City of San Pablo
Addendum to the San Pablo 2030
Gener
al Plan EIR for the San Pablo
R
umrill Corridor Plan and General
Plan Update
May 2025
Public Review Draft
Volume 1
CEQA Addendum
Addendum to the San Pablo 2030 General Plan EIR for the San Pablo Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update May 2025
Public Review Draft
Volume 1
Prepared for the City of San Pablo by
2 Ta bl e o f C o n t e n t s 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Findings ........................................................................................................................ 1-2 2 Project Description ............................................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Project Location ........................................................................................................ 2-2 2.3 Existing Conditions and Planning Context .......................................................... 2-2 2.4 Proposed Project .................................................................................................... 2-12 3 Environmental Analysis ...................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Aesthetics .................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ..................................................................... 3-8 3.3 Air Quality ................................................................................................................ 3-10 3.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................................... 3-17 3.5 Cultural and Tribal Resources ............................................................................. 3-25 3.6 Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Climate Change ............................ 3-32 3.7 Geology and Soils .................................................................................................... 3-36 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 3-45 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................. 3-53 3.10 Land Use, Population, and Housing .................................................................... 3-63 3.11 Mineral Resources .................................................................................................. 3-68 3.12 Noise and Vibration ................................................................................................ 3-69 3.13 Public Services and Recreation ............................................................................ 3-75 3.14 Transportation ......................................................................................................... 3-80 3.15 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................ 3-85 3.16 Wildfire ...................................................................................................................... 3-93 4 List of Preparers .................................................................................................. 4-1
3 A Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................. A-1 B Supporting Materials for Cultural Resources ................................................. B-1 C Supporting Materials for Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................ C-1 D Noise Data .......................................................................................................... D-1 E Transpor tation Data ........................................................................................... E-1 F Buildout Projections for the Rumrill Corridor Plan ........................................ F-1 List of Figures Figure 2-1: Project Area ................................................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-2: Environmental Hazards and Constraints .............................................................................. 2-4 Figure 2-3: Priority Development Areas .................................................................................................... 2-6 Chart 2-1: Existing Land Use, Rumrill Corridor vs. City of San Pablo ................................................ 2-7 Figure 2-4: Existing Land Use ....................................................................................................................... 2-8 Figure 2-5: 2030 General Plan Land Use Map ........................................................................................ 2-11 Figure 2-6: Proposed General Plan Land Use ......................................................................................... 2-16 Figure 2-7: Proposed General Plan Land Use Changes ........................................................................ 2-22 Figure 3.4-1 Special Status Species ........................................................................................................... 3-22 Figure 3.5-1 Historic Resources ................................................................................................................ 3-28 Figure 3.7-1 Geologic Hazards .................................................................................................................. 3-42 Figure 3.8-1 Contaminated Sites within the Vicinity of the Project Area ........................................ 3-49 Figure 3.9-1 Waterways and Flood Zones in the Vicinity of Project Area ....................................... 3-60
1-1
1 Introduction This Addendum, initial study, checklist, and attached supporting documents have been prepared to determine whether and to what extent the San Pablo 2030 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No. 2008082069, certified April 22, 2011) (2030 GP EIR) sufficiently addresses the potential impacts of the proposed Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update (Proposed Project), or whether additional documentation and analysis is required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21000, et seq.). Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166, and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, subd. (a), the attached Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the proposed project. Consistent with the thresholds used by the lead agency in the previous EIR, the attached Addendum uses the standard environmental checklist categories provided in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines but provides answer columns for evaluation consistent with the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a). CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, subd. (a) provides that the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an Addendum to a previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration (ND) if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or ND have occurred (CEQA Guidelines, § 15164, subd. (a)). An Addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the previous EIR or ND (CEQA Guidelines § 15164, subd. (c)). The decision-making body shall consider the Addendum with the previous EIR prior to making a decision on the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines § 15164, subd. (d)). An agency must also include a brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR or ND pursuant to Section 15162 (CEQA Guidelines § 15164, subd. (e)). Consequently, once an EIR or ND has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or ND is required or allowed under CEQA unless, based on substantial evidence: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or ND . . . due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or ND . . . due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 1-2
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, or the ND was adopted . . . shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or ND; b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR or ND; c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR or ND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative (CEQA Guidelines, § 15162, subd. (a); see also PRC § 21166). This Addendum, checklist, and attached documents constitute substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR or ND is not required. This Addendum addresses the conclusions of the San Pablo 2030 General Plan Certified Environmental Impact Report (hereinafter referred to as the “2030 GP EIR”) in light of the Proposed Project. 1.1 Findings There are no substantial changes proposed by the Proposed Project or under the circumstances in which the Proposed Project would be undertaken that would require major revisions of the 2030 GP EIR. The Proposed Project does not require preparation of a new subsequent or supplemental EIR due to either (1) the involvement of new significant environmental effects, (2) a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or (3) new information of substantial importance. No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible. Applicable mitigation measures from the Certified 2030 GP EIR are identified and discussed in this Addendum. As illustrated herein, the Proposed Project is consistent with and within the scope of the 2030 GP EIR and would involve only minor changes, therefore, an Addendum is appropriate and required CEQA compliance for the proposed project.
2-1
2 Project Description 2.1 Introduction This Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts of implementing the Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update. The Rumrill Corridor Plan outlines a strategy that will lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, a special planning subarea envisioned in the General Plan 2030. The General Plan 2030 was adopted in 2011, and an accompanying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified on April 18, 2011 (SCH # 2008082069). That EIR described and disclosed the environmental effects associated with implementation of General Plan 2030, adopted by the City Council to guide development within the City limit. As evaluated in the 2011 EIR, the Plan incorporates goals and policies intended to support economic development and fiscal stability; improve community health and safety; promote equitable job and housing opportunities; and foster creation of a network of parks and trails within easy access of home for San Pablo residents. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15164, an addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Accordingly, the primary purpose of this evaluation is to determine, on the basis of substantial evidence, if one or more of the following conditions are met: 1. Substantial changes are proposed as part of the proposed update that would result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes have occurred with respect to circumstances under which the proposed update is undertaken (i.e., a significant change in the existing or future condition) that would result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and/or 3. New information of substantial importance indicates that the proposed update result in a new significant environmental effect or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Pursuant to Section 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Pablo will be the Lead Agency for purposes of environmental review.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 2-2
Lead Agency Contact: Elizabeth “Libby” Tyler, Director Community Development Department City of San Pablo 1000 Gateway Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806
2.2 Project Location San Pablo is located within the western portion of Contra Costa County, inland from the eastern shore of San Pablo Bay. The city is surrounded on three sides by the City of Richmond and on its fourth by the unincorporated community of El Sobrante. Interstates 80 (I-80) separated the city into east and west portions. San Pablo is roughly bounded north along San Pablo Avenue to Richmond Country Club, northeast to the Rollingwood residential area, east towards Alvarado Park near San Pablo Dam Road, west towards Giant Road and the Union Pacific Railway tracks, and south towards Costa Avenue, as shown on Figure 2-1. San Pablo is served by six regional bus routes that provide connections to BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) and Amtrak rail stations as well as to the Richmond Passenger Ferry Terminal. BART provides service to San Francisco as well as Contra Costa, Alameda, San Francisco, and San Mateo counties from the Richmond BART/Amtrak station. Amtrak offers service to cities across California, including San Jose, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Regional and local bus services in the City of San Pablo are provided by the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) and Western Contra Costa County Transit (WestCAT), while heavy and commuter rail services are provided by the BART and Amtrak via the Richmond station about 1.5 miles south of San Pablo. The Richmond Ferry also provides regional service between the Richmond Ferry Terminal and downtown San Francisco. AC Transit Route 74 connects the Richmond Ferry Terminal to several bus stops in San Pablo. Additionally, the City also has designated truck routes to reduce truck through traffic from impacting residential streets by restricting certain trucks to Routes of Regional Significance, identified in the Countywide Transportation Plan. 2.3 Existing Conditions and Planning Context San Pablo is a largely built out city and there is relatively little vacant land available for new development. Only 2.2 percent of the total land area in the city was vacant in 2021, and as shown in Figure 2-2, much of that land is in areas of environmental hazard. These hazards include the North Hayward Fault, which runs directly through the northern and eastern part of the city, as well as areas of flood risk and very high liquefaction risk located in proximity to the San Pablo and Wildcat creeks. An earthquake fault zone approximately 1,500 feet wide has been established around the trace of the North Hayward Fault. Given the high risk of ground-shaking and surface rupture within the zone, residential construction is not permitted in order to protect public safety and minimize the potential for loss of life and property. Residential construction is permitted within the 100-year flood plain and areas of liquefaction risk, subject to the regulatory standards of the California Building Code designed to ensure adequate protection.
Æb
Æb
San
Pablo
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RAILROAD
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
Point Pinole
Regional Park
Wildcat Canyon
Regional Park
Richmond
BART Station
El Cerrito
Del Nor te
BART Sta ti on
San Pablo Ave
SanPabloAve
Parr Blvd
Stockton Ave
Rumrill Blvd
Brookside Dr
13th St
Mc BrydeAve
22nd St
23rd St
KearneySt
KeyRouteBlvd
DornanDr
S 39th St
Hilltop Dr
Wright Ave
ArlingtonAve
Castro St
1st St
Filbert St
Fairmount Ave
Manor Rd
S 23rd St
Church Ln
S 37th St
Rivers St
S 2nd St
37th St
W
ilson Ave
Marina W
ay
S Garrard Blvd
ColusaAve
Broadway St
Rd 20
Solano Ave
Appian
W
ay
Pennsylvania Ave
BarrettAve
Manila Ave
Schmidt Ln
AshburyAve
San Mateo St
Chesley Ave
SHarborW
ay
SMarinaW
ay
Navellier St
TennentAve
Atlas Rd
Harbour W
ay
ArlingtonBlvd
W Cutting Blvd
McBryde Ave
Maricopa Ave
RichmondSt
Moeser Ln
30th St
BlumeDr
Giant Hwy
29th St
3rd St
PinoleValleyRd
Esmond Ave
Garvin Ave
Potrero Ave
Central Ave
Roosevelt Ave
34th
St
Ohio Ave
Tara Hills Dr
Giant Rd
Market Ave
ValleyViewRd
El PortalDr
Carlson Blvd
Macdonald Ave
San Pablo Dam Rd
Cutting Blvd
Richmond Pkwy
%&n(
!"c$
Richmond
North
Richmond
San Pablo Strait
El Sobrante
SOURCE: City of San Pablo, 2024; Contra Costa County GIS, 2024; Dyett & Bhatia, 2024 City of San Pablo
Sphere of Influence
Urban Limit Line
Rumrill Corridor
Project Area
Urbanized Land
Open Space
Interstate Highway
San Pablo Avenue
Major Road
BART Rail
Railroad
El Cerrito
Hilltop
Bayview
Pinole
0 ½ 1¼
Mile
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
UV1
San Pablo Bay
Pacific
Ocean
San Pablo
Richmond
Hercules
Oakland
Alameda
Tiburon
Novato
San Rafael
Sausalito
Mill Valley
Pinole
Marin
Contra Costa
Alameda
San Francisco
Solano
Sonoma
!"c$
%&n(
%&v(!"c$
IÆ
Figure 2-1:
Project Area
Richmond Pkwy
23rd St
Giant Rd
Rd 20
Rumrill Blvd
Market Ave
Broadway Ave
Rd 20
Brookside Dr
Church Ln
11th St
Stanton Ave
San Pablo Ave
Rumrill Blvd
Rumrill Blvd
Church Ln
San Pablo Ave
San Pablo Ave
San Pablo Dam Rd
SanPabloDamRd
El Portal Dr
Rd 20
San Pablo Dam Rd
El Portal Dr
§¨¦80
City of
Richmond
City of
Richmond
21st St
11th St
San Pablo Ave
17th St
Vale Rd
Dover Ave
20th St
Stanton Ave
Pine Ave
Miner Ave
19th St
16th St
15th St
Amador St
Rivers St
Sutter Ave
Emeric Ave
12th St
14th St
Hillcrest Rd
Rollingwood Dr
13th St
Sanford Ave
Lake St
Ridge Rd
California Ave
22nd St
18th St
Bush Ave
John Ave
Willow Rd
Alpine Rd
Brook Way
Palmer Ave
T yler St
Espanola Ct
Van Ness St
Powell St
Arundel WayArundell Way
10th St
Devon Way
Marin Ave
Mason St
Wilcox Ave
Standard St
Post Ave
Chevy Way
Alfreda Blvd
Stone St
Bayo Vista Ave
Kelley Ave
Fordham St
Greenwood Dr
Manor Dr
Yuba Ave
Manchester Ave
Pullman St
Folsom Ave
Mission Ave
Avon Ln
Villa Dr
Mission Bell Dr
Macarthur Ave
Morrow Dr
Beau Rivage
Bowhill Ln
Douglas St
Miflin Ave
T renton Blvd
Bonita Rd
Merritt Ave Glenlock St
Del Camino Dr
Fillmore St
Pablo Vista Ave
Lovegrove Ave
Glenn Ave
Colin St
Acapulco Dr
Marelia Ct
Bancroft Ln
Montoya Ave
Ventura Ave
Abella Cir
Clare St
Joel Ct
Gerald Ave
Evens Ave
Manzanilla Dr
Carlfield St
Corte St
Ohare Ave
Contra Costa Ave
Casino Ave
Rumrill Rd
Crucero Ave
Wyman St
Riverside Ave
Regina Ave
Barranca St
Humboldt St
E Victoria Ct
Shasta Ave
Harborview Ave
Clement Ave
Baywood Ln
Connecticut Ave
Chattleton Ln
University Ave
Barbara Ln
Kirk Ln
Jean Ct
Madrone Way
Westgate Cir
W Victoria Ct
Frieda Ct
Brookside Ave
Regello Ct
Monte Buena St
Dodson St
Judith Ct
Wanlass Ave
Drake Way
Larchmont Ln
18th St
19th St
20th St
19th St
Bush Ave
15th St
15th St
21st St
18th St
Shasta Ave
Glenn Ave
17th St
Merritt Ave
Riverside Ave
14th St
18th St
Dover Ave
19th St
22nd St
Mason St
15th St
16th St
17th St
17th St
Post Ave
Lake St
20th St
21st St
Rivers St
Lake St
Yuba Ave
19th St
22nd St
16th St
17th St
Glenn Ave
Miner Ave
Rose ArborAv e
Bayview A ve
Bolduc Ct
CapitolHill Ave
W estview Pl
NArlington Blvd
HillcrestRd
MiffinAve
Wanlass
Park
City
Hall
Contra Costa
College
John
Herbert
Davis Park
San Pablo
Lytton
Casino
St. Joseph
Cemetery &
Funeral Center
Rheem Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildcat Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildca t Cr eek
San Pablo Creek
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RR
UNION P ACIFIC RAILROAD
City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Major Highway
Major Roads
Railroads
Vacant Land
J:\GISData\581_SanPablo_GP\GIS\Projects\CEQA\Figure 2 Environmental Hazards and Constraints.mxd Environmental Hazards
Hayward Fault
Alquist Priolo Zones
Very High Liquefaction
100 Y ear Flood Zone
Date: 2/27/2024
0 1,000 2,000500
FEET
SOURCE: Official Maps for New Seismic Hazard Zones in Contra Costa County, California Geological Survey, California Department of Conservation, February, 2024; City of San Pablo, 2021; Contra Costa County GIS, 2021; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 Figure 2-2: Environmental Hazards and
Constraints
Chapter 2: Project Description
2-5
EXISTING LAND USE Citywide Existing Land Use The existing structure of San Pablo is defined by I-80, which physically divides the City into two distinct sections: a larger area to the west, characterized by an older, urban scale of medium-density development on small, relatively flat lots with a gridded roadway pattern; and a smaller, hillier, and more suburban, largely residential area to the east. The two sections are linked only by San Pablo Dam Road. The City’s commercial and retail corridors are located in the center of the planning area, along San Pablo Avenue, 23rd Street, and El Portal Drive. These corridors are surrounded by residential neighborhoods, schools, and other institutional uses. There are industrial uses in and adjacent to the southwestern part of the City, along Giant Road and portions of Rumrill Boulevard to the east of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad. This area is currently occupied by a mix of warehouses, salvage yards, and wholesalers. Due to the historic pattern of urban development in the City, open space and parkland space remain scarce in San Pablo. The largest public park is John Herbert Davis Park, which is 11.4 acres with developed recreational facilities including two baseball fields and one open field used for soccer or football. Significant recreational open spaces are also provided at Rumrill Sports Park, at Wanlass Park, and along the Wildcat Creek trail. The City also includes undeveloped land designated as open space located east of San Pablo Dam Road, on the sloped hills toward Hillcrest Road and further to the south in the East Bay Regional Park District’s Wildcat Canyon Regional Park and the historic Alvarado Park. Residential areas comprise over 45 percent of land within the City limit, primarily concentrated in small lot single-family neighborhoods. Approximately 78 percent of the residential land in San Pablo is developed with single-family homes, while 8 percent is developed with multi-family homes and 1.4 percent with mobile homes. The city's major commercial corridors, however, offer significant potential for redevelopment with residential and job-generating uses. Today, these corridors are typically lined with older buildings and low-slung strip mall developments with large areas of surface parking. Recognizing the potential for redevelopment to help further community priorities for economic development, housing choice, and improved quality of life, the City has designated three corridor segments as Priority Development Areas (PDAs), making them eligible for regional grant funding to support planning and public investment in transportation and utility infrastructure which in turn will help attract private investment to achieve the envisioned land use pattern and growth. Shown on Figure 2-3, the three PDAs are: • San Pablo Avenue PDA - This PDA spans the full length of San Pablo Avenue as it passes through the city. A specific plan was adopted in 2011 to guide the redevelopment of the 261-acre area, envisioning several new mixed-use districts centered around key community services and regional destinations, like Contra Costa College and Lytton Casino. There are three entitled but as yet unconstructed projects in this PDA, which will see construction of 255 new high density multi-family units. • 23rd Street PDA - This PDA extends the full length of 23rd Street from Brookside south to the City limit, encompassing an area of 22 acres. A specific plan was adopted in 2007 to provide a long-term strategy for the revitalization of 23rd Street by facilitating mixed use infill development on vacant and underutilized parcels, fostering a safe and pedestrian- §¨¦80
City of
Richmond
21ST ST
11TH ST
SAN PABLO AVE
17TH ST
VALE RD
DOVER AVE
20TH ST
STANTON AVE
PINE AVE
MINER AVE
19TH ST
16TH ST
15TH ST
AMADOR ST
RIVERS ST
SUTTER AVE
EMERIC AVE
12TH ST
14TH ST
HILLCREST RD
ROLLINGWOOD DR
13TH ST
SANFORD AVE
LAKE ST
RIDGE RD
CALIFORNIA AVE
22ND ST
18TH ST
BUSH AVE
JOHN AVE
WILLOW RD
ALPINE RD
BROOK WAY
PALMER AVE
TYLER ST
ESPANOLA CT
VAN NESS ST
POWELL ST
ARUNDEL WAY
DEVON WAY
MARIN AVE
MASON ST
WILCOX AVE
STANDARD ST
POST AVE
CHEVY WAY
ALFREDA BLVD
STONE ST
BAYO VISTA AVE
KELLEY AVE
FORDHAM ST
GREENWOOD DR
MANOR DR
YUBA AVE
MANCHESTER AVE
PULLMAN ST
FOLSOM AVE
MISSION AVE
AVON LN
VILLA DR
MISSION BELL DR
MACARTHUR AVE
MORROW DR
BEAU RIVAGE
BOWHILL LN
DOUGLAS ST
MIFLIN AVE
TRENTON BLVD
BONITA RD
MERRITT AVE
GLENLOCK ST
DEL CAMINO DR
FILLMORE ST
PABLO VISTA AVE
LOVEGROVE AVE
GLENN AVE
COLIN ST
ACAPULCO DR
MARELIA CT
BANCROFT LN
MONTOYA AVE
VENTURA AVE
ABELLA CIR
CLARE ST
JOEL CT
GERALD AVE
EVENS AVE
MANZANILLA DR
CARLFIELD ST
CORTE ST
OHARE AVE
CONTRA COSTA AVE
CASINO AVE
RUMRILL RD
WYMAN ST
RIVERSIDE AVE
REGINA AVE
BARRANCA ST
HUMBOLDT ST
E VICTORIA CT
SHASTA AVE
HARBORVIEW AVE
CLEMENT AVE
CONNECTICUT AVE
CHATTLETON LN
BARBARA LN
KIRK LN
JEAN CT
MADRONE WAY
WESTGATE CIR
W VICTORIA CT
FRIEDA CT
BROOKSIDE AVE
MONTE BUENA ST
DODSON ST
JUDITH CT
WANLASS AVE
DRAKE WAY
LARCHMONT LN
18TH ST
19TH ST
20TH ST19TH ST
BUSH AVE
15TH ST
15TH ST
21ST ST
18TH ST
SHASTA AVE
GLENN AVE
17TH ST
MERRITT AVE
RIVERSIDE AVE
14TH ST
18TH ST
DOVER AVE
19TH ST
22ND ST
MASON ST
15TH ST
16TH ST
17TH ST
POST AVE
LAKE ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
RIVERS ST
YUBA AVE
19TH ST
22ND ST
16TH ST
17TH ST
MINER AVE
ROSE ARBOR A VE
Bayview A ve
BOLDUC CT
CAPITO
LH
ILL AVE
W ESTVIEW
PL
N
ARLINGTONBLVD
H
ILLCREST
RD
MI
FFIN
AVE
EL PORTAL DR SAN PABLO DAM RD
ROAD 20
ROAD 20
BROOKSIDE DR
MARKET AVE
MARKET ST CHURCH LN
CHURCH LN
23RD ST
VALENCIA WAY
BROADWAY
ROAD 20 RUMRILL BLVD
CHESLEY AVE
RICHMOND PKWY
RICHMOND PKWY
City
Hall
Contra Costa
College
John
Herbert
Davis Park
San Pablo
Lytton
Casino
St. Joseph
Cemetery &
Funeral Center
Wanlass
Park
Rheem Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildcat Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildcat Cr eek
San Pablo Creek
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RR
UNION PACIFIC RR
San Pablo Avenue
PDA
!
