the proposed building would provide a minimum attenuation of 20 dBA. Ground-level receptors would be farther from the noise sources and would have more attenuation. Conservatively, 20 dBA attenuation is applied to all surrounding receptors.

Table 6 below summarizes the hourly average noise levels and day-night average noise levels projected at the surrounding land uses.

Table 6. Operational Noise Levels from HVAC Equipment
Receptor Distance from Center
of HVAC Units
Hourly Average
Leq, dBA
1 Combined Ldn,
dBA1
Noise Level
Increase, dBA L
dn
Adjoining West
Residences
55 feet 40 47 0
North Residences 165 feet 31 37 0
East Commercial Uses 120 feet 34 40 0
South Residences and
Commercial Uses
195 feet 29 36 0
Notes:
1 Conservative 20 dBA noise level reduction is assumed from the HVAC units, parapet wall, and the mechanical screen.

Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Addendum Letter to the Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project Noise and Vibration Assessment. April 14, 2026.

As shown in Table 6, noise generated by the project’s HVAC equipment would not exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime noise thresholds or increase ambient noise levels at the land uses north and east of the site. For all existing receptors, the noise level increase due to operation of the rooftop equipment would not be measurable or detectable.

Based on the above discussion, the project would not result in any significant effects related to mechanical equipment noise.

35 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Truck Loading and Unloading
A loading zone would be designated adjacent to the parking garage entrance on 6th Avenue. The south residences and commercial uses would be shielded from truck loading and unloading activities by the proposed building. Thus, the south receptors would not be exposed to substantial noise. In contrast, the adjoining west residences, north residences, and east commercial uses would have direct line-of-sight to the loading zone. For all loading and unloading activities, truck maneuvering would take more than five minutes but less than 15 minutes per delivery. 14 Truck
maneuvering noise would include a combination of engine, exhaust, and tire noise, as well as the intermittent sounds of back-up alarms and releases of compressed air associated with truck/trailer air brakes. Medium-sized delivery trucks would be expected at the proposed building. Medium- sized delivery trucks typically generate maximum noise levels of 60 to 65 dBA at 50 feet. The noise level of backup alarms can vary depending on the type and directivity of the sound, but maximum noise levels are typically in the range of 65 to 75 dBA at 50 feet.

It is conservatively assumed that up to one delivery would occur daily at the project site. While the proposed building would provide some shielding for the receptors to the west and to the east, no attenuation is assumed for this analysis. Table 7 summarizes expected noise levels generated by typical truck deliveries at the receptors with exposure to the loading areas.

Table 7. Operational Noise Levels from Truck Loading and Unloading Activities Receptor Distance from Center
of Loading Area
Noise Levels from Truck
Deliveries, dBA L
08 dBA Ldn Noise Level
Increase, dBA L
dn
Adjoining West
Residences
60 feet 63 44 0
North Residences 60 feet 63 44 0
East Commercial Uses 130 feet 57 37 0
Notes:

L08 refers to the A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded eight percent of the time during the measurement period.

The noise levels shown above are from the November 2023 Noise and Vibration Assessment that analyzed a prior version of the proposed project. The proposed project would not change truck loading and unloading activities. Therefore, the project would result in the same noise levels.

Sources:

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Nazareth Vista Noise and Vibration Assessment. November 8, 2023.

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Addendum Letter to the Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project Noise and Vibration Assessment. April 14, 2026.

14 Based on the Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.’s (I&R’s) experience, truck maneuvering activities at loading docks last a few minutes. Conservatively, I&R estimates more than five minutes. Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Nazareth Vista Noise and Vibration Assessment. November 8, 2023. 36 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Based on the estimated noise levels in Table 7, truck loading and unloading activities would not exceed the City’s L08 daytime thresholds, which are summarized above to be 70 dBA L08 at the adjoining west residences and 73 dBA L08 at the north residences and east commercial uses. For all existing receptors, the noise level increase due to truck loading and unloading activities would not be measurable or detectable (0 dBA Ldn increase). Thus, the project would not result in any significant effects related to truck loading and unloading.

T
otal Combined Project-Generated Noise
Once operational, noise generated by all project activities (i.e., traffic, mechanical equipment, and truck loading/unloading activities) would result in an increase of two dBA L dn or less at surrounding
land uses. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in any significant effects related to noise.

A
ir Quality
The following discussion is based, in part, on an Air Quality Assessment prepared for the project by Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. A copy of this report, dated April 2026, is attached to this memorandum as Appendix H.

A
ir quality impacts may occur when a project conflicts with or obstructs the applicable air quality plan, or results in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria air pollutant for which the region (i.e., the San Francisco Bay Area) is non-attainment under the applicable federal or state standard, the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (including toxic air contaminants (TACs), such as diesel particulate matter (DPM) that would result in community health risks, or in odors that would adversely affect a significant number of people.15 2017 C
lean Air Plan
The proposed project would not conflict with the 2017 CAP because the project would not exceed the Air District thresholds of significance for construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions, as described below. Because the project would not exceed the Air District screening criteria, it would not result in significant impacts due to the generation of construction or operational-related criteria air pollutants. Thus, the project is not required to incorporate project- specific control measures listed in the 2017 CAP. Further, the project is considered urban infill and would be located near bike facilities and transit with regional connections. Implementation of the project would not prevent the Air District or partner agencies from continuing progress toward attaining State and federal air quality standards and eliminating health-risk disparities from 15 The applicable air quality plan is the Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2017 Clean Air Plan. The San Francisco Bay Area is non-attainment for ground-level ozone (O3), nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SOx), and lead. The project does not include substantial new emissions of sulfur dioxide or lead; therefore, these criteria pollutants are not discussed further.

37 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com exposure to air pollution among Bay Area communities, as described within the 2017 CAP.

Accordingly, the project would not result in significant effects due to a conflict with the 2017 CAP.

Criteria Air Pollutants
Construction Period Emissions
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1 was used to estimate emissions from project construction. Construction emissions were modeled based on equipment list and schedule information provided by the applicant. CalEEMod defaults for the associated land use and size were used where project-specific information was unavailable. Details about the equipment list, construction schedule, modeling, data inputs, and assumptions are included in Appendix H. Table 8 summarizes the unmitigated annualized average daily construction emissions of ROG, NOX, PM
10 exhaust, and PM2.5 exhaust during construction of the project.

Table 8. Project Construction Period Emissions
Year Annualized Daily Construction Emissions (pounds/day) ROG NOX PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Exhaust
2026 0.67 5.3 0.26 0.24
2027 0.43 2.3 0.092 0.084
2028 5.0 2.0 0.063 0.058
Air District Threshold 54 54 82 54
Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Source: Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. CEQA Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment for Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project. April 10, 2026.

As shown in Table 8, the unmitigated average daily emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, or PM2.5 generated by project construction would not exceed Air District thresholds. Accordingly, the project’s construction period emissions would have a less than significant impact.

Operational Period Emissions
Operational period criteria pollutant emissions associated with the project would be generated primarily from vehicles driven by future residents and retail customers, and to a lesser extent by waste disposal and daily energy and water usage. The project proposes 94 dwelling units and falls below the Air District’s operational criteria air pollutants 638-unit screening threshold for the “Apartments” land use type. While the type of retail use to be implemented is unknown at this time, the project’s proposed 7,286 square foot retail space falls below the Air District’s operational criteria air pollutant screening threshold for all “Retail” land use subtypes (ranging from 11,000 to 356,000 square feet). Since the project’s uses would be below the Air District’s screening criteria, a

38 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com detailed operational period criteria air pollutant emissions analysis is not warranted, and the project would result in a less than significant operational air quality impact.

Community Health Risks
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 residents and workers in the project vicinity or by significantly exacerbating existing cumulative TAC impacts. The 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. During project operation, the project would generate emissions associated with traffic consisting of mostly light-duty vehicles.