Rumrill
Boulevard
PDA
!
23rd Street
PDA
!
SOURCE: City of San Pablo, 2025; Contra Costa County GIS, 2025; Dyett & Bhatia, 2025
0 0.2 0.40.1
Miles
J:\GISData\581_SanPablo_GP\GIS\Projects\GeneralPlan\Land Use Element Maps\Fig 3-2 Priority Development Areas in San Pablo_GPLUFormat.mxd City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Major Roads
Minor Roads
Railroads
Priority Development Area (PDA)
San Pablo Avenue PDA
23rd Street PDA
Rumrill Boulevard PDA
Figure 2-3:
Priority Development Areas
Opportunity Sites
Vacant Sites
Underused Sites
Chapter 2: Project Description
2-7
friendly streetscape, and supporting the vitality of neighborhood businesses. While the area has significant potential for new housing development, almost no construction has occurred in the last 15 years. • Rumrill Boulevard PDA - Rumrill Boulevard is a major four-lane community corridor that extends north from San Pablo’s southwestern City limit to connect with Broadway and San Pablo Avenue. The southern portion of the corridor between Brookside and Costa is designated as a PDA, currently identified as an Employment Focus Area in Plan Bay Area and projected to see 22 new households and 194 jobs added by 2040. The area includes several large multi-family apartment complexes and a mobile home park, along with smaller multi-family and single family residences. The City has also adopted a PDA Overlay District into the Zoning Code, which permits residential development at between 20 and 60 dwelling units per acre on all sites in the district. Additional standards for height and development density are also established, and the standards of the PDA overlay prevail in cases of conflict with the base designation. Rumrill Corridor Existing Land Use Existing land uses within the Rumrill Corridor include a variety of multifamily apartment building and other residences, industrial yards, a large mobile home park, and the Rumrill Sports Complex, together with a variety of auto-related uses, grocery stores, churches, restaurants, commercial services, and vacant properties. Chart 2-1 and Figure 2-4 summarize the existing land uses in the Rumrill PDA, based on recent field surveys. Chart 2-1: Existing Land Use, Rumrill Corridor vs. City of San Pablo 36%
8%1%10%2%4%11%
26%
2%San Pablo
Single Family ResidentialMulti Family ResidentialMobile HomesCommercialIndustrialOpen Space/RecreationPublic/InstitutionalOtherVacant 1%14%
61%
11%5%4%1%3%
Rumrill Corridor
§¨¦80
City of
Richmond
!
Rumrill
Boulevard
PDA
City of
Richmond
21ST ST
11TH
ST
SAN
PABLO
AVE
17TH
ST
VALE RD
DOVER AVE
20TH
ST
STANTON AVE
PINE AVE
MINER AVE
19TH
ST
16TH
ST
15TH
ST
AM
ADOR ST
RIVERS ST
SUTTER AVE
EMERIC AVE
12TH
ST
14TH
ST
HILLCREST RD
ROLLINGWOOD DR
13TH
ST
SANFORD AVE
LAKE ST
RIDGE RD
CALIFORNIA AVE
22N
D
ST
18TH ST
BUSH AVE
JOHN AVE
WILLOW RD
ALPINE RD
BROOK WAY
PALMER AVE
TYLER ST
ESPANOLA CT
VAN
N
ESS ST
PO
W
ELL ST
ARUNDEL WAY
DEVON WAY
MARIN AVE
M
ASO
N
ST
WILCOX AVE
STANDARD ST
POST AVE
CHEVY WAY
ALFREDA BLVD
STONE ST
BAYO
VISTA AVE
KELLEY AVE
FO
RD
H
AM
ST
G
REEN
W
O
O
D
D
R
MANOR DR
YUBA AVE
M
AN
CH
ESTER AVE
PULLM
AN
ST
FOLSOM AVE
MISSION AVE
AVO
N
LN
VILLA DR
M
ISSIO
N BELL DR
M
ACARTHUR AVE
MORROW DR
BEAU RIVAGE
BOWHILL LN
DOUGLAS ST
MIFLIN AVE
TRENTON BLVD
BONITA RD
M
ERRITT AVE
GLENLOCK ST
DEL CAM
IN
O
D
R
FILLM
O
RE ST
PABLO VISTA AVE
LOVEGROVE AVE
GLENN AVE
COLIN ST
ACAPULCO DR
MARELIA CT
BAN
CRO
FT LN
MONTOYA AVE
VEN
TURA AVE
ABELLA CIR
CLARE ST
JO
EL CT
GERALD AVE
EVENS AVE
MANZANILLA DR
CARLFIELD STCO
RTE ST
OHARE AVE
CONTRA COSTA AVE
CASINO AVE
RUMRILL RD
WYMAN ST
RIVERSIDE AVE
REGINA AVE
BARRAN
CA ST
HUM
BOLDT ST
E VICTO
RIA CT
SHASTA AVE
HARBO
RVIEW
AVE
CLEMENT AVE
CONNECTICUT AVE
CHATTLETON LN
UNIVERSITY AVE
BARBARA LN
KIRK LN
JEAN CT
MADRONE WAY
W
ESTG
ATE CIR
W
VICTO
RIA CT
FRIED
A CT
BRO
O
KSID
E AVE
M
O
N
TE BUEN
A ST
DO
DSO
N
ST
JU
D
ITH
CT
WANLASS AVE
DRAKE W
AY
LARCH
M
O
N
T LN
18TH
ST
19TH ST
20TH
ST
19TH
ST
BUSH AVE
15TH
ST
15TH
ST
21ST ST
18TH
ST
SHASTA AVE
GLENN AVE
17TH ST
M
ERRITT AVE
RIVERSIDE AVE
14TH
ST
18TH
ST
DOVER AVE
19TH
ST
22N
D
ST
MASON ST
15TH
ST
16TH
ST
17TH ST
POST AVE
LAKE ST
20TH
ST
21ST ST
RIVERS ST
YUBA AVE
19TH
ST
22N
D
ST
16TH
ST
17TH
ST
MINER AVE
ROSE ARBOR A VE
Bayview A ve
BOLDUC C T
CAPITO
LH
ILL AVE
W ESTVIEW
PL
N
ARLINGTONBLVD
H
ILLCREST
RD
M
IFFIN
AVE
EL PORTAL DR SAN PABLO DAM RD
ROAD 20
ROAD 20
BROOKSIDE DR
MARKET AVE
MARKET ST
CHURCH LN
CHURCH LN
23R
D
ST
VALENCIA W
AY
BROADW
AY
ROAD 20 RUMRILL BLVD
CHESLEY AVE
RICHMOND PKWY
RICHMOND PKWY
City
Hall
Contra Costa
College
John
Herbert
Davis Park
San Pablo
Lytton
Casino
St. Joseph
Cemetery &
Funeral Center
Wanlass
Park
Rheem Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildcat Creek
SanPablo Creek
Wildca t Cr eek
San Pablo Creek
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RR
UNION PACIFIC RR
SOURCE: City of San Pablo, 2025; Contra Costa County GIS, 2025; Dyett & Bhatia, 2025
0 0.2 0.40.1
Miles
Single Family Residential
Multi Family Residential
Mobile Homes
Service Station
Hotel, Motel, Lodging Commercial
General Commercial
Mixed Use
Office
Light Industrial
General Industrial
Assisted Living/Skilled Nursing Facility
Public/Institutional
School/Educational Facility
Hospital
Church/Religious Facility
Cemetery/Mortuary
Parks/Recreation
Open Space/Natural Areas
Vacant Land
Existing Land Use
J:\GISData\581_SanPablo_GP\GIS\Projects\PDA_Rumrill\CEQA\Figure 2-4 Existing Land Use.mxd Figure 2-4:
City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Rumrill Boulevard PDA
Major Roads
Minor Roads
Railroads
Chapter 2: Project Description
2-9
Over 76 percent of the land area in the Rumrill Corridor is currently used for residential uses, with most of it located in the northwest and southern portions of the corridor. Although multifamily residential apartments represent the majority of housing units, a mobile home park located in the southwest corner of the corridor represents the largest share of residential acreage (61.4 percent). Multifamily residential represents 14 percent of the Rumrill Corridor acreage, and single family residential, located primarily along the eastern side of Rumrill Boulevard, represents only 1.3 percent of the acreage. Commercial uses represent nearly 11 percent of the acreage. These include restaurants, grocery stores, corner stores, service stations and one mixed-use development, which feature 1 to 5 residential units above a retail shops. Commercial uses are most heavily concentrated in the middle of the corridor. The majority of the City’s industrial and service commercial land uses are located in the Rumrill Corridor, which represent nearly 5 percent of the corridor’s acreage. Open space and recreation represent about 4 percent of the acreage, mostly within the Rumrill Sports Complex site. Vacant land currently represents 3.4 percent of the PDA acreage. Finally, there are seven church/religious facilities on the Corridor, which comprise less than 1 percent of corridor acreage. GENERAL PLAN 2030 Adopted in 2011 as a comprehensive update to the City’s 1996 General Plan, General Plan 2030 is composed of goals, policies, a land use diagram, and other graphic figures and maps (e.g., open space systems, a transportation network, and public facilities) to guide future development within the City’s boundaries, through the year 2030. The Plan included the seven elements required by State law at the time of adoption: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open Space, Conservation, Noise, and Safety. The Housing Element was adopted concurrently with the General Plan but was contained in a separate volume. The Plan also included four optional elements of importance to the community: Economic Development; Growth Management; Health; and Parks, Schools, Community Facilities and Utilities. Key Features of the General Plan 2030 Based on the planning objectives that were set forth, nine key features emerged as the General Plan took shape. These initiatives were large-scale themes that address the planning objectives. The maps and policies in the General Plan were structured around these key initiatives. • Integrating Economic Development into the General Plan. The Economic Development Element brought a strategy for economic growth into the General Plan and underscored the City’s goals for fiscal health, a strong regional center, and job creation. • Pedestrian and Bicycle-Friendly Community. The General Plan established a comprehensive set of principles and strategies to enhance the existing pedestrian and bicycle system and promote a well-integrated and coordinated network to parks, schools and neighborhood retail. • Community Facilities. The General Plan responded to community desires for family-oriented community facilities through new land use designations, such as Mixed Use CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 2-10
Center South that allows community uses to develop among residential and retail development, and direction for impact fees to fund improvements. • Safety and Health. In response to community feedback, the General Plan aims to improve health and safety through greater cooperative efforts with the Police Department as well as by transportation planning, encouraging healthy-living through food strategies, equitable job and housing opportunities, and safety through community design. • Parks and Open Space. City officials and residents alike recognize the need for more parks in San Pablo and the proposed Plan sets out to achieve this with a network of community parks, neighborhood parks and trails to provide recreational areas in close proximity to residents. General Plan 2030 Land Use General Plan Land Use designations reflect the desired distribution of future land uses, rather than the actual land uses that exist on the ground. General Plan land use designations are represented in Figure 2-5. General Plan 2030 residential land use designations include Low Density Residential (west of San Pablo Avenue, along Market Avenue, and eastern City limits), Medium Density Residential (along the Rumrill Boulevard corridor, north of City Hall, and west of Interstate 80 in the southern part of city), High Density Residential (near the intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Church Lane, along San Pablo Avenue north of Broadway Avenue, and western city limits), and Residential Mixed Use (along San Pablo Avenue from Road 20 to Broadway Avenue). Commercial designations include Neighborhood Commercial (along Broadway Avenue and Rumrill Boulevard), Regional Commercial (in the center of San Pablo along San Pablo Avenue), and Commercial Mixed Use (along 23rd Street). The Mixed Use Center designation can be found along San Pablo Avenue near City Hall, as well as the intersection between Rumrill Boulevard, Broadway Avenue, and San Pablo Avenue. The Industrial Mixed Use designation is found on the west side of the city, along Rumrill Boulevard and Giant Road. Public/Institutional land use designations are found in the center of San Pablo, while Parks and Recreation land use designation is found in the eastern portion of San Pablo and near Brookside Drive. General Plan Land Use designations closely follow the patterns of existing land use with some differences. There are existing light industrial uses in the western portion of San Pablo along San Pablo Dam Road that are designated as Commercial Mixed Use. Existing land use of the Rumrill Corridor currently ranges from schools, multi family residential, and single-family residential which is designated as Industrial Mixed Use. General Plan 2030 residential land use designations for the Rumrill Corridor include Medium Density Residential (northwest and southeast corners) and Low Density Residential (eastern side of Rumrill Boulevard). Commercial designations include Neighborhood Commercial, Regional Commercial, and Commercial Mixed Use. The Commercial Mixed Use designation permits residential uses in a mixed use format if the proposed non-residential FAR is at least 0.5. Industrial Mixed Use makes up a large portion of land uses south of Market Avenue on the western side of Rumrill Boulevard, and the remaining land use designations include Parks/Recreation and Public/Institutional. Sites that are currently vacant are zoned Public/Institutional and Industrial Mixed Use.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 2-12
The 2030 General Plan envisions the expansion of light industrial employment-oriented uses in the southwestern part of the City along Rumrill Boulevard and designates parcels on the west side of Rumrill south of Market as Industrial Mixed Use, which permits single and multi-story office, flex-space, and industrial buildings for single and multiple users, warehouse uses, and research and development activities. However, the majority of parcels with the Industrial Mixed Use designation do not currently have an existing industrial use; most are developed with mobiles homes, multi-family residential or general commercial use. Projected Buildout of General Plan 2030 Growth projections for the 2030 General Plan anticipated a total of 34,950 residents, 11,510 homes, and 8,510 jobs at buildout in 2030. Buildout projections assumed an average household size of 3.1 persons per primary dwelling unit sand 1.5 persons per secondary units. The 2030 GP EIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts of projected buildout in 2030. 2023-2031 HOUSING ELEMENT SITES The Sixth Cycle Housing Element outlines a plan to facilitate construction of at least 746 new homes by 2031, which is the City's assessed share of the regional housing need. The new housing would be constructed on sites throughout San Pablo with the majority to be located within the San Pablo Avenue, 23rd Street, and Rumrill PDAs. Specifically, for the Rumrill Corridor, the 2023-2031 Housing Element accommodates 354 housing units affordable to a range of income categories. No rezoning is needed to accommodate RHNA; however, the Housing Element includes programs proposing zoning changes necessary to remove regulatory constraints on housing construction and ensure consistency with new State law, including Program 1-B, which calls for the preparation of a Corridor Plan for the Rumrill PDA. RUMRILL BOULEVARD COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT Completed in 2023, the Rumrill Complete Streets Project was an overhaul of Rumrill Boulevard as it underwent a complete streets construction project. The project involved the installation of separated and protected Class IV bike lanes along the entire length; installation of safety improvements, including flashing beacons at crosswalks, improved lighting, ADA ramps, and median islands for crosswalks; enhanced pedestrian features including wider sidewalks, new trees and plants street greening, benches, and trash receptacles; improved storm drain infrastructure and bioswales; and road improvements including asphalt repair, slurry seal, and new traffic signal systems. 2.4 Proposed Project The Proposed Project is both a Corridor Plan for the Rumrill Boulevard PDA and a technical update to the San Pablo General Plan, involving amendments to refresh background information, synchronize policy direction with the 2023-31 Housing Element, and ensure consistency internal consistency across all Elements. The Rumrill Corridor Plan is a policy document that outlines a comprehensive approach for land use, economic development, transportation, and visual and environmental quality consistent with the San Pablo General Plan. As provided for in State law, it would be adopted by resolution as an amendment to the General Plan, implementing LU-G-11 of Chapter 2: Project Description
2-13
the General Plan Land Use Element by providing area-specific policy guidance for the Corridor. The Rumrill Corridor Plan and the General Plan share a uniform format for land use designations, terminology, and diagrams; however, the Corridor Plan provides greater policy-level detail on issues that particularly affect development within the Corridor. The General Plan addresses the eight required elements defined in State law (Government Code Section 65302) on a citywide basis. Accordingly, where conditions in the Project Area, related to these required elements are otherwise adequately addressed in the General Plan, the Corridor Plan need not address them. The Corridor Plan provides a clear vision for the future of the Rumrill PDA, indicating the general types of uses and activities that are permitted, the policies the City will use to evaluate development applications, and the investments and programs the City will undertake to help implement the community vision it outlines. PLANNING PROCESS The City employed a range of public outreach and engagement strategies to solicit meaningful community input that has informed the Proposed Project. These strategies included a citywide survey on housing and priorities, Technical Advisory Committee Meetings, a series of property owner meetings, a Block Party and community workshop, and decision-maker study sessions with the Planning Commission and City Council. A summary of these engagement activities is described below: • Community Planning Survey. A citywide survey was conducted from December 28, 2021, to February 21, 2022. The survey provided opportunities for residents, business owners, and people who work or go to school in San Pablo to help identify appropriate locations for housing as well as to provide input on key policy topics. In total, 262 people participated and respondents strongly supported adding new, higher density housing along the community's major arterial corridor, like Rumrill Boulevard. • Technical Advisory Committee Meetings. Three Rumrill Corridor Plan Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings were held in the development of the plan. The first TAC meeting was conducted on June 16, 2022, using the online Zoom platform, where an overview of the Rumrill Corridor Plan project, its timeline, and the role of the TAC were presented, as well as an overview of existing conditions in the Corridor. Participants were prompted to post virtual post-it notes listing opportunities and challenges associated with key themes highlighted. The second TAC meeting was conducted on June 5, 2024, using the online Zoom platform, where a current status and overview was presented to TAC members. Further, key findings of the existing conditions were summarized, which led to a presentation of the preliminary draft alternatives for the plan, in order to address the opportunities and constraints at the corridor. TAC participants include members of the following City departments: Community Development, Public Works, and Community Services; AC Transit; ABAG; and Contra Costa Housing Authority. The third TAC meeting was conducted to review and comment on the Draft Plan prior to public release. • Property Owners Meetings. A series of meetings with property owners was conducted to gauge interest in redevelopment and discuss associated opportunities and challenges.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 2-14
Property owner feedback is reflected in the General Plan Land Use map and Rumrill Corridor Plan policies.
• Rumrill Corridor Plan Block Party and Community Meeting. The City hosted a bloc k party and community meeting on August 24, 2024, to introduce the Rumrill Corridor Plan project to the community and to solicit feedback on potential strategies to incorporate into the public review draft corridor plan. The event was held in an open house format with five stations set up around the venue, including a sign in station, a kids’ activity table, and one station on each alternative. Community members were able to drop in at any time between 11:00am and 2:00pm and visit the stations in any order interacting with City staff and consultant team members. Each station had bilingual display posters conveying information and "post it" notes for people to use to make comments. Al l participants also received a trifold comment card that they could use to share their input in English o r Spanish. After visiting all stations, participants enjoyed a hot lunch courtesy of the City. In total, 41 community members attended the outreach workshop, and 30 trifold comment cards were collected by the end of the event.