Project impacts to existing sensitive receptors were addressed for temporary construction activities and long-term operational conditions, as discussed below. 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 TACs was also assessed in terms of the cumulative risk which includes the project’s contribution.

Community risk impacts were addressed by predicting increased cancer risk, the increase in annual PM

2.5 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 is typically used (per Air District guidance), with the nearby residential sensitive receptors being exposed to both project construction and operation emissions during this timeframe.

The project’s 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 PM

2.5 concentration and HI values are not additive but based on the annual maximum values for the entirety of the project. The project’s maximally exposed individual (MEI) is identified as the existing resident or worker that would be most impacted by the project’s construction and operation. Other residents and workers in the surrounding area would be exposed to a lower health risk than identified for the MEI. Additional explanation of the methodology for computing community risk impacts is provided in Appendix H.

Construction Health Risks
The MEI with the greatest cancer risks, exposure to PM2.5, and exposure to non-cancer health risks during construction would be a single-family residence located on 7th Avenue between South B Street and Laurel Avenue. The location of the MEI is shown on Figure 8 on the following page.

Source: Ramboll.
0(,5
&DQFHU30DQG&KURQLF+,2IIVLWH5HVLGHQW

*HQHUDWRU
1HDUE\%XLOGLQJV
&RQVWUXFWLRQ$UHD
+DXO5RXWHV
3URMHFW6LWH0 100 200 400 600 1,000 Feet
LOCATION OF OFF-SITE MAXIMALLY EXPOSED INDIVIDUALS FIGURE 8 39 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com

40 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a known TAC. Although construction exhaust air pollutant emissions would not contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations, construction exhaust emissions may still pose health risks for sensitive receptors such as surrounding residents. Diesel exhaust particulate matter (DPM) poses both a potential health and nuisance impact to nearby receptors. The primary community risk impact issues associated with construction emissions are cancer risk and exposure to PM2.5. A quantitative health risk assessment of the project construction activities was conducted to evaluate the potential health effects to nearby sensitive receptors from construction emissions of DPM and PM2.5, pursuant to the Air District’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines using CalEEMod and the U.S. EPA AERMOD dispersion model. Details about the community health risk modeling, data inputs, and assumptions are included in Appendix H.

Table 9 below summarizes maximum cancer risks, PM2.5 concentrations, and hazard index from project construction activities at the MEI.

Table 9. Construction Health Risks at Offsite MEI
Source Cancer Risk per Million Hazard Index PM2.5 Concentration Construction 16 0.022 0.41
Air District Threshold 10.0 1.0 0.30
Exceed Threshold? Yes No Yes
Source: Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. CEQA Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment for Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project. April 10, 2026.

As shown in Table 9, the project’s construction-related community health risks would exceed the Air District’s thresholds for cancer risk and PM2.5 concentration. The applicant and contractor would be required to comply with the following BMPs established by the Air District for reducing construction emissions of fugitive PM10 and PM2.5. Infill development commonly involves construction adjacent to sensitive receptors, as is the case for the subject project, and the conditions below represent common restrictions and requirements on construction activity when proposed adjacent to sensitive receptors. The nature of the proposed construction and its effects on adjacent land use do not constitute unusual circumstances.

Condition of Approval16:
a. The following provision to control traffic congestion, noise, and dust shall be followed during site excavation, grading, and construction:
i. Construction activities related to the issuance of any Public Works permit shall be restricted to the weekday between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Please note, however,

16 Please note the Air Quality Report (Appendix G) identifies impact-reducing measures as “mitigation measures” rather than “conditions of approval.” They are listed as “conditions of approval” in this CE Memo because they are standard practice for construction projects and do not constitute unusual circumstances.

41 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com that no work shall be allowed to take place within the City right-of-way after 5:00 p.m. In addition, no work being done under the issuance of a Public Works encroachment permit may be performed on the weekend unless prior approvals have been granted by Public Works. Earth haul and materials delivery to and from the site, including truck arrivals and departures to and from the site, will be prohibited between the weekday hours of 4:00 p.m. 5:30 p.m. Signs outlining these restrictions shall be posted at conspicuous locations on site. The signs shall be per the City Standard Drawing for posting construction hours. The sign shall be kept free of graffiti at all times. Contact the Public Works Department to obtain sample City Standard sign outlining hours of operation.