• Pop-Up Outreach at Rumrill Sports Complex. The City of San Pablo staffed a pop -up booth as part of a citywide festival at the Rumrill Sports Complex and engaged with attendees to solicit input on their priorities and preferences for the corridor. A bi -lin gual
(English and Spanish) information board pr ovided an overview of the project, key demographic information for the Rumrill Corridor PDA area, and a project timeline. This su
pplemented a set of English and Spanish interactive boards, which encouraged residents to share their thoughts about the future of the Rumrill Corridor PDA by ranking fou r questions on a scale of 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Feedback from residents in
formed alternatives that represent different options for future land use and econom ic development strategies in the corridor.
• De
cision-Maker Review. The City of San Pablo has held multiple decision -maker study sessions in the process of developing the Rumrill Corridor Plan with Planning Commission and City Council to present the Preferred Plan and gather feedback to ensure the Plan reflects community preferences and priorities.
PRINCIPAL COMPONENTS OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Rumrill Corridor Plan
The Rumrill Corridor Plan envisions Rumrill Boulevard as a vibrant, inclusive destination that fosters community engagement, economic opportunity, and cultural identity. Over the next 10–15 years, the Plan aims to transform the corridor into a lively hub for residents and visitors alike, offering diverse housing options, quality employment opportunities, and accessible public spaces.
Key objectives include establishing a mixed -use focal point at the intersection of Rumrill and Market, integrating residential neighborhoods with shops and transit, and supporting local entrepreneurship through commercial and employment spaces. The corridor will also feature distinctive gateway de signs, including branded signage, public art, and landscaping, to create a memorable sense of place. Central to this vision is the promotion of “food and fun,” with spaces for recreation, dining, and social gatherings, such as the Rumril l Sports Complex and new public plazas. These efforts aim to enhance livability, celebrate local heritage, and build a more connected and resilient community.
Chapter 2: Project Description
2-15
The Rumrill Corridor Plan is comprised of five chapters that 1) introduce the corridor plan and provide planning context; 2) present a corridor profile, including existing land use, population characteristics, and local business profile; 3) present the vision, land use designations and land use map within the Project Area; 4) introduce the key goals of the Corridor Plan; and 5) set forth a phasing and implementation matrix to track progress with indicators.
Proposed Land Use
To implement the vision, the Corridor Plan introduces three new General Plan Land Use designations, described below and shown on Figure 2-6.
Mixed Use Center West
Mixed Use Center West. Mixed use development at this prominent western gateway into San Pablo will include multiunit residential development with a permitted density of 30 -60 units per gross acre and/or activity-generating commercial uses with an FAR ranging from a minimum of 0.3 to a maximum of 2.3. The maximum permitted density and FAR may be calculated over the total area of adjoining parcels if they are proposed for redevelopment together as part of a single project. A mix of uses is encouraged but not required on individual sites. Typical building height is expected to be four to five stories with mixed use in either a vertical or horizontal format. Desired commercial uses include a grocery store, restaurants, commercial recreational uses, and community -serving shops and services. Other potential commercial uses include a food truck park with communal seating, a production facility with a tasting room or retail sales point, and/or a commercial kitchen with on- site sales and dining. Residential developmen ts that are “affordable by design” are encouraged, such as co-housing, micro-apartments, and modular construction. Bonus density and other regulatory incentives will be available for projects that provide public plazas, on -site recreational amenities, public art, and high-quality design features that build the visual presence of the Rumrill/Market gateway.
Employment Mixed Use
This designation seeks to foster a range of production, distribution, and repair-oriented businesses, including food production and distribution; repair; apparel, electronics, and furniture manufacturing; and a host of other creative demonstration, showcas e, and assembly uses. The intent is to provide opportunities for smaller scale commercial, office, industrial, and hybrid uses seeking affordable spaces that do not require direct access to the regional transportation network and to provide jobs with good wages that do not require a college degree for local residents. On - site live/ work housing is also encouraged within this designation. On sites over 0.25 acres, multiunit housing is permitted where adequate buffering and noise mitigation is provided.
Maximum permitted FAR for non-residential uses is 0.6.
Planned Development/Infill Opportunity
This designation is intended to promote high density residential and/or mixed use development on a cluster of adjacent City -owned sites. Permitted residential density is up to 60 units per net acre prior to any density bonus and an affordable housing component is required, consistent with Gov.
Code, §§ 54220 -54234. Residential development should include a mix of unit types, including studios, one-bedroom units, micro-units and other smaller unit types suitable for singles and ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! §¨¦80
City of
Richmond
City of
Richmond
21ST ST
11TH
ST
SAN
PABLO
AVE
17TH
ST
VALE RD
DOVER AVE
20TH
ST
STANTON AVE
PINE AVE
MINER AVE
19TH
ST
16TH
ST
15TH
ST
AM
ADOR ST
RIVERS ST
SUTTER AVE
EMERIC AVE
12TH
ST
14TH
ST
HILLCREST RD
ROLLINGWOOD DR
13TH
ST
SANFORD AVE
LAKE ST
RIDGE RD
CALIFORNIA AVE
22N
D
ST
18TH ST
BUSH AVE
JOHN AVE
WILLOW RD
ALPINE RD
BROOK WAY
PALMER AVE
TYLER ST
ESPANOLA CT
VAN
N
ESS ST
PO
W
ELL ST
ARUNDEL WAY
DEVON WAY
MARIN AVE
M
ASO
N
ST
WILCOX AVE
STANDARD ST
POST AVE
CHEVY WAY
ALFREDA BLVD
STONE ST
BAYO
VISTA AVE
KELLEY AVE
FO
RD
H
AM
ST
G
REEN
W
O
O
D
D
R
MANOR DR
YUBA AVE
M
AN
CH
ESTER AVE
PULLM
AN
ST
FOLSOM AVE
MISSION AVE
AVO
N
LN
VILLA DR
M
ISSIO
N BELL DR
M
ACARTHUR AVE
MORROW DR
BEAU RIVAGE
BOWHILL LN
DOUGLAS ST
MIFLIN AVE
TRENTON BLVD
BONITA RD
M
ERRITT AVE
GLENLOCK ST
DEL CAM
IN
O
D
R
FILLM
O
RE ST
PABLO VISTA AVE
LOVEGROVE AVE
GLENN AVE
COLIN ST
ACAPULCO DR
MARELIA CT
BAN
CRO
FT LN
MONTOYA AVE
VEN
TURA AVE
ABELLA CIR
CLARE ST
JO
EL CT
GERALD AVE
EVENS AVE
MANZANILLA DR
CARLFIELD STCO
RTE ST
OHARE AVE
CONTRA COSTA AVE
CASINO AVE
RUMRILL RD
WYMAN ST
RIVERSIDE AVE
REGINA AVE
BARRAN
CA ST
HUM
BOLDT ST
E VICTO
RIA CT
SHASTA AVE
HARBO
RVIEW
AVE
CLEMENT AVE
CONNECTICUT AVE
CHATTLETON LN
UNIVERSITY AVE
BARBARA LN
KIRK LN
JEAN CT
MADRONE WAY
W
ESTG
ATE CIR
W
VICTO
RIA CT
FRIED
A CT
BRO
O
KSID
E AVE
M
O
N
TE BUEN
A ST
DO
DSO
N
ST
JU
D
ITH
CT
WANLASS AVE
DRAKE W
AY
LARCH
M
O
N
T LN
18TH
ST
19TH ST
20TH
ST
19TH
ST
BUSH AVE
15TH
ST
15TH
ST
21ST ST
18TH
ST
SHASTA AVE
GLENN AVE
17TH ST
M
ERRITT AVE
RIVERSIDE AVE
14TH
ST
18TH
ST
DOVER AVE
19TH
ST
22N
D
ST
MASON ST
15TH
ST
16TH
ST
17TH ST
POST AVE
LAKE ST
20TH
ST
21ST ST
RIVERS ST
YUBA AVE
19TH
ST
22N
D
ST
16TH
ST
17TH
ST
MINER AVE
ROSE ARBOR A VE
Bayview A ve
BOLDUC C T
CAPITO
LH
ILL AVE
W ESTVIEW
PL
N
ARLINGTONBLVD
H
ILLCREST
RD
M
IFFIN
AVE
EL PORTAL DR SAN PABLO DAM RD
ROAD 20
ROAD 20
BROOKSIDE DR
MARKET AVE
MARKET ST
CHURCH LN
CHURCH LN
23R
D
ST
VALENCIA W
AY
BROADW
AY
ROAD 20 RUMRILL BLVD
CHESLEY AVE
RICHMOND PKWY
RICHMOND PKWY
City
Hall
Contra Costa
College
John
Herbert
Davis Park
San Pablo
Lytton
Casino
St. Joseph
Cemetery &
Funeral Center
Wanlass
Park
Rheem Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildcat Creek
SanPablo Creek
Wildca t Cr eek
San Pablo Creek
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RR
UNION PACIFIC RR
SOURCE: City of San Pablo, 2025; Contra Costa County GIS, 2025; Dyett & Bhatia, 2025
0 0.2 0.40.1
Miles
Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Use
Mixed Use Center North
Mixed Use Center South
Mixed Use Center West
Residential Mixed Use
Commercial Mixed Use
Industrial Mixed Use
Employment Mixed Use
Planned Development
Commercial/Industrial
Neighborhood Commercial
Regional Commercial
Other
Parks/Recreation
Public/Institutional
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
Air Quality Health Risk Overlay Zone
Proposed General
Plan Land Use
J:\GISData\581_SanPablo_GP\GIS\Projects\PDA_Rumrill\CEQA\Figure 2-6 Proposed General Plan Land Use.mxd Figure 2-6:
City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Major Roads
Minor Roads
Railroads
Chapter 2: Project Description
2-17
students as well as larger units for families. Live/work housing that provides opportunities for compatible homebased businesses is encouraged. The site may be developed with residential uses alone; however, complementary non-residential uses such as business incubator space, commercial recreational uses, or space for workforce development and training activities are also desired. Additionally, the Corridor Plan proposes some targeted changes to General Plan Land Use intended to better reflect existing development in the Corridor and ensure consistency with the 2023-31 Housing Element. First, multifamily parcels in north and south of the corridor would be redesignated High Density Residential (HDR) reflecting what is existing and built in the neighborhood now. Second, parcels on the east side of Rumrill at the middle of the Corridor would be redesignated from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Commercial Mixed Use (CMU) to harmonize with sixth cycle Housing Element. Lastly, the mobile home park in the existing Rumrill Corridor will be updated to Medium Density Residential (MDR) to reflect existing density/conditions. Goals, Policies and Actions Chapter 4 of the Rumrill Corridor Plan is organized around 11 key goals listed below. The goals describe desired results that the community seeks to create through the implementation of the Plan. Each goal is supported by a series of policies and implementing actions that establish the “who,” “how,” and “when” for carrying out the “what” and “where” of the goals. • RUM-1: Cohesive Land Use Framework: Foster a vibrant mix of uses along the Corridor and a clear development pattern defined by a mixed use core, residential nodes, and opportunities for retail, employment, and recreation. • RUM-2: Distinctive Gateway: Create an attractive, memorable gateway into San Pablo at the prominent intersection of Market and Rumrill. • RUM-3: Housing For All. Promote a variety of housing types along the corridor and prevent displacement of existing residents. • RUM-4: Engaging Spaces. Activate the public realm and build visual character along the Corridor. • RUM-5: Thriving Local Businesses. Cultivate a vibrant mix of home-grown businesses and entrepreneurs while attracting new businesses to diversify and grow the local economy. • RUM-6: Quality Jobs, Education, and Training. Support workforce development initiatives and connect residents with local employment opportunities. • RUM-7: Destination for Food and Fun. Establish the Rumrill Corridor as a destination for recreation and entertainment within San Pablo. • RUM-8: Safe, Efficient Streets. Manage circulation and improve connectivity to and along the Rumrill Corridor to ensure safe, efficient mobility for all roadway users. • RUM-9: Comprehensive Parking Management. Strategically provide parking to meet the needs of existing and future residents and businesses.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 2-18
• RUM-10: Livable Corridor. Enhance livability and environmental quality along the corridor. • RUM-11: Strong Community Bonds. Strengthen connections between neighbors and encourage the active participation of residents and businesses in civic life. Key Policies in Rumrill Corridor Plan The following policies are included in the Corridor Plan. • Parking Management Strategies. Implementation of the Rumrill Corridor Plan would include shared parking agreements that allow for common use of spaces between uses with different time of day needs. • Anti-Displacement Strategy. Rumrill Corridor Plan will also include an anti-displacement strategy that will focus on ensuring that existing residents and businesses can stay in the corridor as redevelopment takes place. There will be distinct strategies for both businesses and residents within or adjacent to the corridor boundary. • Recreation and Gathering Spaces. The Rumrill Corridor Plan envisions the creation of a local density bonus program to incentivize provision of parks, plazas, green spaces and recreational amenities for residents. The program would be tiered so that some bonus density would be provided for easier-to-provide benefits and greater density in exchange for more valuable benefits. • Corridor Greening and Beautification. Tree planting, stormwater control improvements, facade improvements, and rubbish removal will all be central to the Corridor Plan. • Workforce Development Strategies. Workforce development strategies in the Plan will focus on efforts to connect area residents with jobs in collaboration with the San Pablo EDC and make sure local residents have the skills and training needed for new jobs created in the Project Area. General Plan Update The General Plan Update involves a series of technical amendments to all chapters and Elements of the General Plan, except the Housing Element. The amendments update data, information and mapping in the General Plan and include some targeted revisions to the policy framework to ensure the internal consistency of the General Plan, including the Housing Element. A summary of the technical amendments is provided below. Additionally, the horizon year of the General Plan is proposed for extension to 2035 in view of development trends in the City of San Pablo since 2010 which indicate that the projected buildout capacity analyzed in the 2030 General Plan EIR will not be achieved by 2030. • Introduction – Data on population and residential growth, along with buildout projections, were revised to reflect 2025 and 2035 conditions respectively, and descriptions of General Plan themes were updated to highlight health and safety, community building, parks and open space, and bicycle and pedestrian priority as key themes. • Economic Development – Employment trends and projections have been updated using latest publicly available data, and new target industries were identified. In general, goals Chapter 2: Project Description
2-19
and policies proposed under the Element were updated to closely align with the City’s Economic Development Strategy, adopted in July 2024. • Land Use and Physical Design - Data and descriptions of existing use and recent development trends were updated to reflect 2025 condition; new General Plan Land Use designations from the Rumrill Corridor Plan were incorporated; and maps were updated accordingly. The organization of the Element was modified slightly to better illustrate that new development is envisioned primarily within the City's three PDAs, consistent with the 2023-31 Housing Element. • Growth Management – Implementation policies under Development Review and Mitigation were revised. • Circulation – New information on major transportation improvements and adopted transportation plans was incorporated, with respective updates to policies/goals and maps. • Parks, Schools, Community Facilities, and Utilities – Data and descriptions of existing/proposed parks, schools and community facilities, projected enrollment (using new 2035 buildout projections), and water demand has been revised. Maps were also updated accordingly. • Open Space Conservation – Sections on soil and water quality were updated to highlight pertinent trends, with adjustments made to goals and policies accordingly. • Community Health and Environmental Justice – There are no additional revisions to the Element since its adoption in 2024. • Safety and Noise – Descriptions and maps on wildfire hazards and local hazard mitigation planning has been updated. • Implementation and Monitoring - Descriptions of responsible departments or committees were updated to reflect active entities. BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS Buildout refers to the estimated amount of new development and corresponding growth in population and employment that is likely to take place under the Proposed Plan through the horizon year of 2035, based on the proposed land use designations. Buildout estimates should not be considered a prediction for growth, as the actual amount of development that will occur through 2035 is based on many factors outside of the City’s control, including changes in regional real estate and labor markets and the decisions of individual property owners. Therefore, buildout estimates represent one potential set of outcomes rather than definitive figures. Additionally, the designation of a site for a specific land use in the Proposed Plan does not guarantee that a site will be developed or redeveloped at the assumed density during the planning period, as future development will rely primarily on each property owner’s initiative. Outside of the City limits, lands remain under the development control of Contra Costa County unless annexed. Rumrill Corridor Growth Projections Using parcel data from the Contra Costa County Assessor, vacant and underutilized parcels in the Corridor were identified as opportunity sites, or locations where change (i.e., new development or redevelopment) is most likely to occur during the planning horizon. Properties under City CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 2-20
ownership that may not be needed for municipal operations in the future were also taken into consideration. Using these criteria, a total of 24 opportunity sites were identified. The buildout calculations assume development on these parcels for the purpose of projecting a reasonably foreseeable estimate of development from the Rumrill Corridor Plan. The Planned Development/Infill Opportunity designation that would apply to the three City-owned sites in the south of the Corridor would create capacity for an additional 96 housing units. Opportunity sites in the Mixed Use Center West (MUC-W) designation are assumed to develop with residential uses at 60 units per net acre, consistent with recent trends in the area and the assumptions of the 2023-31 Housing Element. Additionally, the new MUC-W designation would permit a wider range of non-residential uses including not only retail, restaurant and services uses but also commercial recreation, food and beverage production facilities, a communal kitchen facility, and a food truck park. Corridor Plan policies support intensification at the intersection of Market and Rumrill. Accordingly, 182 additional jobs are projected at this location. Development of opportunity sites in the Employment Mixed Use designation is projected to result in 24 new production and repair oriented jobs by 2035, consistent with employment projections for the PDA from Plan Bay Area 2050. A detailed description of the methodology used for buildout projections is included in Appendix B. Overall, buildout of the Rumrill Corridor Plan is projected to result in 408 new housing units and 369 new jobs over the planning period. Citywide Growth Assumptions The Proposed Project is projected to result in 1,683 new homes and 2,610 new jobs in San Pablo by 2035. This accounts for the projected capacity of the City's 2023-31 Housing Element and employment growth projected in Plan Bay Area 2050, the regional transportation plan and sustainable communities strategy for the San Francisco Bay Area. It also accounts for development under the proposed Rumrill Corridor Plan, which involves General Plan Land Use changes that would increase development capacity in that part of San Pablo, consistent with City and regional growth objectives for Priority Development Areas. Outside of the Rumrill Corridor, the Proposed Plan would involve only minor General Plan land use changes proposed primarily to better reflect existing development. These minor changes would not affect development capacity. Comparison with 2030 General Plan EIR Projections The 2030 General Plan EIR assumed a total of 34,950 residents, 11,510 homes, and 8,510 jobs at buildout in 2030 and analyzed impacts in accordance with these totals. Based on population and housing estimates from the California Department of Finance (DoF) for 2024, the latest available data, there were 31,507 residents, 9,672 households, and 10,073 housing units in San Pablo on January 1, 2025. The latest available employment data is from the U.S. Census, which indicates that in 2022 there were 5,877 jobs in the city. Assuming an average household size of 3.2 persons and a vacancy rate of 4.0 percent consistent with DoF estimates, the addition of 1,683 new homes and 2,610 new jobs with implementation of the Proposed Plan, there would be 36,614 residents, 11,756 homes, and 8,487 jobs in the city in 2035 as shown in Table 2-1. This represents 246 housing units more than analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR, but 23 fewer jobs than previously analyzed. Accordingly, buildout of the Proposed Plan would result in a substantially similar increment of growth as analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR.
Chapter 2: Project Description
2-21
Ta bl e 2-1: Buildout Summary 2025 - 2035 Residents Housing Units Jobs Existing 31,507 10,073 5,877 Net New (Rumrill Corridor) 1,253 408 369 Net New (Citywide) 5,107 1,683 2,610 2035 T otal 36,614 11,756 8,487 2030 General Plan EIR Projection 34,950 11,510 8,510 Difference 246 -23 §¨¦80
City of
Richmond
!
Rumrill
Boulevard
PDA
City of
Richmond
21ST ST
11TH
ST
SAN
PABLO
AVE
17TH
ST
VALE RD
DOVER AVE
20TH
ST
STANTON AVE
PINE AVE
MINER AVE
19TH
ST
16TH
ST
15TH
ST
AM
ADOR ST
RIVERS ST
SUTTER AVE
EMERIC AVE
12TH
ST
14TH
ST
HILLCREST RD
ROLLINGWOOD DR
13TH
ST
SANFORD AVE
LAKE ST
RIDGE RD
CALIFORNIA AVE
22N
D
ST
18TH ST
BUSH AVE
JOHN AVE
WILLOW RD
ALPINE RD
BROOK WAY
PALMER AVE
TYLER ST
ESPANOLA CT
VAN
N
ESS ST
PO
W
ELL ST
ARUNDEL WAY
DEVON WAY
MARIN AVE
M
ASO
N
ST
WILCOX AVE
STANDARD ST
POST AVE
CHEVY WAY
ALFREDA BLVD
STONE ST
BAYO
VISTA AVE
KELLEY AVE
FO
RD
H
AM
ST
G
REEN
W
O
O
D
D
R
MANOR DR
YUBA AVE
M
AN
CH
ESTER AVE
PULLM
AN
ST
FOLSOM AVE
MISSION AVE
AVO
N
LN
VILLA DR
M
ISSIO
N BELL DR
M
ACARTHUR AVE
MORROW DR
BEAU RIVAGE
BOWHILL LN
DOUGLAS ST
MIFLIN AVE
TRENTON BLVD
BONITA RD
M
ERRITT AVE
GLENLOCK ST
DEL CAM
IN
O
D
R
FILLM
O
RE ST
PABLO VISTA AVE
LOVEGROVE AVE
GLENN AVE
COLIN ST
ACAPULCO DR
MARELIA CT
BAN
CRO
FT LN
MONTOYA AVE
VEN
TURA AVE
ABELLA CIR
CLARE ST
JO
EL CT
GERALD AVE
EVENS AVE
MANZANILLA DR
CARLFIELD STCO
RTE ST
OHARE AVE
CONTRA COSTA AVE
CASINO AVE
RUMRILL RD
WYMAN ST
RIVERSIDE AVE
REGINA AVE
BARRAN
CA ST
HUM
BOLDT ST
E VICTO
RIA CT
SHASTA AVE
HARBO
RVIEW
AVE
CLEMENT AVE
CONNECTICUT AVE
CHATTLETON LN
UNIVERSITY AVE
BARBARA LN
KIRK LN
JEAN CT
MADRONE WAY
W
ESTG
ATE CIR
W
VICTO
RIA CT
FRIED
A CT
BRO
O
KSID
E AVE
M
O
N
TE BUEN
A ST
DO
DSO
N
ST
JU
D
ITH
CT
WANLASS AVE
DRAKE W
AY
LARCH
M
O
N
T LN
18TH
ST
19TH ST
20TH
ST
19TH
ST
BUSH AVE
15TH
ST
15TH
ST
21ST ST
18TH
ST
SHASTA AVE
GLENN AVE
17TH ST
M
ERRITT AVE
RIVERSIDE AVE
14TH
ST
18TH
ST
DOVER AVE
19TH
ST
22N
D
ST
MASON ST
15TH
ST
16TH
ST
17TH ST
POST AVE
LAKE ST
20TH
ST
21ST ST
RIVERS ST
YUBA AVE
19TH
ST
22N
D
ST
16TH
ST
17TH
ST
MINER AVE
ROSE ARBOR A VE
Bayview A ve
BOLDUC C T
CAPITO
LH
ILL AVE
W ESTVIEW
PL
N
ARLINGTONBLVD
H
ILLCREST
RD
M
IFFIN
AVE
EL PORTAL DR SAN PABLO DAM RD
ROAD 20
ROAD 20
BROOKSIDE DR
MARKET AVE
MARKET ST
CHURCH LN
CHURCH LN
23R
D
ST
VALENCIA W
AY
BROADW
AY
ROAD 20 RUMRILL BLVD
CHESLEY AVE
RICHMOND PKWY
RICHMOND PKWY
City
Hall
Contra Costa
College
John
Herbert
Davis Park
San Pablo
Lytton
Casino
St. Joseph
Cemetery &
Funeral Center
Wanlass
Park
Rheem Creek
San Pablo Creek
Wildcat Creek
SanPablo Creek
Wildca t Cr eek
San Pablo Creek
BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RR
UNION PACIFIC RR
SOURCE: City of San Pablo, 2025; Contra Costa County GIS, 2025; Dyett & Bhatia, 2025
0 0.2 0.40.1
Miles
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed Use Center South
Mixed Use Center West
Commercial Mixed Use
Industrial Mixed Use
Employment Mixed Use
Planned Development
Regional Commercial
Parks/Recreation
Public/Institutional
Proposed General Plan
Land Use Changes
J:\GISData\581_SanPablo_GP\GIS\Projects\PDA_Rumrill\CEQA\Figure 2-7 Proposed General Plan Land Use Changes.mxd Figure 2-7:
City Limits
Sphere of Influence
Rumrill Boulevard PDA
Major Roads
Minor Roads
Railroads
3-1
3 Environmental Analysis The purpose of the Environmental Checklist is to evaluate each of the environmental resource categories in CEQA Appendix G in terms of any changed condition (e.g., changed circumstances, project changes, or new information of substantial importance) that may result in a changed environmental result (e.g., a new significant impact or substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect) (CEQA Guidelines § 15152). The questions posed in the checklist come from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. A “no” answer does not necessarily mean that there are no potential impacts relative to the environmental category, but that there is no change in the condition or status of the impact since it was analyzed and addressed with mitigation measures in the previous EIR. These environmental categories might be answered with a “no” in the checklist, since the proposed project does not introduce changes that would result in a modification to the conclusion of the previous EIR. EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST EVALUATION 1. Conclusion in Prior EIR. This column summarizes the conclusion of the previous EIR relative to the environmental issue listed under each topic. Pursuant to Section 21094, subdivision (a) of the Public Resources Code, this column indicates whether the impacts were mitigated or avoided pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 as a result of the prior environmental document. This is a two-part checklist question, which asks whether the impact is potentially significant 1) before mitigation and 2) after mitigation. 2. Mitigation Measures. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(3), this column indicates whether the previous EIR provides mitigation measures to address effects in the related impact category. Any previously adopted mitigation measures will be identified. The response will also address proposed revisions to previously adopted mitigation measures. These mitigation measures will be implemented with the construction of the project, as applicable. If “NA” is indicated, the previous EIR has concluded that the impact either does not occur with this project or is not significant, therefore, no additional mitigation measures are needed. 3. Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15152, subd. (f) and 15162, subd. (a)(1), this column indicates whether the changes represented by the revised project will result in new significant environmental impacts not previously identified or mitigated by the previous EIR or whether the changes will result in a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact. 4. New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(2), this column indicates whether there have been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-2
5. New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, subd. (a)(3)(A-D), this column indicates whether new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was adopted, shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or ND; b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. If the additional analysis completed as part of this environmental review were to find that the conclusions of the previous EIR remain the same and no new significant impacts are identified, or identified impacts are not found to be substantially more severe, or additional mitigation is not necessary, then the question would be answered “no” and no additional environmental document would be required. DISCUSSION AND MITIGATION SECTIONS The following sections include three components for each environmental checklist question: (1) discussion of each checklist question and any potential impacts to the environment, (2) any mitigation measures required, and (3) a conclusion of the analysis. Each component is further described below: 1. Discussion. A discussion of the elements of the checklist is provided under each environmental category in order to clarify the answers. The discussion provides information about the particular environmental issue, how the project relates to the issue, and the status of any mitigation that may be required or that has already been implemented. Pursuant to Section 21094, subdivision (a) of the Public Resources Code, the discussion indicates whether the prior environmental document examined potential environmental impacts at a sufficient level of detail to enable those effects to be mitigated or avoided by site specific revisions, by the imposition of conditions, or by other means in connection with the approval of the later project. Additionally, pursuant to Section 15152, subdivision (f)(1)-(2) of the CEQA Guidelines, the discussion indicates whether a cumulative effect has been adequately addressed in the prior EIR and need not be discussed in detail. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15152, subd. (f)(1).) Where assessing whether there is a new significant cumulative effect, the lead agency shall consider whether the incremental effects of the project would be considerable when viewed in the context of past, present, and probable future projects. At this point, the question is not whether there is a significant cumulative impact, but whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15152, subd. (f)(2).) Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-3
2. Applicable Mitigation Measures. Applicable mitigation measures from the previous EIR that apply to the proposed project are listed under each environmental category. 3. Conclusions. A discussion of the conclusion relating to the analysis is contained in each section. ENVIRONMENTAL TOPICS The following topics are evaluated in accordance with current CEQA Guidelines: • Aesthetics, Light, and Glare • Agricultural Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources • Geology, Seismicity, and Soils • Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Mineral Resources • Noise • Population and Housing • Public Services and Recreation • Transportation • Utilities and Service Systems • Wildfire • CEQA Required Conclusions CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-4
3.1 Aesthetics Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant None No No No b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway; Less than Significant None No No No
c. If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; or Less than Significant None No No No d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-5
DISCUSSION a) Scenic Vistas Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR notes that there are no regional scenic features or formally designated scenic roadways in San Pablo. Given that the development under the General Plan 2030 would be required to comply with design guidelines and General Plan policies that are intended to maintain and improve the overall scenic quality of San Pablo, the 2030 GP EIR found that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to scenic vistas. Analysis of Proposed Project Development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with existing and updated General Plan policies that would reduce the impact, such as 2030 General Plan Policy LU-I-68 that would protect the semi-rural character of the hillside area through the integration and balance of usable open space areas and residential uses, as well as Policy OSC-I-2 that would identify, preserve, and enhance scenic vistas to and from hillside areas and other visual resources. New development from the Proposed Project would be designed to minimize obstructions of scenic vistas and preserve or enhance important attributes of view corridors; therefore, impacts to scenic vistas under the Proposed Project would be less than significant. The Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) State Scenic Highways Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to degradation of scenic views within designated State scenic highways, as there are no designated State scenic highways within the Project Area. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. The Proposed Project would not allow development adjacent or near an officially State-designated scenic highway as there are no State-designated highways within the Project Area or in San Pablo. As such, impacts to State-designated scenic highways under the Proposed Project would be less than significant. The Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-6
c) Public Views Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR found that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to the creation of significant contrasts related to visual character, as adherence to the City’s design guidelines and the additional standards in the 2030 General Plan governing design and character would ensure compatibility with existing character. Analysis of Proposed Project Based on the CEQA guidelines, in urbanized areas such as the Project Area, significant impacts related to conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality would result if the Proposed Project was inconsistent with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, a special planning subarea envisioned in the General Plan 2030, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. Development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the standards in the San Pablo Zoning Code, including new objective standards that would be adopted by the City Council pursuant to Program 1-K of the 2023-31 Housing Element, which calls for the adoption of objective standards to help streamline project approvals. Compliance with zoning standards and related programs would ensure that impacts under the Proposed Project would be less than significant, as with the 2030 General Plan. As such, the Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Light and Glare Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in a less-than-significant impact related to the creation of new source of substantial light or glare, as General Plan policies (including PSCU-I-7) and existing regulations would reduce the potential for new or significant sources of light pollution or glare in San Pablo to a less than significant level. Analysis of Proposed Project Development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with General Plan policy and applicable regulations, including the standards in Chapter 17.56 of the San Pablo Municipal Code, which include requirements for nuisance prevention, maintenance, shielding, maximum height, and level of illumination. Further, the Proposed Project also sets out to create an attractive gateway into San Pablo at the intersection of Market and Rumrill, where development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with unified gateway design palette and guidelines that address streetscape, signage, lighting, and building massing to heighten sense of place at gateway (Action RUM-2.c). Compliance with Municipal Code, Proposed Project policies and Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-7
actions, and applicable regulations would ensure that impacts related to substantial light or glare under the Proposed Project would be less than significant, similar to the 2030 General Plan. As such, the Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted land use changes that would alter the scale, density, and character of urban areas and neighborhoods could change the visual character of many areas in the region, especially where development would occur on visually prominent hillsides or in existing rural or open space lands. However, due to the built-out nature of San Pablo, the lack of undeveloped hillsides in the Planning Area, and the attention to preserving existing residential neighborhoods through policies and land use design, the General Plan 2030’s contribution to this potentially significant cumulative impact is not cumulatively considerable. Analysis of Proposed Project Implementation of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with General Plan policy and applicable regulations regarding aesthetics. Land use changes would alter the scale, density, and character of the Rumrill Corridor, and in general, would improve visual character and public views of this neighborhood in San Pablo. Further, there are no State-designated scenic highways within the Project Area nor San Pablo; therefore, there would be less than significant impacts related to scenic highways under the Proposed Project. Compliance with policies and land use design governing aesthetics would make the Proposed Project’s contribution to this potentially significant cumulative impact is not cumulatively considerable. As such, the Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to aesthetics and visual resources. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-8
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?; Scoped Out None No No No
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Scoped Out None No No No c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g)); Scoped Out None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-9
DISCUSSION a-e) Agricultural Resources Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Section 3.1 Land Use of the 2030 GP EIR noted that based on data from the California Department of Conservation, there is no Farmland, Williamson Act lands, or land protected for agriculture uses in San Pablo; buildout of the 2030 General Plan and land use changes would focus growth on existing urban infill sites. Analysis of Proposed Project Since the certification of the previous EIR, California Department of Conservation California Important Farmland circumstances and conditions have not changed within San Pablo1; therefore, there is no Farmland, Williamson Act lands, or land protected for agriculture uses within the Rumrill Corridor Project Area. As such, impacts would be the same as under the 2030 GP EIR and less than significant. No additional analysis is required. 1 California Department of Conservation, 2022. California Important Farmland Finder. Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed: December 16, 2024.
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or Scoped Out None No No No e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
Scoped Out None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-10
f) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted there are no known agriculture resources or land protected for agriculture uses within San Pablo or the Planning Area, and therefore the 2030 General Plan has no impact to agriculture resources or land protected for agriculture uses. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan that are not focused on agriculture and forest resources. As such, the Proposed Project would not contribute to or result in the loss of Farmland, Williamson Act lands, or land protected for agriculture uses; therefore, the Proposed Project has no impact to agriculture resources. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.3 Air Quality Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; Less than Significant None No No No Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-11
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; Significant and Unavoidable None No No No
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; Less than Significant None No No No d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people; Not analyzed None No No No
DISCUSSION Appendix A Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions includes a detailed summary of the data used in this analysis. a) Conflicts with Adopted Air Quality Plans Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR analyzed air quality impacts under Section 3.3, Air Quality. The EIR determined that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would be consistent with goals and control measures of the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan, and impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project A project that would not support the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) 2017 Clean Air Plan’s goals would not be considered consistent with the plan. On an individual project basis, consistency with BAAQMD’s quantitative thresholds is interpreted as demonstrating support for the 2017 Clean Air Plan’s goals. The Proposed Project would facilitate construction of medium and high-density housing along one of San Pablo’s key commercial corridor, Rumrill Corridor, in CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-12
proximity to transit and services. The Proposed Project would also include targeted revisions and technical amendment to the General Plan, such as revised Growth Management Implementation policies and updated information on major transportation improvements, and adopted transportation plans. By focusing development in established areas next to existing transit and services, development facilitated by the Proposed Project would reduce the use of personal vehicles and subsequent mobile emissions than if development were placed further from transit and services. In addition, development facilitated by the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 regulations, including requirements for residential indoor air quality. The analysis is based on compliance with 2022 Title 24 requirements (individual projects developed under the plan would be required to comply with the most current version of Title 24 at the time of project construction). These requirements currently mandate Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 (or equivalent) filters for heating/cooling systems and ventilation systems in residences or implementation of future standards that would be anticipated to be equal to or more stringent than current standards. Therefore, the Proposed Project would improve air quality compared to development farther from transit and services through reducing VMT per capita compared to the existing condition and would protect public health through stringent requirements for MERV-13 filters or equivalent indoor air quality measures, which would be consistent with the primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The project’s consistency with applicable control measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan is shown in Table 3.3-1. Ta bl e 3.3-1: Proposed Project Consistency with Applicable 2017 Plan Control Measures Clean Air Plan Control Measures Consistency Transpor tation TR9: Bicycle and Pedestrian Access and Facilities. Encourage planning for bicycle and pedestrian facilities in local plans, e.g., general and specific plans, fund bike lanes, routes, paths and bicycle parking facilities.
Consistent: The Proposed Project would locate higher density residential development in proximity to employment, shopping, transit, recreation, and other services. Goal C-G-4 of the San Pablo General Plan 2030 aims to develop a safe and comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network. Policies C-I-9 and C-I-10 call for expanding the bicycle system and routes. Policies C-I-31 and C-I-32 of the San Pablo General Plan 2030 would complete and enhance the pedestrian network and provide pedestrian facilities. By placing future residents in proximity to bicycle lanes and pedestrian facilities, the project would facilitate pedestrian and bicycle circulation and minimize automobile trip generation. T12: Parking Policies. Encourage parking policies and programs in local plans, e.g., reduce minimum parking requirements; limit the supply of off-street parking in transit-oriented areas; unbundle the price of parking spaces; support Consistent: The Proposed Project would prioritize a comprehensive parking management strategy (Goal RUM-9) for the Project Area. Specifically, the Proposed Project sets out for a balanced supply of parking along the Corridor Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-13
Clean Air Plan Control Measures Consistency implementation of demand-based pricing (such as “SF Park”) in high-traffic areas. that supports business vitality, walkability, and healthy air quality. Actions include implementation of a parking management plan for events at the Rumrill Sports Complex, a review off-street parking standards and identification of opportunities to optimize the use of space devoted to parking, and monitoring of spillover parking into residential neighborhoods and establishment of a residential parking permit program if warranted. Energy EN2: Decrease Electricity Demand. Work with local governments to adopt additional energy-efficiency policies and programs. Support local government energy efficiency program via best practices, model ordinances, and technical support. Work with partners to develop messaging to decrease electricity demand during peak times.
Consistent: Future development facilitated under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with San Pablo General Plan 2030 Policy OSC-I-25, which requires the promotion of energy efficiency in architectural design for new construction. Additionally, the Proposed Project also encourages the use of innovative and cost-effective building materials and construction methods, as well as energy and water conservation measures to conserve resources and reduce the cost of residential development (Policy RUM-3.4). Buildings BL1: Green Buildings. Collaborate with partners such as KyotoUSA to identify energy-related improvements and opportunities for on-site renewable energy systems in school districts; investigate funding strategies to implement upgrades. Identify barriers to effective local implementation of the CALGreen (Title 24) statewide building energy code; develop solutions to improve implementation/enforcement. Work with ABAG’s BayREN program to make additional funding available for energy-related projects in the buildings sector. Engage with additional partners to target reducing emissions from specific types of buildings.
Consistent: Future development facilitated by the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the energy and sustainability standards of Title 24 (including the California Energy Code and CALGreen). For example, the current CALGreen standards require a minimum 65 percent diversion of construction/demolition waste. Additionally, Housing Element Policy 5-3 encourages the use of building placement, design, and construction techniques that promote energy conservation, including green building practices, the use of recycled materials, and the recycling of construction and demolition debris. BL4: Urban Heart Island Mitigation. Develop and urge adoption of a model ordinance for “cool parking” that promotes the use of cool surface treatments for new parking facilities, as well existing surface lots undergoing resurfacing. Develop and promote adoption of model building code requirements for new construction or re-roofing/roofing upgrades for commercial and residential multi-family housing. Collaborate with expert partners to perform outreach to cities Consistent. Future development pursuant to the Proposed Project requires landscaping plans and the incorporation of low impact design techniques for development proposals and encourage site designs that include shade trees, living walls, rain gardens, use of native and drought-resistant plantings, permeable pavement, and green roofs to enhance environmental quality and mitigate urban heat along the Corridor (Policy RUM-10.4).
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-14
Clean Air Plan Control Measures Consistency and counties to make them aware of cool roofing and cool paving techniques, and of new tools available. Natural and Working Lands NW: Urban Tree Planting. Develop or identify an existing model municipal tree planting ordinance and encourage local governments to adopt such an ordinance. include tree planting recommendations the air District’s technical guidance, best practices for local plans and CEQA review.
Consistent. The Proposed Project sets the City out to update City standards to require shade trees and landscaping in surface parking lots and public plazas, considering the benefits for environmental quality and urban heat mitigation together with the financial feasibility of development projects (Action RUM-10.c). Water WR2: Support Water Conservation. Develop a list of best practices that reduce water consumption and increase on-site water recycling in new and existing buildings; incorporate into local planning guidance.