The allowed hours of Public Works construction activities may be waived or modified through an exemption, for limited periods, if the Director of Public Works or designee finds that:
• The following criteria are met:
o Permitting extended hours of construction will decrease the total time needed to complete the project thus mitigating the total amount of noise associated with the project as a whole; or
o Permitting extended hours of construction are required to accommodate design or engineering requirements, such as a large concrete pour. Such a need would be determined by the project’s design engineer and require approval of the Director of Public Works or designee.
o An emergency situation exists where the construction work is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition
resulting in obvious and eminent peril to public health and safety. If such a condition exists, the City may waive any of the remaining requirements outlined below.
• The exemption will not conflict with any other condition of approval required by the City to mitigate significant impacts.
• The contractor or owner of the property will notify residential and commercial occupants of property adjacent to the construction site of the hours of construction activity which may impact the area. This notification shall be provided three days prior to the start of the extended construction activity.
• The approved hours of construction activity will be posted at the construction site in a place and manner that can be easily viewed by any interested member of the public.

The Director of Public Works or designee may revoke the exemption at any time if the contractor or owner of the property fails to abide by the conditions of

42 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com exemption or if it is determined that the peace, comfort, and tranquility of the occupants of adjacent residential and commercial properties are impaired because of the location and nature of the construction. The waiver application shall be submitted to the Public Works Construction Inspector ten (10) working days prior to the requested date of waiver.
b. The following conditions shall be complied with at all times during the construction phase of the project:
ii. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph). iii. All construction vehicles shall be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers that meet State standards.
iv. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average winds exceed 20 mph.
v. All trucks and equipment, including their ties, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
vi. All visible mud or dirt trackout 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.
vii. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times a day. Newly disturbed soil surfaces shall be watered down regularly by a water trucks or by other approved method maintained on site during all grading operations. Construction grading activity shall be discontinued in wind conditions that in the opinion of the Public Works Construction Inspector cause excessive neighborhood dust problems. Wash down of dirt and debris into storm drain systems will not be allowed. viii. Construction activities shall be scheduled so that paving and foundation placement begin immediately upon completion of grading operation. ix. Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a six- to twelve-inch layer of compacted wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
x. All aggregate materials transported to and from the site shall be covered in accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code during transit to and from the site.
xi. Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
c. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant shall submit traffic control plans for any impact to the right-of-way for each phase of operation, including pedestrian and bicycle detour plans as applicable. The traffic control plan shall comply with the most recent

43 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com version of the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the City’s Traffic Control Plan Requirements. The applicant shall also submit a site logistics plan for each phase of operation. The plan, at a minimum, shall include estimated timeframes for implementation, duration, and construction operations.

In addition, the applicant and contractor would be required to incorporate the following measures to reduce construction equipment emissions.

Conditions of Approval:
a. Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit a construction management plan to the Building Division that demonstrates that all cranes, forklifts, generator sets, and welders used in project construction shall be equipped with Tier 4 diesel engines or better (e.g., natural gas generators or electric welders). The construction management plan is subject to review and approval of the Community Development Director, or his/her designee.
b. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall also submit an emissions reduction plan to the Planning Division that details the equipment to be used during construction and be signed by a qualified air quality specialist, verifying that the equipment included in the plan meets standards set forth in this measure. i. Alternatively, if use of Tier 4 equipment is not available, the applicant may propose use of equipment that meets U.S. EPA emissions standards for Tier 3 engines and include particulate matter emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control devices that altogether achieve a 90 percent reduction in particulate matter exhaust in comparison to uncontrolled equipment. The use of Tier 3 equipment shall not exceed five percent of all equipment usage (described in terms of total horsepower hours during a phase). Alternatively, the project may also use electrical or non-diesel fueled equipment. All construction vehicles shall be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers that meet State standards. ii. The emissions reduction plan is subject to review and approval of the Community Development Director, or his/her designee.

The Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment prepared by Ramboll (refer to Appendix H) determined that adherence with the above conditions of approval would reduce cancer risk and by PM

2.5 concentration by approximately 60 percent to below Air District thresholds. Therefore, the project would not result in any significant effects related to construction health risks.

Cumulative Health Risks from All TAC Sources
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. These sources include busy surface streets (i.e., roadways that exceed 10,000 vehicles per day), stationary sources, railways, and projects with concurrent construction schedules. There are seven projects within 1,000 feet of

44 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com the project site (listed in Section V Environmental Review on page 12) that are projected to be constructed at around the same time as the proposed project, i.e., their schedules could overlap.

Construction of these projects was factored into the cumulative analysis based on data provided by the City. Modeling was completed to calculate the community health risk from the cumulative sources at the project MEI. Refer to Appendix H for details about the cumulative health risk modeling, including model inputs and assumptions. Table 10 below shows the cumulative community risk impacts from project construction and other cumulative sources at the MEIs.

Table 10. Cumulative Health Risks at Offsite MEI
Source Cancer Risk per Million Hazard Index PM2.5 Concentration Project Construction 6.71 0.0102 0.173
Project Operation (Generator) 0.8 0.0001 0.002
Stationary Sources 0.9 -- --
Roadways 7.9 0.03 0.23
Railways 0.38 0.0001 0.00047
Future Cumulative Development4 1.5 0.0011 0.011
Total 18 0.041 0.41
Air District Threshold 100.0 10.0 0.80
Exceed Threshold? No No No
Source: Ramboll US Consulting, Inc. CEQA Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment for Nazareth Vista Mixed-Use Project. April 10, 2026.

Notes:
1 Reduced from 16 cases per million with implementation of conditions of approval. 2 Reduced from 0.022 with implementation of conditions of approval. 3 Reduced from 0.41 with implementation of conditions of approval. 4 Foreseeable future cumulative development projects include the mixed-use developments at 500 East 4th Avenue, 222 East 4th Avenue, 445 South B Street, 500 East 3rd Avenue, and 477 9th Avenue.

As shown in Table 10, the cumulative cancer risks, annual PM2.5 concentrations, and hazard index for non-cancer health risks would not exceed the Air District’s cumulative-source thresholds.

Accordingly, the project’s cumulative health risks would not have a significant effect.

Odors
According to the Air District CEQA Guidelines, an odor source with five or more confirmed complaints per year averaged over three years is considered to have a significant impact.17 The Air

17 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. May 2017. Page 2-1.

45 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com District has identified a variety of land uses that produce emissions that may lead to odors and generate complaints including, but are not limited to, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, composting operations, and food manufacturing facilities.

Commercial and residential uses do not typically generate objectionable odors, nor do they fall under any of the land uses identified by the Air District to cause objectionable odors. Localized odors, mainly resulting from diesel exhaust and construction equipment on-site, would be created during the construction phase of the project. These odors would be temporary and not likely to be noticed beyond the project site’s boundaries. Odors associated with the application of paints and coatings may also be noticeable on occasion by adjacent receptors. Painting and coating of the project would occur during daytime hours only, be localized, and be generally confined to the project site. These odors would also be temporary. Operation and maintenance of the project would require the use of cleaning supplies, maintenance chemicals, and herbicides and pesticides for landscape maintenance. Any odors generated by the use of these materials would be both temporary and highly localized. Therefore, the project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Water Quality
The water quality of streams, creeks, ponds, and other surface water bodies 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. Urban stormwater runoff often contains contaminants such as oil and grease, plant and animal debris (e.g., leaves, dust, animal feces, etc.), pesticides, litter, and heavy metals. In sufficient concentration, these pollutants have been found to adversely affect the aquatic habitats to which they drain.