Consistent: Future development requiring new or expanded water service would be required to comply with the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s (EBMUD) water efficiency regulations, which include water use restrictions and water efficient irrigation rules. As shown in Table 3.3-1, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan as development would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 regulations and would increase density in urban areas, allowing for greater use of alternative modes of transportation. Development facilitated by the Proposed Project does not contain elements that would disrupt or hinder implementation of a 2017 Clean Air Plan control measures. Therefore, the project would conform to this determination of consistency for the 2017 Clean Air Plan and would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 GP EIR. b) Increase Criteria Pollutant Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR analyzed criteria pollutant emissions under Section 3.3, Air Quality. The analysis determined that implementation of the proposed San Pablo General Plan could result in an increase in VMT at a rate that would exceed the rate of population increase, which would exceed the BAAQMD plan-level threshold. The EIR discussed how General Plan policies would assist in reducing VMT and thus reducing emissions; however, impacts were assessed as significant and unavoidable. Analysis of Proposed Project According to the BAAQMD 2022 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, the threshold for criteria air pollutants and precursors includes an assessment of the rate of increase of plan VMT versus population growth. To result in a less than significant impact, the analysis must show that the plan’s projected VMT increase would be less than or equal to its projected population increase. Table 3.3- Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-15
2 summarizes the net increase in population versus VMT based on VMT modeling conducted by Kittleson & Associates. Population under the plan would increase at a rate of 11 percent, while VMT would increase at a rate of 6 percent. Therefore, under the Proposed Project, the VMT per capita is more efficient than the existing condition. This would result in a less than significant impact per the BAAQMD threshold, and the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. No additional analysis is required. Ta bl e 3.3-2: Increase in Population Compared to VMT Under Proposed Project Scenario Existing (2020) Project (2031) Net Increase Percent Change Population 36,414 40,582 4,168 11% Vehicle Miles Traveled 841,253 894,661 53,408 6% Source: Kittleson & Associates, 2025 c) Sensitive Receptors Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR analyzed TACs under Section 3.3, Air Quality. Citing implementation of land use diagrams to identify health risk overlay zones around existing and planned sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and policies to require site-specific project design improvements to reduce public health risks for projects within a health risk overlay zone, impacts were determined to be less than significant. The EIR did not analyze construction TAC emissions. Analysis of Proposed Project Future projects facilitated by the Proposed Project would also be required to be consistent with the applicable 2017 Clean Air Plan, BAAQMD regulatory requirements and control strategies, and the CARB In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which are intended to reduce emissions from construction equipment and activities. Therefore, construction-related TACs exposure impacts would be less than significant, and the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more significant construction impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. Future development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be required to comply with San Pablo General Plan 2030 Policy OSC-I-19, which calls for the City to work with BAAQMD to develop and implement a Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) to address the exposure of sensitive populations to toxic air contaminant emissions in San Pablo. Therefore, operational impacts from TAC emissions would be less than significant, and the plan would not result in new or substantially more significant operational impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. d) Odors Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Odors were not discussed in the 2030 GP EIR.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-16
Analysis of Proposed Project Since the Proposed Project would not include major facilities and operations likely to cause substantial odors, development facilitated by the Rumrill Corridor Plan would not generate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people during operation, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. e) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Implementation of the San Pablo General Plan could result in an increase in VMT at a rate that would exceed the rate of population increase within the City. The General Plan includes many of the measures identified by the BAAQMD as applicable to reduce air quality impacts of general plans. Unfortunately, transportation modeling is unable to account for the positive influence of these policy and land use design choices. Based strictly on the transportation modeling conducted for the 2030 General Plan in accordance with BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, vehicle travel is forecast to increase at a faster rate than population, and therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. The 2030 General Plan is consistent with Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)’s and ABAG’s transit-oriented development goals in which urban development is directed toward existing urban infill sites near transit corridors in order to avoid the loss of open space. The significant impacts related to the 2030 General Plan would not be considerably different under any other likely growth scenario for San Pablo that accommodates planned approved residential and non-residential development proposed for the city. Moreover, emissions of several criteria pollutants are expected to decrease by 2030 even with population growth and increased VMT because of fuel efficiency standards. This suggests that the 2030 General Plan will create only a minimal contribution to the overall regional cumulative impacts of criteria air pollutant emissions. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. Development under the Proposed Project would be subject to the same regulatory mechanisms as detailed in the prior EIR. Further, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable measures in the 2017 Clean Air Plan as development would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 regulations and would increase density in urban areas, allowing for greater use of alternative modes of transportation. Under the Proposed Project, the VMT per capita is more efficient than the 2030 General Plan. This would result in a less than significant impact per the BAAQMD threshold, and the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. As such, these impacts are assumed to be less than cumulatively considerable. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more cumulative severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-17
APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to air quality. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.4 Biological Resources Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Less than Significant None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-18
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Less than Significant None No No No
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means; Less than Significant None No No No
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites; Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-19
DISCUSSION a) Special-Status Species Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would have a less than significant impact on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species, as habitat for sensitive species (monarch butterfly, California red-legged frog, the western pond turtle, the San Pablo song sparrow, and the Bridges coast range shoulderband snail) is limited within the urbanized context of the City of San Pablo. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would facilitate construction of medium- and high-density housing and businesses along one of San Pablo’s key commercial corridor, Rumrill Corridor, in proximity to transit and services. Special status species within the Rumrill Corridor Plan area are shown in Figure 3.4-1. The Proposed Project does not involve development along the creeks. As with the 2030 GP EIR, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the following General Plan policies which would reduce potential impacts on special-status species possibly Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or Less than Significant None No No No
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less than Significant None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-20
present in the Project Area would be reduced to less-than-significant levels : OSC-I-4, OSC-I-5, OSC-I-6, OSC-I-7, OSC-I-8, OSC-I-9, OSC-I-10, and OSC-I-11. These policies protect and enhance wetlands, creek systems, and rare and endangered species and their habitats, as well as protect water supply and quality through conservation and good stormwater management practices. Additionally, the policies call for the City to coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, California Department of Fish and Game, and Regional Water Quality Control Board to ensure City staff is providing developers with the best guidance and standards for project design to avoid impacts to creeks, wetland features, woodlands, or other sensitive natural features. There have been no changes in circumstances or new information such that new or more substantially severe impacts to special status species would result. Thus, similar to the findings in the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impact to special status species. No additional analysis is required. b) Sensitive Habitat Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would have a less than significant impact on riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities. Riparian corridors associated with both San Pablo Creek and Wildcat Creek are identified as sensitive natural communities by the CNDDB and Significant Ecological Resource Areas by the Contra Costa County General Plan. Potential impacts on riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities are possibly present in San Pablo Creek and Wildcat Creek would be reduced to less-than-significant levels through General Plan policies listed under Biological Resources Criterion 3.4-a. These policies prohibit the use of invasive plant species, such as pampas grass and ivies, adjacent to wetlands, riparian areas, or other sensitive habitat. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would facilitate construction of medium- and high-density housing along one of San Pablo’s key commercial corridor, Rumrill Corridor, in proximity to transit and services. The Proposed Project does not involve development in riparian areas along the creeks. Further, development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with Policy RUM-10.3, where top-of creek setback requirements of at least 25 feet are required for new structures along Wildcat Creek. This would allow for the preservation and enhancement of biological and riparian resources along Wildcat Creek. There have been no changes in circumstances or new information such that new or more substantially severe impacts to sensitive habitats would result. Thus, similar to the findings in the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impact to riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities. No additional analysis is required. c) Wetlands Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would have a less than significant impact on state of federally protected wetlands.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-21
Analysis of Proposed Project Wildcat Creek passes through the northern portion of Project Area along Folsom Avenue from east-west. Potential impacts on wetlands are possibly present as development and redevelopment of property within the Project Area could increase surface runoff and could increase seasonal flows within the creeks, which could impact the jurisdictional waters. However, new development and redevelopment involving 5,000 square feet or more would be required to comply with Provision C.3 of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board's Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit. Provision C.3 requires site designs for new developments and redevelopments to minimize the area of new roofs and paving by implementing best management practices. Runoff should be dispersed to landscaping where possible. Where feasible, pervious pavements can be used so that runoff can infiltrate to the underlying soil. Remaining runoff from roofs and pavement must be treated using bio-retention. In some developments, the rates and durations of site runoff must also be controlled. In addition, project applicants must execute agreements to maintain stormwater treatment and flow-control facilities in perpetuity. Further, individual developments under the Proposed Project would also be required to prepare landscaping plans that incorporate low impact design techniques and encourage site designs that include shade trees, living walls, rain gardens, use of native and drought-resistant plantings, permeable pavement, and green roofs to enhance environmental quality and mitigate urban heat along the Corridor (Policy RUM-10.4). Development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with these requirements, which would limit increases in runoff to the maximum extent practicable. Thus, similar to the findings in the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impact on wetlands and other jurisdictional waters. No additional analysis is required. d) Wildlife Corridors Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would have a less than significant impact on migratory fish or wildlife species. While implementation of the 2030 General Plan has the potential to affect migratory and breeding birds through building collisions and increases in nighttime lighting, the Planning Area is an urbanized area with buildings and nighttime lighting. The anticipated development intensification due to the implementation of the 2030 General Plan would not substantially increase building heights or night lighting levels beyond those that now exist such that a substantial increase in bird strikes or disruption of migratory patterns would result. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would facilitate construction of medium and high-density housing along one of San Pablo’s key commercial corridor, Rumrill Corridor, in proximity to transit and services. While most of the Project Area is developed and lacks habitat value for most species, Wildcat Creek represents an important wildlife corridor connecting the bay salt marsh habitats with undeveloped oak savannah and annual grasslands in the Oakland Hills. Development pursuant to the Proposed Project is not anticipated to directly modify this riparian habitat, but increased water pollution or noise levels which could impact wildlife within the riparian corridors of the Wildcat Creek. General Plan policy PSCU-I-6 would work to reduce the overall impact of light pollution and glare as noted
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-23
in Aesthetics Criterion 3.1-d, which would help to ensure that lighting for new development is held to high design standards for light pollution reduction. Additionally, the San Pablo Municipal Code Chapter 17.56 regulates lighting to balance the safety and security needs for lighting with the City’s desire to preserve dark skies and to ensure that light trespass and glare have negligible impact on surrounding property especially residential, roadways, and animals. Further, as discussed in Biological Resources Criterion 3.3-d, new development and redevelopment involving 5,000 square feet or more would be required to comply with Provision C.3 of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board's Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit. Provision C.3 requires site designs for new developments and redevelopments to minimize the area of new roofs and paving by implementing best management practices. Individual developments under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with these requirements, which would limit increases in runoff to the maximum extent practicable. As such, there have been no changes in circumstances or new information such that new or more substantially severe impacts to migratory fish and wildlife species would result. Thus, similar to the findings in the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impact to migratory fish and wildlife species. No additional analysis is required. e&f) Policies and Ordinances, Habitat Conservation Plans Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would have a less than significant impact on conflict with local policies, ordinances, an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), or Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) as there are no HCPs nor NCCP within the Planning Area. Analysis of Proposed Project Since the adoption of the 2030 GP EIR, the City of San Pablo has adopted a Trees, Shrubs, and Plants in Public Places ordinance (Chapter 12.16), that regulates any tree, shrub or plant growing in or on public ground. Chapter 12.16 states a permit is required to trim, cut, remove or plant any plant species. Further, any development pursuant to the Proposed Project, would be required to follow guidelines established in the City of San Pablo’s Master Landscape Plan that regulates and oversees planting and maintenance of trees and shrubs. Additionally, there have been no adopted HCP, NCCP, or no changes in circumstances or new information such that new or more substantially severe impacts to the conflict of regulations would result.2 Development from the Proposed Project comply with the City’s Floodplain Management and Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance and implement appropriate mitigation measures to minimize surface water run-off. Thus, similar to the findings in the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impact to conflict of regulations. No additional analysis is required. 2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2024. Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP). Available: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/NCCP. Accessed: January 2, 2024.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-24
g) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted the San Pablo General Plan and other future projects within the cumulative geographic context are required to comply with local, state, and federal laws and policies and all applicable permitting requirements of the regulatory and oversight agencies intended to address potential impacts on biological resources, including wetlands, other waters of the United States, and special-status species. Additionally, as noted in the previous EIR, new projects would be required to mitigate significant effects on these biological resources to the extent feasible, although it is possible that some projects may be approved even though they would have significant, unavoidable impacts on biological resources. Unmitigated significant noise and lighting impacts resulting from the implementation of the General Plan and other reasonably foreseeable projects, combined with existing conditions resulting in part from past development, could increase the aggregate effect and be considered cumulatively significant. However, the 2030 GP EIR impact analysis has shown that the General Plan has the potential for relatively minor impacts on biological resources and that these impacts can be minimized to less than significant levels through the application of the General Plan Policies and proposed mitigation measures. When considered relative to all past, present, and reasonably foreseeable similar projects within the geographic context for this analysis, the incremental contribution of the General Plan to an already existing cumulative impact would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the cumulative effect of the General Plan on biological resources would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Reasonably foreseeable future development that may occur in and around the Project Area could have impacts on biological resources, including the loss of habitat. However, the Proposed Project would not propose any substantial changes to construction or operation activities that could have the potential to conflict with the identified biological resources impacts beyond those analyzed in the previous EIR. Further, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be required to adhere to applicable policies and ordinances related to the protection of biological resources. Development resulting from the Proposed Project, as well as future development projects that could occur within the Project Area or in the vicinity of the Project Area, would be subject to the requirements of biological resource protection laws, including Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), California Endangered Species Act (CESA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the California Fish and Game Code, as well as protection policies and provisions in the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code. With compliance with federal, state, and local regulations, the Proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative biological resources impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-25
CONCLUSION There is no additional information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to biological resources. The conclusions from the previous EIR regarding biological resources remain unchanged. 3.5 Cultural and Tribal Resources Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Cause a substantial change to the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5; Less than Significant None No No No b. Cause substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5; Less than Significant None No No No
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries Less than Significant None No No No d. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-26
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Not Analyzed None No No No
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Not Analyzed None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-27
DISCUSSION Appendix B Supporting Materials for Cultural Resources lists and describes all historic, archaeological, and tribal cultural resources NWIC identified in the City of San Pablo. Appendix C Supporting Materials for Tribal Cultural Resources includes correspondence with tribes. a-c) Historic Resources, Archeological Resources, and Human Remains Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR documented the presence of historic buildings and structures, including four properties that appear eligible for listing on the National Register and one property, the Alvarado Adobe, that is listed on the State Register. The 2030 GP EIR determined that implementation of General Plan policies OSC-I-13, involving the creation of a register of historic and potentially historic resources to serve as the basis for a local preservation program, and OSC-I-15, which requires records review, pre-construction surveys, and actions such as avoidance or preservation as appropriate, would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Continued implementation of these policies would ensure that potential impacts to historic resources from development under the Proposed Project would also be reduced to a less than significant level, as with the 2030 General Plan. Additionally, the 2030 GP EIR documented the existence of recorded Native American cultural resources (archaeological sites) and noted the high likelihood of as yet undiscovered archaeological and tribal cultural resources in the planning area, particularly in the vicinity of ridgelines, midslope terraces, alluvial flats, ecotones, and sources of water. The 2030 GP EIR determined that impacts to know cultural resources sites and as yet undiscovered resources as well as to undiscovered human remains would be reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with existing regulations, including PRC 5097 which establishes protocols for the protection of archaeological, paleontological, and historic sites and resources, as well as CEQA 15064.5, which further defines steps that must be taken to protect resources in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. Based on the records search, there is one recorded historic building/structures located throughout the Project Area, as shown on Figure 3.5-1. In addition, there are numerous properties more than 50 years old in the Project Area that have not yet been evaluated for historic significance and that may be eligible for listing on local, State, or national registers, resulting in a potentially significant level. As discussed in the previous EIR, there are known prehistoric and historic archaeological resources in and around the Project Area; therefore, there is a high potential for unrecorded historic period archaeological resources to be within the Project Area, resulting a potentially significant impact. Further, human remains, particularly those interred outside of formal cemeteries, could be disturbed during grading, excavation, or other ground-disturbing activities associated with future development or redevelopment projects allowed under the Proposed Project, also resulting in a potentially significant impact.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-29
Though the Project Area is mostly built out, which would reduce the likelihood of discovering unknown cultural resources, the risk remains. As such, if potentially significant cultural resources are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with project preparation, construction, or completion, work shall halt in that area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find, and, if necessary, develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with Contra Costa County and other appropriate agencies and interested parties, as noted in the 2030 GP EIR. For example, a qualified archaeologist shall follow accepted professional standards in recording any find including submittal of the standard Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Primary Record forms (Form DPR 523) and location-specific information to the California Historical Resources Information Center office (Northwestern Information Center). The consulting archaeologist shall also evaluate such resources for significance per California Register of Historical Resources eligibility criteria (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1; Title 14 CCR Section 4852). If the archaeologist determines that the find does not meet the CEQA standards of significance, construction shall proceed. On the other hand, if the archaeologist determines that further information is needed to evaluate significance, the Planning Department staff shall be notified, and a data recovery plan shall be prepared. All future development in the Project Area will be accordance with state laws pertaining to the discovery of human remains. Accordingly, if human remains of Native American origin are discovered during project construction, the developer and/or the Planning Department would be required to comply with state laws relating to the disposition of Native American burials, which fall within the jurisdiction of the Native American Heritage Commission (Pub. Res. Code Sec. 5097). If any human remains are discovered or recognized in any location on a project site, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until: A. The Contra Costa County Coroner/Sheriff has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required; and B. If the remains are of Native American origin: 1. The descendants of the deceased Native Americans have made a recommendation to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98; or 2. The Native American Heritage Commission was unable to identify a descendant or the descendant failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission. Development pursuant to the Proposed Project would also be required to comply with these regulations. Development under the Proposed Project would also be required to adhere to General Plan policy OSC-I-15 regarding cultural resources, which ensures that new development analyzes and avoids potential impacts to historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, by 1) requiring a records review for development proposed in areas that are considered archaeologically or paleontologically sensitive; 2) requiring pre-construction surveys and monitoring during any ground disturbance for all development in areas of historic or archaeological sensitivity; and 3) implementing appropriate measures as a condition of project approval— measures such as CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-30
avoidance, preservation in place, excavation, documentation, and/or data recovery—in order to avoid any identified cultural resource impacts. Overall, current federal and state laws as well as the policy OSC-I-15 in the General Plan would reduce these impacts to the maximum extent practicable on historic and archaeological resources, and human remains to less than significant levels. The Proposed Project does not reveal any significant changes and remains consistent with what was evaluated and disclosed in the previous EIR. As such, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Tribal Cultural Resources Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings In 2017, the State of California amended its CEQA Guidelines to require the analysis of impacts to Tribal Cultural resources, defined in the Public Resources Code as sites, features, places, geographically defined cultural landscapes, sacred places, or objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe. This represents a change in circumstances that could potentially result in new impacts not previously identified in the 2030 GP EIR. As part of the Proposed Project, the City of San Pablo requested a records search from the Northwest Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS). The City of San Pablo contains ten recorded Native American archaeological resources including tool processing sites, habitation sites, hearth or pits, burials, and two historic-period archaeological resources, including landscaping, fences, and a 1906 Earthquake Refugee camp. Based on evaluation of the environmental setting and features associated with known sites, there is a high potential for unrecorded Native American resources to be within the Planning Area. Analysis of Proposed Project In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code 21080.3.1, the City contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on November 15, 2022, with a request to facilitate involvement of interested Native American tribes in the planning process and a search of the Sacred Lands File for sites within the Planning Area. The NAHC responded on December 6, 2022, providing contact details and indicating that the results of the search of the Sacred Lands File were positive. On December 7, 2022, the City sent tribal outreach letters to the eight Native American representatives from seven tribes that were previously identified by the NAHC to consult on the Proposed Project. Of the tribes contacted, the Confederated Villages of Lisjan requested consultation and the City met with tribal representatives on January 18, 2023. Details of the recorded tribal cultural resources are included in Appendix C – Supporting Materials for Tribal Cultural Resources. Implementation of the Proposed Project would primarily involve infill development on previously disturbed sites; however, given that the NAHC Sacred Lands file search results were positive and the likelihood for undiscovered tribal cultural resources in the Project Area, the potential for accidental discovery during ground disturbing construction activities exists. As with the 2030 General Plan, implementation of General Plan policies and compliance with existing regulations would reduce the potential for damage, disturbance, or other adverse change to tribal cultural resources. Specifically, General Plan Policy OSC-I-16 would require records review, pre- Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-31