Construction
Construction activities, such as grading and excavation, have the potential to result in temporary impacts to surface water quality in adjacent waterways and groundwater. When disturbance to the soil occurs, sediments may be dislodged and discharged into the storm drainage system after surface runoff flows across the site.

Construction of the below level parking garage, building footings, grading, and trenching activities would extend to a depth of eight feet and would not encounter groundwater on-site. 18 No
dewatering would be required as a result of the project. Projects that would disturb one acre or more of soil are required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to file a Notice of Intent (NOI) and prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Projects are required by Chapter 7.39 of the San Mateo Municipal Code to adhere with the SWRCB regulations and obtain

18 Based on a Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Summit Engineering and a Phase I ESA prepared by PIERS Environmental Services, groundwater on-site is located at depths greater than 15 feet below ground surface (bgs). 46 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com a Stormwater Pollution Prevention (STOPPP) Construction permit. Adherence with the aforementioned regulations would ensure that the discharge of pollutants is minimized to the extent feasible, and would protect beneficial uses and receiving waters from the adverse effects of construction-related storm water discharges. Accordingly, construction of the project would not result in any significant effects on water quality.

Post-Construction
Provision C.3 of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP) requires project that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area are required to implement site design, source control, and Low Impact Development (LID)-based stormwater treatment controls to treat post-construction stormwater runoff. The project would replace over 50 percent of the existing impervious area and therefore would be required to comply with Provision C.3. As documented in Section IV Project Description, the project would comply with Provision C.3 by treating stormwater runoff through the use of silva cells on 6th Avenue. Silva cells located on South B Street and 7th Avenue would treat public right-of-way areas. Excess runoff from the silva cells would be discharged to the City storm drain system. Additionally, as required by Chapter 7.39 of the San Mateo Municipal Code and the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Management Plan, the project applicant would be required to implement the following measures.

Conditions of Approval:
a. O
wner/occupant shall inspect private stormwater treatment devices and GI features in the public right-of-way at least two times per year and sweep parking lots immediately prior to and once during storm season.
b. The applicant shall pay a Pollution Prevention Inspection fee on a yearly basis for cost associated with, but not limited to, City inspection of the private stormwater treatment facilities, emergency maintenance needed to protect public health or watercourses, and facility replacement or repair in the event that the treatment facility is no longer able to meet performance standards or has deteriorated. The fee shall be based upon the Comprehensive Fee Schedule, established by the City Council, in effect at the time. c. Label new and redeveloped storm drain inlets with the phrase “No Dumping – Drains to Bay” plaques to alert the public to the destination of storm water and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. Template ordering information is available from the Department of Public Works.
d. All process equipment, oil fuels, solvents, coolants, fertilizers, pesticides, and sim ilar
c
hemical products, as well as petroleum-based wastes, tallow, and grease planned for st
orage outdoors shall be stored in covered containers at al times.

A
dherence with Provision C.3 of the MRP, the City’s Municipal Code, and the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Management Plan would ensure that stormwater pollution is minimized,

47 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com treated, and filtered prior to entering the storm drain system. Accordingly, operation of the project would not result in

(e) The site can be adequately serviced by all required utilities and public services.

Utilities
Utility services to the proposed project would be provided by the City of San Mateo (storm drain, sanitary sewer), the Cal Water Bayshore District (water service), and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) (electricity). The project proposes to construct new laterals and electrical connections that would tie into existing utility lines located in 6th Avenue.

The City of San Mateo Public Works Department has confirmed, based on storm drain and sanitary sewer capacity studies, that the existing storm drain and sanitary sewer infrastructure can accommodate increases in flows generated by the proposed project. The proposed project falls below the 500-dwelling unit and 500,000 square foot thresholds for preparation of a water supply assessment by a local provider
19, and the Cal Water Bayshore District determined in its most recent Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) that the City will meet projected water demand through 2045 during normal, single-, and multiple-dry years. In addition, the City prepared a Sewer Capacity Study for the project (refer to Appendix I) that determined the city’s sewer system has capacity to convey the project’s flow to the treatment plant.