construction surveys, and actions such as avoidance or preservation as appropriate, while Policy OSC-I-17 call for the City to work with local Native American tribes to protect recorded and unrecorded cultural and sacred sites, and to educate developers and the community-at-large about the connections between Native American history and the environmental features that characterize the local landscape. Further, compliance with PRC 5097, which establishes protocols for the protection of archaeological, paleontological, and historic sites and resources, as well as CEQA 15064.5, which further defines steps that must be taken to protect resources in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery would be required. Therefore, overall, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts related to tribal cultural resources than analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR and impacts would be less than significant. No additional analysis is required. e) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted because the accommodation of future growth also constitutes a likelihood that future development will encounter challenges associated with known and unknown historic resources, there is the possibility of cumulative impacts to historical and archaeological resources, as well as disturbances to human remains, in the future in the context of regional growth and development. The City of San Pablo cannot be sure that all cumulative impacts on such historical resources and archaeological resources, as well as disturbances to human remains can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Consequently, the General Plan has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts to these cultural resources. However, with implementation of General Plan policies and state and federal law, the proposed Project’s contribution to this significant cumulative impact is not cumulatively considerable. Further, in 2017, the State of California amended its CEQA Guidelines to require the analysis of impacts to Tribal Cultural resources, defined in the Public Resources Code as sites, features, places, geographically defined cultural landscapes, sacred places, or objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe. This represents a change in circumstances that could potentially result in new cumulative impacts not previously identified in the 2030 GP EIR. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. As such, the Proposed Project, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in San Pablo, would still be required to adhere to the regulatory framework presented in the General Plan and Municipal Code for the preservation of cultural and historic resources. The same mitigation required in the previous EIR would also apply to the Proposed Project. As such, General Policy OSC-I-16, which requires that all proposed development within the Project Area undergo additional investigation to determine the project-level impact on the built environment’s historical resources, would ensure that the Project Area’s incremental contribution to this impact would not be cumulatively considerable. Further, any adverse effects to archaeological resources shall be mitigated as specified by PRC Section 21083, ensuring that any contribution to prehistoric and archaeological resources would CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-32
not be cumulatively considerable. All development in the Project Area would also be required to comply with State laws pertaining to the discovery of human remains and disposition of Native American burials, as well as applicable tribal consultation requirements. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s contribution to tribal cultural resource impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to cultural and tribal cultural resources. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.6 Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Climate Change Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-33
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? No Impact None No No No c. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; Less than Significant None No No No d. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than Significant None No No No
DISCUSSION a-b) Wasteful, Inefficient, and Unnecessary Energy / Conflict with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Regulation Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Analysis in the 2030 GP EIR indicated that implementation of the 2030 General Plan, combined with anticipated regional growth and improvements in vehicle technology, would result in a slight increase in per service population energy use (relative to existing conditions) related to residential, commercial, and industrial development, while at the same time a substantial decrease in per service population energy use (relative to existing conditions) from transportation, largely as a result of implementation of existing State policy. However, as new development is required to meet California’s Title 24 energy efficiency requirements, the 2030 GP EIR determined that development under the 2030 General Plan would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy and that, accordingly, no impact would result.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-34
Analysis of Proposed Project Since the adoption and certification of the 2030 General Plan, the City of San Pablo adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2012. San Pablo CAP contains goals and policies related to energy conservation, including compliance with Title 24 energy regulations and encouraging project design that increases energy efficiency during project construction or operation. Development of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the goals and policies in the San Pablo CAP, as well as the Title 24 regulations. The City of San Pablo General Plan also features several goals and policies regarding energy efficiency or renewable energy aside from those contained in the CAP. These include the following, which apply to the Proposed Project: amend the Zoning Ordinance to establish “green” parking design standards that have multiple benefits (C-I-46), support the efficient use and conservation of water (PSCU-G-6), and establish water saving and conservation standards for new development (PSCU-I-23). Further, the Proposed Project contains various goals, policies and programs that would apply to the consumption of energy resources and compliance with state/local plans for energy efficiency. Housing Element Policy 5-1 aims to have proactive energy conservation and waste reduction activities in all residential neighborhoods, by the promotion of energy conservation programs and incentives; Housing Element Policy 5-1 encourages the incorporation of energy conservation design features in existing and future residential developments to conserve resources and reduce housing costs; and Housing Element Policy 5-3 encourages the use of building placement, design, and construction techniques that promote energy conservation, including green building practices, the use of recycled materials, and the recycling of construction and demolition debris. Therefore, similar to the 2030 GP EIR, compliance with existing regulations and General Plan policies would ensure development under the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources and would avoid potential conflicts with adopted energy conservation plans. No additional analysis is required. c-d) Generate GHG Emissions, Conflict with Renewable Energy or Energy Efficiency Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR analyzed GHG emissions under Section 3.4, Energy and Greenhouse Gases. The criteria used for GHG emissions included exceeding the per service population (residents plus employees) threshold of 6.6 MT CO2e per year or conflicting with existing local, regional, or state efforts to implement AB 32 or SB 375. The EIR analysis determined that the GHG emissions per service population would not exceed the threshold, which would also make the 2030 General Plan consistent with GHG regulations. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project As discussed above, under the Proposed Project, the VMT per capita is more efficient than the existing condition. Therefore, per capita GHG emissions are anticipated to be less than analyzed under the 2030 General Plan EIR. Future development facilitated by the Proposed Project would also be located in proximity to transit. Additionally, future development would receive electricity Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-35
from PG&E, which complies with SB 100 that requires renewable portfolio standards of the utility to reach 60 percent by December 31, 2030, and 100 percent of retail sales from eligible renewables and zero-carbon resources by December 31, 2045. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on GHG emissions and with consistency with GHG plans and regulations, and the plan would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. No additional analysis is required. f) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR stated the total GHG emissions in San Pablo were expected to increase from about 196,000 MTCO2e then to 261,000 at General Plan buildout. While this represents about a third more emissions overall than existing conditions, it was only a slight increase in the per service population emissions rate, from 5.31 to 5.99 MTCO2e per year. The change in per service population emissions rate was a result of the difference between per capita rates associated with residential emissions and per job rates associated with non-residential emissions, and the difference in growth rates of residents and jobs. The per-job rates were higher than the per capita rates, and jobs were expected to grow faster in San Pablo than population. Nonetheless, this 2030 per service population rate was still below the BAAQMD threshold for a significant plan level impact (6.6 MTCO2e per year), which brings this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. The Proposed Project would facilitate construction of medium and high-density housing along one of San Pablo’s key commercial corridor, Rumrill Corridor, in proximity to transit and services, which would result in greater energy efficiency overall for Project Area residents and operations. Even so, construction and operation of the Proposed Project would result in the consumption of energy resources. However, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would still be required to adhere to the General Plan’s policies that support and reflect the increasingly stringent State and local goals and regulations that seek to increase energy efficiency, reduce energy consumption, and prioritize renewable energy. As such, the Proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. As discussed above, under the Proposed Project, the VMT per capita is more efficient than the existing condition of the 2030 General Plan; therefore, per capita GHG emissions are anticipated to be less than analyzed under the 2030 General Plan EIR. As such, the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts, and no additional analysis is required.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-36
APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to energy and greenhouse gas emissions. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.7 Geology and Soils Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
Less than Significant None No No No
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-37
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Mines and Geology Special Publication 42 ii. Strong seismic ground shaking; Less than Significant None No No No iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; Less than Significant None No No No iv. Landslides? Less than Significant None No No No b. Result in substantial soil erosion and topsoil loss; Less than Significant None No No No c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; Less than Significant None No No No
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial Less than Significant None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-38
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? direct or indirect risks to life or property; e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater; or Not analyzed None No No No
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than Significant None No No No
DISCUSSION a) Seismic Hazards (Fault Rupture, Ground Shaking, Liquefaction, Landslides) Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted given the extent of seismic hazards, the potential for loss or damage due to fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, and earthquake-induced landslides is high. The 2030 General Plan General Plan acknowledged the existence of the underlying risk related to fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslide that existed in the previous Planning Area and the surrounding region, and incorporated policies to proactively reduce it, including the creation of a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (Policy SN-I-1), the prohibition of critical or habitable development in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Hazard Zone around the Hayward Fault (Policy SN-I-2), and the identification of at-risk buildings (Policy SN-I-4), and promotion of State and federal funding sources to support necessary safety retrofits (Policy SN-I-5). The 2030 GP EIR found that implementation of these policies and mandatory compliance with existing regulations, including the construction standards established in the California Building Code (based on the Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-39
Uniform Building Code), the requirements of the City of San Pablo Municipal Code, would reduce vulnerability to an acceptable level that is less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Fault Rupture Buildout of the Proposed Project would not involve construction on sites within the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone show on Figure 3.7-1. However, in a seismically active area such as the San Francisco Bay Area, there is a small chance that future faulting could occur in areas where no faults previously had been mapped. Compliance with California Building Code regulations incorporated in the San Pablo Municipal Code and implementation of General Plan Safety Element policies would minimize the risk of loss or damage dure to fault rupture. California Building Code earthquake protection standards apply to all newly constructed structures as well as older pre-code buildings that need to be reinforced in order to lessen the impact of a severe seismic event. Additionally, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be required to adhere to Policies SN-I-2, SN-I-3, and SN-I-4, which would re individual projects to prohibit the development of critical or habitable structures within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, maintain and enforce appropriate standards in the Uniform Building Code to ensure new development is designed to meet current safety standards associated with seismic activity, and continue to identify and catalogue structures that may be subject to serious structural damage in the event of a major earthquake. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations and continued implementation of Safety Element policies would reduce potential impacts from surface fault rupture to the maximum extent practicable. Thus, the Proposed Project would have a less than significant impact with regards to adverse effects from fault rupture. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Ground Shaking The Project Area’s proximity to active local faults places it at risk for strong ground shaking. Development occurring under the Proposed Project would be required to conform to the current seismic design provisions of the 2022 California Building Code, adopted and incorporated into the San Pablo Municipal Code, which contains the latest seismic safety requirements to resist ground shaking through modern construction techniques. As such, compliance with existing regulations would reduce potential Proposed Project impacts from ground shaking to the maximum extent practicable. Thus, associated impacts would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Liquefaction The Project Area includes areas of high and very high liquefaction susceptibility, generally located adjacent to Wildcat Creek, which drains to the San Pablo Bay. Potential impacts from ground failure resulting from liquefaction would be addressed through site-specific geotechnical studies prepared in accordance with California Building Code requirements as adopted in Chapter 15.04, Uniform Construction Codes, and standard industry practices.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-40
While seismic hazards cannot be eliminated completely, adherence to the State and local regulatory requirements would minimize potential exposure of people and new structures to seismic hazard by requiring incorporation of hazard mitigation measures into project design. Therefore, the Proposed Project impacts due to liquefaction are less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Landslides Most of the Project Area is in an area of low landslide susceptibility. Further, development on within the Project Area with slope stability hazards would be subject to the provisions of the California Building Code, adopted and incorporated into the Municipal Code, which regulate analysis of slope instability and requirements for drainage and grading. Compliance with NPDES and local Municipal Code regulations would reduce impacts related to landslides. Associated impacts of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Soil Erosion Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil from the 2030 General Plan would be less than significant. The 2030 GP EIR notes the Soil Survey for Contra Costa County indicates the hazard of erosion of site soils varies from slight where gently sloping, to moderate in the hilly areas at the northern and eastern edges of the Planning Area. However, erosion hazards are highest during construction activities because excavation, backfilling, grading, and demolition can remove stabilizing vegetation and expose areas of loose soil that, if not properly stabilized, can be subject to soil loss and erosion by wind and stormwater runoff. Concentrated storm water runoff, if not managed or controlled, can eventually result in significant soil loss that can threaten foundations and undermine sidewalks and roadways. Development and redevelopment projects that disturb areas that are greater than one acre are required to obtain a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit which must include a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). These SWPPPs typically contain numerous erosion control measures that effectively reduce the potential for erosion and loss of topsoil. As these same existing City policies and regulations would also apply to development under the Proposed Project, similar to the 2030 General Plan, impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil from the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, which could involve development in areas with erosion potential and risk. Similar to the previous EIR, development and redevelopment projects that disturb areas that are greater than one acre are required to obtain a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-41
Construction Permit which must include a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). These SWPPPs typically contain numerous erosion control measures that effectively reduce the potential for erosion and loss of topsoil. Projects that are less than one acre, with implementation of the General Plan Policy SN-I-6 would reduce the potential impact from erosion and loss of topsoil to less than significant levels, which require erosion prevention of hillside areas by re-vegetation or other acceptable methods. Further, all construction activities and design criteria are required to comply with applicable codes and requirements of the most current version of the California Building Code (Title 24), and applicable local construction and grading ordinances. Compliance with General Plan Safety and Noise Element policies, as well as applicable codes and regulations, would ensure that the risk of substantial soil erosion or topsoil loss resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project will be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c-d) Unstable Soils/Expansive Soils Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the impact of the adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan on expansive soils was less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. Development associated with the implementation of the Proposed Project could be located on a geologic unit or soils that are susceptible to lateral spreading. Locations within the Project Area that have high liquefaction susceptibility have the highest risk of lateral spreading, such the northern portion of the Project Area, north of Market Avenue, as shown on Figure 3.7-1, which could result in a potentially significant impact. None of the projects which could be constructed under the Proposed Project would withdraw groundwater, oil, or natural gas in a quantity great enough to result in subsidence. Therefore, subsidence is unlikely to result from construction created under the Proposed Project. As noted in the previous EIR, expansive soils, which swell and shrink as they gain and lose moisture and can result in damage to overlying structures, underly portion of the Project Area, as displayed in Figure 3.7-1. If presence of critically expansive soils or other soil problems which, if not corrected, would lead to structural defects is determined, a site-specific soils investigation which recommends corrective action to prevent structural damage to each dwelling proposed to be constructed on the expansive soil is required. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations would ensure that any expansive soil-related impacts resulting from the Proposed Project would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-43
There are existing City policies and General Plan requirements for expansive soil measures that would apply to the Planning Area for individual development or redevelopment projects proposed under the 2030 General Plan. As these same existing City policies and regulations would also apply to development under the Proposed Project, similar to the 2030 GP EIR, impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil from the Proposed Project would also be less than significant, as with the 2030 General Plan. e) Septic Systems Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR did not note the impact of the 2030 General Plan would have due to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. As such, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would not use septic tanks. Chapter 16.22.030 of the San Pablo Municipal Code requires that new development be served by the sanitary sewer system that serves the city. Therefore, there would be no impact related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems from the Proposed Project, and the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially adverse impacts. f) Paleontological Resources Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that there were no known paleontological resources within the Planning Area and that due to the built-up urban nature of the planning area, there is a very low possibility of finding any paleontological or unique geologic resources, thus resulting in a less than significant impact. Further, compliance with General Plan Policy OSC-I-15 that stipulates provisions for the accidental discovery of paleontological resources, in addition to State laws and regulations would be required in the event of accidental discovery of paleontological or geologic resources to protect these resources from disturbance and destruction. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would primarily involve infill development on previously developed sites and, as with the 2030 General Plan, compliance with General Plan Policy OSC-I-16 and applicable State regulations would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, similar to the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would not result in a significant impact related to paleontological or geologic resources.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-44
g) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted people who live and work in San Pablo—as in nearby cities and counties—are subject to the risks associated with living in a seismically-active region. Additional growth and development will occur regardless of whether the General Plan is adopted, increasing population exposure to this risk. The General Plan acknowledges the existence of that underlying regional risk, and provides policies to proactively reduce it, for instance the creation of a Geologic Hazard Abatement District, the prohibition of critical or habitable development in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Hazard Zone around the Hayward Fault, or the identification of at-risk buildings and promotion of state and federal funding sources to support necessary safety retrofits. Analysis of Proposed Project Along with other projects that will occur in the cumulative geographic context of San Pablo, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would also be required to comply with the General Plan, Municipal Code, Proposed Project, and California Building Standards Code requirements. The standards presented in these documents require that a site-specific geotechnical investigation be prepared which would include design recommendations to reduce each cumulative project’s impacts. Similar seismic safety standards would apply to the cumulative projects. For these reasons, project building under the Proposed Project, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, would not result in a significant cumulative impact on geology and soils. Therefore, no significant cumulative impact exists in the geographic context for geology, soils, and seismicity. Similarly, the Proposed Project would be required to adhere to Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 which specifies the procedures to be followed in the event of the unexpected discovery of paleontological re-sources. Therefore, the contribution of the Proposed Project to the cumulative impact on paleontological resources would not be cumulatively considerable. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no additional information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to geology, soils, and seismicity. The conclusions from the previous EIR regarding geology, soils, and seismicity remain unchanged.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-45
3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; Less than Significant None No No No
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; Less than Significant None No No No
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; Less than Significant None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-46
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment; Less than Significant None No No No
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area; No Impact None No No No
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; Not addressed None No No No
g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of No Impact None No No No Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-47
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? DISCUSSION a-c) Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials, Release of Hazardous Materials, Hazardous Waste near School Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations together with implementation of 2030 General Plan policies would reduce to less than significant levels impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; the release of hazardous due to accident or upset; and the emission or handling of acute hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Analysis of Proposed Project Implementation of the Proposed Project would involve facilitation of housing and mixed-use construction and would not involve the transport, use, or disposal of significant quantities of hazardous materials. Demolition or development under the Proposed Project may involve the handling and transport of hazardous materials that could result in the need to handle and transport asbestos or lead based paints; however, such activities are subject to various federal, State, and local regulations, including BAAQMD regulations pertaining to asbestos abatement; Construction Safety Orders 1529 (pertaining to asbestos) and 1532.1 (pertaining to lead) from Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations; Part 61, Subpart M of the Code of Federal Regulations (pertaining to asbestos); and lead exposure guidelines provided by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Asbestos and lead abatement must be performed and monitored by contractors with appropriate certifications from the State Department of Health Services. Construction activities may involve the use of diesel-powered equipment or the application of architectural coatings, but not at levels that could create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Similarly, once constructed, the residents of new homes and businesses constructed pursuant to the Proposed Project may use cleaning solvents or landscaping chemicals, but not at levels that could create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Overall, any transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials would be required to comply with existing regulations established by several agencies, including the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US Department of CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-48
Transportation, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The construction and operation of housing generally does not involve the release -- accidental or otherwise -- of hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard to the public, nor would it involve emitting or handling acutely hazardous materials or wastes in the vicinity of schools. Overall, compliance with existing regulations would result in a less than significant impact, as with the 2030 General Plan. As such, the Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Hazardous Material Sites Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR identified a number of known sites within the Planning Area where releases of hazardous materials have occurred, as well as other areas where either light industrial or commercial uses have entailed hazardous materials in the past might be the source of undocumented releases that could be exposed during earthwork activities associated with future development. However, the 2030 GP EIR determined that with implementation of 2030 General Plan policies requiring an evaluation for potential risks and remediation, if necessary, prior to reuse of contaminated sites, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Analysis of Proposed Project In 2025, a search of federal, State, and local environmental regulatory agency databases was conducted in order to identify sites within the planning area which may have been historically impacted by hazardous materials or wastes. Search results indicate there are 3 leaking underground storage tank cleanup sites within the Project Area, shown on Figure 3.8-1. All three sites have been remediated and are considered closed. The two open sites within proximity to the Project Area, include: • 2145 Rumrill Boulevard. Historical dry-cleaning operations at the site involved the use of tetrachloroethylene (PCE). The dry cleaning equipment was replaced and the use of PCE was discontinued in 2009. The Site is subject to RWQCB Order No. R2-2011-0040, pursuant to which monitoring of groundwater conditions, soil vapor extraction, and indoor air quality is ongoing. A low-threat closure request has been submitted. • 1509 Rumrill Boulevard. Rumrill Sports Complex was developed under a voluntary cleanup agreement between the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the former Redevelopment Agency of San Pablo. The selected clean-up actions at the site included soil excavation with off-site disposal and a combination of surface cap constructions and institutional controls.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-50