Therefore, sufficient water supplies would be available to the project. The project would coordinate with PG&E on connections between the existing power grid lines and the proposed building, and as discussed in Section 15300.2 – Exceptions above, the project’s energy consumption would be minimal in comparison with county demand and would be accommodated by existing energy supplies. Accordingly, the project can be adequately serviced by all required utilities.

Public Services
The proposed project would intensify use of the site and may result in an increase in demand for fire and police protection services. However, the proposed project is consistent with the assumptions of the San Mateo 2040 General Plan EIR, which concluded that new development would have a less than significant impact on fire and police protection services with payment of building permit fees (as mandated by the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code) that would help provide additional fire and police protection resources to the City as needed. Additionally, the project would be constructed in compliance with the most recent California Building Code and California Fire code to ensure the building is fire-safe, and with Implementation Program LU-4.29 and the City’s Building Security Code, which requires proposed developments to be reviewed by the San Mateo Police Department to ensure appropriate safety features that minimize criminal activity

19 Pursuant to Senate Bill 610 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15155. 48 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com are incorporated into the project design. For these reasons, fire and police protection services are adequate to service the proposed project.

Based on the San Mateo-Foster City School District’s student generation rates of 0.04 student per multi-family residential unit for elementary schools and middle schools, the project’s 94 residential units would generate approximately four new students at Sunnybrae Elementary School and Borel Middle School. Using the San Mateo Union High School District’s student generation rate of 0.10 high school students per multi-family residential unit, the project would generate approximately ten new students at San Mateo High School. Enrollment at Sunnybrae Elementary is 368 students20 with a capacity of 832 students, enrollment at Borel Middle is 863 students21 with a capacity of 1,134 students, and enrollment at San Mateo High is 1,532 students22 with a capacity of 1,941 students. Accordingly, Sunnybrae Elementary, Borel Middle, and San Mateo High can accommodate an additional 464, 271, and 409 students, respectively. Therefore, adequate capacity exists at the school facilities that serve the project site. The project would be required to pay statutory school impact fees to offset increased demands on school facilities resulting from the project.

Future residents and employees are expected to marginally increase demand on other public facilities, such as libraries and community centers. Additionally, the City is in process of updating its library services through the San Mateo Public Library Strategic Plan, which will build and expand existing library facilities and employ resources in new ways to ensure equitable access. Accordingly, libraries and community centers in San Mateo would be equipped to provide services to new residents of the proposed project. The project would also pay in-lieu fees under the Quimby Act to offset the demand generated by new residents and employees on parks and recreational facilities.

For these reasons, the project would not result in a significant effect on public facilities such as libraries, community centers, parks, and recreation facilities.

VI. Conclusion
As documented under Section V Environmental Review, none of the exceptions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to the project, and the project is eligible for a Categorical Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, since it a) meets the definition of an in-fill development project; b) would occur within San Mateo city limits on a project site no more than five acres that is surrounded by urban uses; c) has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species; d) would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and e) can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
20 California Department of Education. “School Profile: Sunnybrae Elementary.” Accessed April 27, 2026. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sdprofile/details.aspx?cds=41690396045017. 21 California Department of Education. “School Profile: Borel Middle.” Accessed April 27, 2026. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sdprofile/details.aspx?cds=41690396044853. 22 California Department of Education. “School Profile: San Mateo High.” Accessed April 27, 2026. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sdprofile/details.aspx?cds=41690474136370.

49 1871 The Alameda, Suite 200 • San José, CA 95126 • Tel: (408) 248-3500 • www.davidjpowers.com

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Geotechnical Report
Appendix B: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for 616 South B. Street Appendix C: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for 606 South B. Street Appendix D: Historic Resource Evaluation Report
Appendix E: Transportation Analysis
Appendix F: Noise and Vibration Report
Appendix G: Addendum to Noise and Vibration Report
Appendix H: Air Quality Report
Appendix I: Sewer Capacity Study

San Mateo City CouncilAugust 17, 2026

San Mateo City Council
August 17, 2026