The Proposed Project includes policies to enhance livability and environmental quality along the corridor. Specifically, RUM-10.2 sets out to facilitate remediation of industrial and service commercial sites within the Corridor consistent with federal, State, and local regulations and connect developers with resources, grants, and funding for cleanup. Further, the 2030 General Plan includes policies that enhance waste reduction and recycling in San Pablo and reduce the risk to the health of San Pablo residents from exposure to hazardous materials (PSCU-G-8 and SN-G-4). For example, PSCU-I-39 requires recycling collection services in all residential and non-residential buildings, while PSCU-I-39 promotes the importance of waste reduction and recycling, as well as the safe disposal of hazardous materials, to San Pablo residents and businesses owners. Implementing Policy SN-I-19 also requires applicants for development in a potentially contaminated location to perform inspection and cleanup if the site is found to be contaminated with hazardous substances. Therefore, continued compliance with existing federal and State regulations together with implementation of 2030 General Plan and Rumrill Corridor policies that require evaluation and remediation of hazardous materials sites prior to redevelopment would ensure that impacts resulting from Proposed Project implementation would be less than significant, as with the 2030 General Plan. The Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Airport Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted there are no airports located in San Pablo. The nearest airport to the City of San Pablo is the Oakland International Airport, which is located approximately 18 miles south. Therefore, the 2030 General Plan EIR would not expose people residing or working in the plan area to excessive airport hazards and there would be no impact. Analysis of Proposed Project Circumstances have not changed since certification of the 2030 GP EIR and the Proposed Project would also have no impact with respect to exposure of people to excessive airport hazards, as with the 2030 General Plan. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. f) Emergency Evacuation Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR does not explicitly analyze the impacts of the 2030 General Plan on the impairment of implementation of or physically interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. As noted on page 3.10-14 of the 2030 GP EIR, “less than one percent of the Planning Area has a high or very high threat of wildfire according to wildfire hazard data provided by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, and since most land use changes in the proposed General Plan are in existing urban infill sites, implementation of the proposed Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-51
General Plan is not expected to increase the threat of wildfire hazards. This impact is evaluated no further in this EIR.” Analysis of Proposed Project Since the certification of the 2030 GP EIR, the City of San Pablo has partnered with Contra Costa County to develop a hazard mitigation plan to reduce risks from natural disasters in the Contra Costa County Operational Area. The plan, Contra Costa County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP), was published in 2018 and addresses the following hazards of concern within the Planning Area: earthquake, flood, landslide, sever weather, tsunami, and wildfire. Additionally, the City of San Pablo is under the authority of the Contra Costa County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), which provides an analysis of wildfire hazards and risk in the wildland-urban interface (WUI). The CWPP aims to reduce hazard through increased information and education about wildfires, hazardous fuels reduction, actions to reduce structure ignitability and other recommendations to assist emergency preparedness and fire suppression efforts. The Proposed Project would involve continued implementation of Safety and Noise Element policies that support the HMP and CWPP, including Policy SN-I-31, which requires the development of an emergency evacuation map showing potential evacuation routes, Policy SN-I-32, which would involve public information programs that explain the City’s emergency preparedness programs, Policy SN-I-33, which would continue participation in the multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation planning process with Contra Costa County, Policy SN-I-34 would develop effective mechanisms for a coordinated response to natural and man-made emergencies, and lastly, Policy SN-I-35, which would ensure critical use facilities (City Hall, Police Department, Fire Station, public assembly facilities, transportation services) and other structures that are important to protecting health and safety in the community remain operational during an emergency. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts than identified in the 2030 GP EIR, and impacts from the Proposed Project on emergency response and emergency evacuation plans would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. g) Wildfire Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that buildout of the 2030 General Plan would not increase the threat of wildfire hazards as less than one percent of the Planning Area is designated as high or very high threat of wildfire by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and because buildout would occur primarily on urban infill sites away from designated high and very high wildfire threat. Analysis of Proposed Project Since adoption of the 2030 General Plan and certification of the 2030 GP EIR, the frequency and severity of wildfires in California have increased due to multiple sequential years of drought and CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-52
the increasing effects of anthropogenic climate change. In response, the State of California amended its CEQA Guidelines in 2019 to require additional analysis related to wildfire risks. The Planning Area is not located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) designated by the State, nor is it located within the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Area designated by the City.3 Areas in the southeast of San Pablo, west of I-80 are classified as VHFHSZ and adjacent areas outside the City limit in Wildcat Canyon are also classified as VHFHSZ. As discussed above, the City of San Pablo prepared a Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) in partnership with the County of Contra Costa, and the 2018 draft included mitigation actions related to public education and risk reduction in WUI areas. The City of San Pablo is also party to the Contra Costa County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), which aims to reduce hazard through increased information and education about wildfires, and actions to reduce structure ignitability. Given that the Planning Area is not located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or in the WUI area and that high-risk wildfires are relatively infrequent in the urbanized context of the Planning Area, the Proposed Project’s implementation of General Plan policies and regulations would result in less than significant impact related to wildfire. Additionally, continued implementation of Safety and Noise Element policies would serve to protect San Pablo residents and property from potential fire hazards by continuing work with the County Fire Department (SN-I-16), working cooperatively with the Fire Department to promote public awareness of fire safety and emergency life support (SN-I-17), reviewing the Fire District’s fire hazard standards and annual report to determine if there should be a modification or additional types of services based on local population needs (SN-I-18), as well as requiring sprinklers in addition to fire breaks or fire doors in all mixed use development and buildings exceeding 5,000 square feet to protect residential uses from non-residential uses (SN-I-19). Continued implementation of the HMP, CWPP, and Safety and Noise Element policies would result in less than significant impact related to wildfire, as with the 2030 General Plan. h) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted that hazardous material impacts typically occur in a local or site-specific context versus a cumulative context combined with other development projects. It is possible, however, for the combined effects of transporting and disposal of hazardous materials to be affected by cumulative development. Future development, with implementation of the General Plan policies, would have a less than significant hazardous materials impact to the public or the environment in and within the vicinity of the General Plan Planning Area. Other foreseeable development within the region, although likely to increase the potential to disturb existing contamination and potentially increase the handling of hazardous materials, would be required to comply with the same regulatory framework as the development under the General Plan. These stringent regulatory requirements include federal and State regulatory requirements for transporting (CalEPA and Caltrans) hazardous materials or cargo (including fuel and other materials used in all motor vehicles) on public roads or disposing of hazardous materials (CalEPA, 3 State of California Office of the State Fire Marshal, CAL FIRE, Local Responsibility Area for Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6660/fhszl_map7.pdf. Accessed November 9, 2023.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-53
DTSC). Therefore, the effect of the project on hazardous materials, in combination with other foreseeable projects, would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Reasonably foreseeable projects in the Project Area and immediate vicinity could result in construction impacts related to the routine transport, disposal, or handling of hazardous materials; intermittent use and transport of petroleum-based lubricants, solvents, and fuels; and transport of affected soil to and from sites. However, the handling and transportation of hazardous materials by all projects (including projects within the Project Area) would be regulated under federal, State and local authority and no significant cumulative impact would occur. Furthermore, hazardous waste generated during construction of any project would be collected, properly characterized for disposal, and transported in compliance with applicable regulations. Hazardous materials are strictly regulated by local, state, and federal laws. Specifically, these laws are designed to ensure that hazardous materials do not result in a gradual increase in toxins in the environment. For each of the reasonably foreseeable projects under consideration, various project-specific measures (such as the ones identified for the General Plan) would be implemented as a condition of development approval to mitigate risks associated with exposure to hazardous materials. For these reasons, the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR; no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to geology, seismicity, and soils. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially Less than Significant None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-54
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? degrade surface or ground water quality; b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?; Less than Significant None No No No
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would;
i. result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less than Significant None No No No ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-55
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? flooding on- or offsite? iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant None No No No
iv. impede or redirect flood flows? Less than Significant None No No No d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation; or No Impact None No No No e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
Less than Significant None No No No
DISCUSSION a-b) Water Quality Standards, Groundwater Supplies Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Implementation of the 2030 San Pablo General Plan could result in degradation of water quality and depletion of groundwater supplies by increasing nonpoint source pollutants including sedimentation in stormwater runoff through creation of new impervious surfaces in new development. The Planning Area is already largely developed and widely covered by impervious CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-56
surfaces; therefore, the 2030 GP EIR determined that any increase in impervious surfaces due to redevelopment is anticipated to be small. A net increase in impervious surfaces might affect the amount of precipitation that is recharged to the shallow aquifer. Groundwater within the Planning Area is not used for water supply use but is considered by the RWQCB as a potential resource. However, as new development and redevelopment occurs, on-site drainage plans would be designed to retain, capture and convey increased runoff in accordance with C.3 site control features. According to the C.3 provision in the Contra Costa Clean Water Program NPDES permit, the 2030 San Pablo General Plan falls in the “significant redevelopment projects” category under Group 1 Projects. A significant redevelopment project is defined as a project on a previously developed site that results in addition or replacement of a total of 43,560 square feet (one acre) or more of impervious surface. However, stormwater flows generated from the Planning Area would generally remain unchanged, or potentially decrease, following implementation of required source control measures, which would not affect the drainage system in the Planning Area. As noted in 2030 GP EIR, groundwater recharge and nonpoint source pollutants would not be expected to be significantly affected due to the built-out nature of the city and the current amount of impervious surface area. The 2030 San Pablo General Plan also includes policies that would mitigate degradation of water quality and depletion of groundwater supplies, which include requiring new developments to reduce impermeable surface area and increase infiltration with permeable paving and parking area design, grading that lengthens flow paths and increases runoff travel time to reduce the peak hour flow rate, and canopy trees and shrubs to absorb water (PSCU-I-34). The 2030 General Plan also sets out to maintain, protect, and enhance San Pablo’s creeks, as shown on Figure 2-7, by strengthening management requirements for properties adjacent to creek areas (OSC-1-10). Adherence to the aforementioned requirements as well as the 2030 General Plan policies would result in a less than significant impact related to water quality in stormwater runoff, groundwater recharge, and generally altering drainage patterns. Analysis of Proposed Project Future development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be subject to all water quality protection requirements and conditions applicable to reduce and alleviate any potential construction period and post-construction water quality impacts. This includes adherence to federal and State water quality regulations and plans, as well as RWQCB, and City requirements and conditions applicable to development. Construction activities arising from implementation of the Proposed Project, such as grading and other construction-related earth-disturbing activities, could result in short-term water quality impacts. Further, post-construction, other potential water quality impacts include runoff into storm drains or water bodies if proper minimization measures are not implemented. Individual projects disturbing more than one acre of ground would be required to obtain coverage under the State Construction General Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); the SWPPP also must include BMPs to control contamination of surface flows and potential discharge of pollutants from commencement of construction through project completion. Compliance with Construction General Permit and San Pablo Municipal Code (Chapter 17.48) requirements would ensure that BMPs would be implemented to control soil erosion and sedimentation and restrict non-stormwater discharges from construction sites as well as any release of hazardous materials. These standard NPDES and Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-57
local required construction period measures would reduce the construction period pollutants entering waterbodies to a less-than-significant level. As such, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Drainage Pattern Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Erosion, Siltation, and Flooding The 2030 GP EIR noted that construction activities undertaken to implement subsequent development projects in the General Plan could include excavation, soil stockpiling, boring, and/or grading activities that strip existing vegetation prior to the installation of impervious surfaces. Soil erosion is probable during construction and resulting water quality problems in receiving waters could include turbidity, increased algal growth, oxygen depletion, or sediment buildup, thereby degrading aquatic habitats. Sediment from project-induced erosion could also ultimately accumulate in downstream drainage facilities and interfere with stream flow, thereby aggravating downstream flooding conditions. Further, all projects that would disturb one acre or more are required to prepare and implement a SWPPP, in accordance with the SWRCB’s General Construction Permit. The SWPPP would include erosion control measures. The 2030 GP EIR concluded that incorporation of equivalent practices in accordance with the requirements of the SWRCB’s General Construction Permit process would reduce this potentially significant impact on water resources during construction to a less-than-significant level. Surface Runoff The 2030 GP EIR noted new development or redevelopment projects in the General Plan area could result in the expansion or reconfiguration of existing development that might increase the overall amount of impervious surface areas. Increasing the total area of impervious surfaces could result in a number of potential impacts associated with a greater potential to introduce pollutants to receiving waters and reduced groundwater recharge. The General Plan area is already largely developed and widely covered by impervious surfaces, and therefore any increase in impervious surfaces due to redevelopment is anticipated to be small. A net increase in impervious surfaces might affect the amount of precipitation that is recharged to the shallow aquifer. However, as new development and redevelopment occurs, on-site drainage plans would be designed to retain, capture and convey increased runoff in accordance with the local county design standards that include C.3 site control features. As a result, stormwater flows generated from the General Plan area would generally remain unchanged, or potentially decrease, following implementation of required source control measures, which would therefore not affect the drainage system in the General Plan area. Adherence to these requirements that are also reinforced by the General Plan policies would result in a less than significant impact related to stormwater runoff and generally altering drainage patterns.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-58
Impede or Redirect Flood Flows The 2030 GP EIR noted that although the majority of the Planning Area is located outside of the 100-year floodplain, there are areas where new development could be located within the floodplain. There is a 100-year flood zone area located on the western boundary of the Planning Area in and around Giant Road, However, the General Plan policies would continue prioritizing policies that minimize the potential for flooding to adversely impact land uses. The 2030 GP EIR stated that not only are there design requirements for new development, but there also would be assurances of adequate storm drainage capacities, and the continued improvements of the flood control projects associated with San Pablo and Wildcat Creeks. With implementation of the General Plan policies, the potential impact from flooding would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Erosion, Siltation, and Flooding Development pursuant to the Proposed Project with soil disturbance of at least 500 square feet or 50 cubic yards would be required to submit an ESCP, which would need to meet City standards of including erosion control BMPs. Additionally, individual projects disturbing more than one acre of ground would be required to implement a SWPPP; with erosion and sediment control BMPs as required by the State’s Construction General Permit and MS4 Phase II Permit regulations. Standard erosion and sediment control measures and other housekeeping BMPs, such as vehicle and equipment maintenance, material delivery and storage, and solid waste management, would be identified in the SWPPP. These measures would be identified for each individual project and implemented during construction to reduce contamination and sedimentation in waterways. Projects disturbing less than an acre of ground surface during construction would not be required to pre-pare a SWPPP but would be required to implement the construction site control BMPs required by the City’s MS4 NPDES permit. Development associated with the Proposed Project would be required to comply with Provision E.10, which requires adoption and implementation of LID techniques. Development would also be subject to requirements of the Construction General Permit, Central Coast RWQCB Municipal Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program, and the City’s erosion and sediment control requirements. Compliance with applicable regulations and implementation of erosion and sediment control BMPs dis-cussed above would ensure that impacts associated with substantial alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the Project Area would be reduced. Therefore, at the program level, development under the Proposed Project would not result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site and impacts would be less than significant. As such, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Surface Runoff Storm water quality is regulated under the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for the San Francisco Bay Region’s Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (MRP), of which the City of San Pablo is a permit-tee. Developments within the Project Area must meet comply with Provision C.3, which requires adoption and implementation of low-impact development (LID) techniques, including, among other things, infiltration and biotreatment, the Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-59
use of vegetated swales and retention basins, and minimal use of impermeable surfaces, to manage stormwater and maintain a site’s predevelopment runoff rates and volumes. Guidelines for implementing these regulations are detailed in the Contra Costa Clean Water Program Stormwater C.3 Guidebook and are reviewed and permitted by San Pablo. Required compliance with existing local regulations would reduce the amount of runoff as well as the risks of the Proposed Project contributing significant additional polluted runoff. Any new development associated with buildout of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with best practices for stormwater treatment, as required by the City’s MS4 Permit, and Parks, Schools, Community Facilities & Utilities Element Policy PSCU-I-34 require applicable development projects to employ low impact development (LID) design strategies that minimize drainage concentration, minimize impervious coverage, utilize pervious paving materials, and overall utilize best management practices (BMPs) to reduce stormwater runoff and minimize increases in downstream runoff and/or impacts resulting from new development. New development, during both construction and operations phases, would be required to comply with the NPDES General Permit for Construction Activities, which requires the preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of BMPs to mitigate risks of polluted runoff. Compliance with these regulations would reduce stormwater velocity and volume the maximum extent practicable, and as a result impacts would be less than significant. Further, the Rumrill Corridor Plan includes policies and actions that enhance livability and environmental quality along the corridor. Action RUM-10.a calls for the identification of drainage and stormwater management improvements to address localized flooding for the Southwest Flooding Area of Concern, together with potential funding sources for implementation and update the Green Infrastructure Plan and Capital Improvements Program accordingly. Action RUM-10.b also requires site design and planning for the redevelopment of the cluster of City-owned parcels near Sutro Avenue to incorporate strategies to improve drainage and stormwater management conditions on and adjacent to the site. As such, compliance with existing regulations and Rumrill Corridor Plan actions policies would reduce potential impacts from the Proposed Project to a less than significant level As such, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Impede or Redirect Flood Flows As with the 2030 General Plan, implementation of the Proposed Project could result in the placement of housing and businesses in the 100-year and 500-year floodplain or structures that would impede flood flows exposing people to injury or death. The 100-year and 500-year floodplain is located in the northern part of the Rumrill Corridor area, where the Wildcat Creek enters the Rumrill Corridor area and travels east along Folsom Ave, as displayed on Figure 3.9-1. Approximately 14.65 acres of the Rumrill Corridor area is within the 100-year flood zone and an additional 10.73 acres is in the 500-year flood zone. New developments associated with buildout of the Proposed Project, within the 100-year and 500-year floodplain would be in compliance with the San Pablo Municipal Code (Chapter 15.28, Floodplain Management and Flood Damage Prevention), which includes regulations for flood resistant development, specifically for site improvement, manufactured homes, and subdivisions. To minimize flood hazards, standards of construction require anchoring to prevent flotation and collapse, as well as flood resistant materials as specified in FEMA Technical Bulletin TB2-93. Further, as noted in previous discussion, the
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-61
Rumrill Corridor Plan includes policies and actions that promote healthy water quality and a safe, livable urban environment along the Corridor, such as Action RUM-10.a calls for the identification of drainage and stormwater management improvements to address localized flooding, and Action RUM-10.b, which requires site design and planning for the redevelopment of the cluster of City-owned parcels near Sutro Avenue to incorporate strategies to improve drainage and stormwater management conditions on and adjacent to the site. Compliance with SWRCB’s General Construction Permit, San Pablo General Plan policies, and Rumrill Corridor Plan actions would reduce potential impacts from the Proposed Project to a less than significant level. As such, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Flood, Tsunami, Seiche Hazard Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that adoption and implementation of the 2030 General Plan would have no impact on tsunami and seiche risk. The Planning Area is located sufficiently inland and away from large water bodies to be out of what would be considered a potential hazard area for seiches, tsunamis, and sea level rise, and therefore no impact discussion for these hazards is included in the 2030 GP EIR. In addition, the relatively gentle topography in much of the Planning Area make the potential for mudflows remote. Analysis of Proposed Project Similar to the 2030 GP EIR, the Project Area is located sufficiently inland and away from large water bodies to be out of what would be considered a potential hazard area for seiches, tsunamis, and sea level rise. These conditions remain the same and therefore, similar with the 2030 GP EIR, the Proposed Project would have no impacts on tsunami and seiche risk. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Water Quality Control Plan Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) oversees surface and groundwater in the San Pablo area, and as issued under the San Francisco RWQCB Water Quality Control Plan, the San Pablo area falls under the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the San Francisco Bay Basin. The Basin Plan identifies existing potential beneficial uses and provides water quality objectives designed to protect those uses. The San Francisco Bay RWQCB has included San Pablo Creek and Wildcat Creek as polluted water bodies with the pollutant diazinon causing impairment related to urban runoff and storm sewers. The 2030 GP EIR notes compliance with the water quality control plan, Basin Plan; therefore, the 2030 General Plan would not have an impact on conflict of water quality control plan.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-62
Analysis of Proposed Project Since the certification of the 2030 GP EIR, new CEQA guidelines were adopted by the State to require additional analysis related to sustainable groundwater management plans. As of 2016, the City of San Pablo is within the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin—East Bay Plain Subbasin (No. 2-009.04), which is designated by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) as a medium priority basin.4 The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) manages the groundwater management plan and is subject to review of certain proposed projects for compliance with applicable water conservation guidelines and requirements of EBMUD as noted in the Chapter 17.48.060 of the City’s Municipal Code. Furthermore, the City has adopted municipal regional stormwater permit as issued by the California RWQCB in order to comply with the NPDES General Construction Permit in Chapter 17.40 of the Municipal Code. As development of the Proposed Project would be required to comply with Basin Plan, EBMUD review, Municipal Code, State, and Federal regulations, implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with water quality control plan not sustainable groundwater management basin plans. As such, the Proposed Project would have no impact. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. f) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted implementation of the General Plan would include policy provisions, as well as compliance with the City’s Grading and Drainage Ordinance, which would reduce the city’s contribution to cumulative water quantity and quality impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level. This impact is also mitigated through the implementation of CCCWP requirements and NPDES C.3 requirements which address the use of water quality and quantity control through design measures and use of BMPs. Effective BMPs relate to site preparation, runoff control, sediment retention, and other similar features. The effectiveness of BMPs has been recognized in the California Stormwater Quality Association, California Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbooks. Therefore, with adherence to the existing regulatory requirements regarding stormwater control and the policies identified above, the cumulative contribution of the General Plan would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Equivalent to the prior EIR, future development in the geographic context of the Project Area for hydrology and water quality would be required to comply with regulations and policies including NPDES Construction General Permit adopted by the SWRCB; RWQCB’s NPDES permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for MS4 discharges; Sustainable Groundwater Management Act; and the San Pablo Municipal Code. For these reasons, development under the Proposed Project, in 4 California Department of Water Resources, 2024. East Bay Municipal Utility District GSA. Available: https://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/gsa/print/104. Accessed: January 2, 2024.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-63
combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, would not result in a significant cumulative impact on hydrology and water quality. Potential growth in the San Pablo Bay watershed would likely not degrade water quality as the Proposed Project primarily consists of infill development and medium density development in already urbanized areas. The Proposed Project must also adhere to General Plan policies which would ensure that development protects and restores riparian habitat and ensure natural channel processes in the watershed. As detailed in the prior EIR, all new developments pursuant to the Proposed Project are also required to handle stormwater in a manner that ensures that flood flows will not increase or be redirected to other areas. In addition, all future development in the geographic context for hydrology and water quality would be required to adhere to Contra Costa County General Plan policies and local municipal codes related to protecting water resources. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to hydrology and water resources. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.10 Land Use, Population, and Housing Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Physically divide an established community; No Impact None No No No b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding No Impact None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-64
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) or Not analyzed None No No No
d. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact None No No No
DISCUSSION a-b) Divide Community, Conflict with Any Land Use Plan Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would not physically divide any established community, but would provide better connectivity within the city, as the 2030 General Plan provides more linkages within and between existing neighborhoods. The 2030 GP EIR also determined that the 2030 General Plan would not conflict with applicable area land use plans, including adopted specific plans, as other adopted policies, specific plans, programs, the zoning code, and other implementing tools would be amended to conform to the adopted 2030 General Plan, the City’s primary planning instrument.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-65
Analysis of Proposed Project As with the 2030 General Plan, the Proposed Project would also have no impact with respect to dividing an existing community, as it would primarily involve infill development within Rumrill PDA, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan, and would not involve the construction of linear infrastructure such as freeways or railroad line would help the City accommodate its assessed share of the regional housing need and increase the amount of development within the Rumrill PDA, consistent with the regional transportation plan/sustainable community strategy Plan Bay Area 2050. Housing Element Program 1-C calls for the preparation of a Corridor Plan for the Rumrill PDA, which would guide the future development along the corridor and incorporate an integrated mix of high-density housing, employment, and commercial service uses to serve the community need. Housing Element Program 1-I calls for the hearing on amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to allow shopkeeper units in commercial and mixed-use districts and to provide flexibility as to who can live in shopkeeper units as a way of providing additional housing while creating walkable mixed-use districts in appropriate locations, such as the Rumrill Corridor area. Thus, implementation of these programs would help ensure continued consistency between the General Plan, adopted specific plans, and the San Pablo Municipal Code. Therefore, overall, the Proposed Project would have not impact related to physically dividing an existing community or consistency with other plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, similar to the 2030 General Plan. Associated impacts would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Growth Inducement Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted in Contra Costa County, all cities are participating in Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA)’s growth management program are required to adopt growth management elements in their General Plans. These growth management elements must include goals and policies for managing growth and requirements for achieving these goals in order to be approved by CCTA. This countywide planning and regulatory framework override any growth-inducing effect that may be attributable to San Pablo’s General Plan. As a consequence, the physical growth inducing effects of the General Plan on other jurisdictions are likely to be minimal. Indirect growth-inducing impacts such as those associated with job increases that might affect housing and retail demand in other jurisdictions over an extended time period are difficult to assess with precision, since future economic trends may be influenced by unforeseeable events, such as natural disasters and business and development cycles. Moreover, long-term changes in economic and population growth are often regional in scope; they are not influenced solely by changes or policies in San Pablo.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-66
Analysis of Proposed Project Buildout of the Proposed Project would consist primarily of infill development within the Rumrill PDAs, consistent with the objectives of the regional transportation plan/sustainable communities’ strategy. Buildout of the Proposed Project would occur incrementally over a period of 10 to 15 years and would result in an increase in population and housing units facilitating accommodation of the City's assessed share of the regional housing need. The Proposed Project sets out to increase housing supply and facilitate production of at least 800 new homes by 2031 (HE Goal #1), which is planned growth in line with the 2030 General Plan projections. Specifically, the Proposed Project promotes the development of a variety of housing types, sizes, and densities that meet community needs based on the suitability of the land, including the availability of infrastructure, the provision of adequate services and recognition of environmental constraints (HE Policy 1.2). The Proposed Project would not involve the extension of roads or infrastructure into undeveloped areas in a way that would induce substantial unplanned growth. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact associated with population growth, either directly or indirectly. Accordingly, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse effects than the 2030 General Plan, as related to unplanned population growth. d) Displacement Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined the adoption and implementation of the 2030 San Pablo General Plan would not displace substantial numbers of existing residents or housing units and that associated impacts would be less than significant. The 2030 GP EIR found that redevelopment resulting from new permitted land uses or different densities may temporarily remove housing in certain areas, but overall, the 2030 General Plan will increase the number of housing units in San Pablo so anyone displaced will be able to find accommodation in the same area. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would primarily involve infill development within the Rumrill PDA. Redevelopment could potentially displace existing residents, housing units, or businesses, directly or indirectly; however, Goal 3 of the Rumrill Corridor Plan includes policies that would address the risk of displacement. Policy RUM-3.1 promote a range of residential densities and unit sizes throughout the Corridor to encourage a mix of housing types in varying price ranges and rental rates. Policy RUM-3.2 encourage a mix of for-sale and rental housing units along the Corridor, including alternative ownership models such as fee-simple ownership, common interest developments, housing cooperatives, or community land trusts. Policy RUM-3.5 promote the development of live/work units and compatible multi-unit housing in commercial and employment mixed use areas along the Corridor. Policy RUM-3.9. Continue to engage the community in developing new and refining existing affordable housing and anti-displacement strategies. Additionally, there are several Housing Element policies and programs address the risk of displacement. Housing Element Program 6-G would require any units removed from a non-vacant site through redevelopment to be replaced units affordable to the same or lower income level. Further, the Housing Element also includes measures to preserve the existing housing stock: Program 4-E would involve the establishment of a Healthy Homes program; through Program 4-F Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-67
the City will continue the residential health & safety (RH&S) program to inspect existing housing and facilitate improvements for Code compliance; and Program 4-G under which the City would explore enhancements the RH&S program to improve conditions in rental housing. Therefore, overall, the Proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and a less than significant impact would occur, as with the 2030 General Plan. e) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted land use changes that would alter the scale, density, and character of urban areas and neighborhoods could change the visual character of many areas in the region, especially where development would occur on visually prominent hillsides or in existing rural or open space lands. However, due to the built-out nature of San Pablo, the lack of undeveloped hillsides in the Planning Area, and the attention to preserving existing residential neighborhoods through policies and land use design, the 2030 General Plan’s contribution to this potentially significant cumulative impact is not cumulatively considerable. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project does not involve the construction of a linear feature or other barrier and would not remove any means of access or impact mobility. Implementation of the Proposed Project would in fact improve connectivity in the Project Area through implementation of policies and actions that foster walkable, higher density, and mixed-use areas. Therefore, the cumulative impact of the Proposed Project on the division of an existing community would be less than significant and equivalent to the impacts detailed in the prior EIR. Impacts from plans and projects in the region that could conflict with existing plans, including the City’s adopted specific plans, are not cumulative in nature. The Proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan’s goals for the Project Area and includes focused specific plan updates and zoning code amendments to ensure consistency. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to land use, population, and housing. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-68
3.11 Mineral Resources Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state; or No Impact None No No No
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact None No No No
DISCUSSION a-b) Loss of Mineral Resource Availability Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Section 3.7 Geology and Seismicity of the 2030 GP EIR establishes there are no known mineral resources within San Pablo or the Plan Area, and therefore determined that the 2030 General Plan would have no impact to mineral resources or locally important mineral resource recovery sites. Analysis of Proposed Project Environmental circumstances have not changed since the certification of the previous EIR, and no new information has emerged related to the presence of mineral resources. Accordingly, the Proposed Project would have no associated impact, similar to the 2030 General Plan. As such, the Proposed Project does not propose any substantial changes compared to what was already analyzed in the previous EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce any new environmental impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-69
c) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted there are no known mineral resources within San Pablo or the Planning Area, and therefore the 2030 General Plan has no impact to mineral resources or locally important mineral resource recovery sites. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. As such, the Proposed Project would not contribute to or result in the loss of availability of either a known mineral resource deposit or a locally important mineral resource recovery site in the region or state; therefore, the Proposed Project has no impact to mineral resources. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to mineral resources. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.12 Noise and Vibration Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; Less than Significant None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-70
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or Less than Significant None No No c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact None No No No
DISCUSSION Appendix D Noise Data includes a summary of the methodology and data used to evaluate the potential noise and vibration impacts from the Proposed Project. The predominant source of noise in the plan area is motor vehicles. Motor vehicle noise is characterized by a high number of individual events that can create a sustained noise level in proximity to noise-sensitive uses. Roadways with the highest traffic volumes and speeds produce the highest noise levels. The roadway in the Project Area with the highest traffic volumes and, thus, the highest noise levels is Rumrill Boulevard. Ambient noise level measurements were conducted in San Pablo by Rincon on Wednesday, May 31, 2023. As part of the ambient noise survey, a 15-minute noise measurement was conducted between 4:40 and 4:55 p.m. on the east side of Rumrill Boulevard, midway between California Avenue and Regina Avenue, approximately 20 feet from vehicle traffic. The results of noise monitoring indicate that noise levels along Rumrill Boulevard are in the range of 67 dBA Leq and 85 dBA Lmax.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-71
a) Noise Standards Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR analyzed noise and vibration impacts under Section 3.9, Noise., determining that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would be consistent with goals and control measures of the Noise Element, and impacts would be less than significant. The 2030 GP EIR found that noise generated by construction activity could expose noise-sensitive receptors to temporary noise, however, this impact was determined to be less than significant if development under the proposed General Plan complies with General Plan policies and with limitations on construction activity in the City’s Municipal Code which specifically prohibits construction operations between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. unless there is an emergency. Analysis of Proposed Project Construction Noise from individual construction projects facilitated by the project would temporarily increase noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive receivers. Since at this stage of planning, project-level details are not available for future projects that would be carried out under the plan, it is not possible to determine exact noise levels or time periods for construction of such projects, or construction noise at adjacent properties. Nevertheless, the Proposed Project would require developers to mitigate noise exposure to sensitive receptors from construction activities (Policy RUM-10.7). Mitigation may include a combination of techniques that reduce noise generated at the source, increase the noise insulation at the receptor, or increase the noise attenuation as noise travels from the source to the receptor (e.g., through the incorporation of barriers). Therefore, implementation of the plan would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. No additional analysis is required. Operation Implementation of the Proposed Project would allow additional buildout, which would generate new vehicle trips that could incrementally increase the exposure of land uses along roadways to operational traffic noise. Traffic data provided by Kittelson & Associates indicates that the 2022 average daily traffic (ADT) along the Rumrill Boulevard corridor was 16,080. Based on the VMT assessment for the Proposed Project, the Proposed Project would increase VMT citywide by 6 percent. Conservatively assuming that all new vehicle trips would occur on Rumrill Boulevard, this would result in a traffic volume of approximately 17,045 ADT, and an increase of approximately 0.3 dBA DNL noise level, which would not exceed the most stringent traffic noise threshold of 1.5 dBA DNL for ambient noise environments of 65 dBA DNL and higher. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more significant impacts than those identified in the 2030 General Plan EIR. No additional analysis is required.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-72
b) Vibration Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings Construction The 2030 GP EIR determined that while vibration impacts from construction activities associated with buildout of the 2030 General Plan could potentially result, depend on the proximity to sensitive receptors and the types and duration of construction equipment used, such impacts would be short-term and limited to the period of construction and further that compliance with existing City regulations prohibits construction operations between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. would ensure that construction impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Construction Vibration Construction of individual projects facilitated by the Proposed Project could intermittently generate groundborne vibration on and adjacent to construction sites. Buildings in the vicinity of a construction site respond to vibration with varying degrees ranging from imperceptible effects at the lowest levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at minor levels, and up to minor damage at the highest vibration levels. Construction equipment with greater vibrational impacts, such as pile drivers, is typically needed for high-rise structures and as such is not applicable to the construction needs under the Proposed Project. Hours for all construction, alteration, remodeling, demolition, and repair activities which are authorized by a valid City Building Permit, as well as the delivery and removal of materials and equipment associated with these activities. Further, development pursuant to the Proposed Project would also be required to reduce vibration impacts associated with construction activities by requiring construction contractors to implement measures to help reduce vibration levels at nearby sensitive receptors (Policy RUM-10.7). Measures to reduce vibration levels include 1) operating heavy equipment as far as practical from residential uses; and 2) Using smaller bulldozers (operating weight less than 20,000 pounds) when grading must occur within approximately 50 feet of residential uses or other vibration sensitive uses. Compliance with such regulations would ensure the impacts related to excessive groundborne vibration are not significant. Therefore, compliance with applicable the Proposed Project policies and regulatory requirements, such as the construction hour restrictions and mitigation measures for vibration, would ensure that construction vibration associated with development under the Proposed Project would be minimized to the maximum extent practicable and impacts would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Operation Vibration Stationary Source Vibration Similar to the previous EIR on the 2030 San Pablo General Plan, as development occurs, there is generally a potential for more operational vibration sources to be developed. However, implementation of the Proposed Project would not directly result in an increase of operational Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-73
sources of vibration in the Project Area. Additionally, should mechanical equipment be installed or new sources of vibration be constructed, the potential vibration effects would be analyzed in a project-specific environmental analysis. Further, vibration from mechanical equipment is generally localized, and it is unlikely that vibration effects would occur outside the immediate vicinity of the vibration-generating mechanical equipment. As such, stationary source vibration impacts associated with implementation of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Traffic Vibration There would be an anticipated increase in traffic in the Project Area associated with new development permitted within the Project Area under the Proposed Project. General Plan Policy LU-I-40 would ensure that noise, traffic, and other potential conflicts that may arise from development pursuant to the Proposed Project in a mix of commercial and residential uses are mitigated through good site planning, building design, and/or appropriate operational measures. Therefore, vehicle traffic resulting from construction and operation of residential projects under the Proposed Project would not be anticipated to result in substantial or excessive groundborne vibration and impacts would be less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Airports Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 General Plan EIR noted there are no airports located in San Pablo. The nearest airport to the City of San Pablo is the Oakland International Airport, which is located approximately 18 miles south. The City of San Pablo is located outside of the airport’s noise contours and the airport influence area. Therefore, the 2030 GP EIR determined that the 2030 General Plan would not expose people residing or working in the plan area to excessive noise levels and there would be no impact. Analysis of Proposed Project Circumstances have not changed since certification of the 2030 GP EIR. As such, the Proposed Project would also have no impact with respect to exposure of people to excessive airport noise levels, as with the 2030 General Plan. d) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR states that ambient noise and groundborne vibration near areas of new development may temporarily increase due to construction activities. Development under the 2030 General Plan would be required to comply with the limitations on construction activity included in Chapter 9.12 of the San Pablo Municipal Code. Compliance with these provisions and noise CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-74
polices in the 2030 General Plan, is mandatory and will ensure that construction impacts, while potentially a temporary nuisance, are less than significant. The prior EIR also noted that proposed new land uses may experience noise levels that exceed existing city standards in the 2030 General Plan, according to noise modeling conducted for this EIR. Considering 2030 General Plan policies, State building code standards, and existing noise attenuation devices such as the sound barriers along the freeway (which are not factored into the noise contour modeling), the prior EIR concluded the overall cumulative noise impact is mitigable with the measured provided in the prior EIR analysis. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would also result in both short-term and long-term changes to the existing noise environment in the Rumrill Corridor Plan area. Construction activities, including traffic, demolition, and reconstruction, would generate ambient and groundborne noise. Consistent with the prior EIR, the Proposed Project would also have to adhere to the variety of policies, codes, and regulations in place to prevent substantially adverse impacts, particularly to sensitive land uses. Development in and around the Project Area would comply with the General Plan Noise Compatibility Standards/Land Use Compatibility For Community Noise Environments (2030 GP EIR Table 3.9-4), which establishes noise/land use compatibility standards as well as exterior noise standards. Development under the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the limitations on construction activity included in Chapter 9.12 of the San Pablo Municipal Code. All new construction would be required to comply with noise restrictions which regulate the time and intensity of construction in the Municipal Code as well as requirements from the California Building Code and CalGreen Code. Together, these policies, regulations, and noise level restrictions would ensure that cumulative adverse noise and vibration impacts associated with construction be attenuated to a less than significant impact. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to noise and vibration. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-75
3.13 Public Services and Recreation Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services;
Fire protection? Less than Significant None No No No Police protection? Less than Significant None No No No Schools? Less than Significant None No No No Parks? Less than Significant None No No No Other public facilities? Less than Significant None No No No CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-76
DISCUSSION a) Fire, Police, Schools, Parks, or Other Public Facilities Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to the provision of fire, police, school, parks, and recreational facilities.
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? b. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; Less than Significant None No No No
c. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-77
Analysis of Proposed Project Police Protection Service The Proposed Project would be located within the Project Area, which is served by the San Pablo Police Department (SPPD). Since the certification of the 2030 GP EIR, construction on the new San Pablo Police Department Headquarters and Regional Training Center is underway as of May 2025. The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. Buildout of the Proposed Project would not exceed the projected growth analyzed in the GP EIR and would be within the General Plan buildout analyzed in the previous 2030 GP EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to increase demand for police services beyond the level analyzed in the 2030GP EIR, and impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Fire and Emergency Services The Proposed Project would be located within the Project Area, which is served by Contra Costa County Fire Protection District. Since the certification of the 2030 GP EIR, the Contra Costa Fire Protection District has constructed a new station on 23rd Street in San Pablo, located half a mile west from the Project Area. The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. Buildout of the Proposed Project would not exceed the projected growth analyzed in the GP EIR and would be within the General Plan buildout analyzed in the previous 2030 GP EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to increase demand for fire and emergency beyond the level analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR, and impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Schools The Proposed Project would be located within the Project Area, served by West Contra Coast Unified School District (WCCUSD). WCCUSD estimates that it would need to expand some existing facilities and potentially alter current lease agreements with private and/or charter schools in order to meet the projected need. Similar to the previous EIR, new residential and mixed-use development under the Proposed Project would be required to pay standard school impact fees, which would cover a fair share of any need for altered school facilities. As provided by California Government Code Section 65996, the payment of such fees is deemed to fully mitigate the impacts of new development on school services. Therefore, payment of development fees to WCCUSD would address the Proposed Project’s impacts on schools, resulting in a less-than-significant impact. As such, the Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Parks The Proposed Project would be located within the Project Area, served by the City’s parks and recreation system. Specifically, since the certification of the previous EIR, the City and San Pablo CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-78
Economic Development Corporation developed the Rumrill Sports Complex within the Rumrill Corridor Plan Area, which features a soccer field complex with three fields, a picnic area, tor lot, and dedicated parking spaces. The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. Buildout of the Proposed Project would not exceed the projected growth analyzed in the GP EIR and would be within the General Plan buildout analyzed in the previous 2030 GP EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to increase demand for parks and recreation facilities beyond the level analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR, and impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Library Facilities The Proposed Project would be located within the Project Area, served by the newly constructed San Pablo Public Library of the Contra Costa County Library. The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan Buildout of the Proposed Project would not exceed the projected growth analyzed in the GP EIR and would be within the General Plan buildout analyzed in the previous 2030 GP EIR. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to increase demand for library facilities beyond the level analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR, and impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Use of Neighborhood, Regional, or Recreational Facilities Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to the provision of recreational facilities. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. Growth associated with implementation of the Proposed Project could increase use of the City’s existing neighborhood parks, such as the Rumrill Sports Complex, such that physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, as noted in the previous EIR. However, the level of deterioration would not exceed that normally expected to occur in an urban environment or what was previously analyzed, given that growth under the Rumrill Corridor Plan would occur incrementally throughout the corridor over a period of 10 to 15 years. As such, the Proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; therefore, this impact is less than significant. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-79
c) Construction or Expansion Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that implementation of the 2030 General Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to the provision of recreational facilities. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. Increased population growth generated by the development of the Proposed Project would likely use existing public service and community facilities within the city, including community centers, the San Pablo Public Library, and school spaces that could be used for community activities. Given that development of the Proposed Project would occur incrementally, population growth with implementation of the Proposed Project would not be expected to result in the substantial physical deterioration of existing facilities or to require construction or expansion of recreational facilities to meet the needs of new residents. As such, this impact is less than significant. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not introduce new impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. d) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR note the Planning Area is located in an area that is fully urban and is served by existing roadways, utility infrastructure, and service systems. The East Bay Municipal Utility District and West County Wastewater District provide water service and sanitary sewer service to the city, respectively. The amount of water consumed, and wastewater generated by the additional population is minimal and would not require or result in the construction of new treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. Solid waste generated by the future residents is disposed of through the West Contra Costa County Integrated Waste Management Authority at the Keller Canyon Landfill and the Potrero Hills Landfill. Both landfills have sufficient permitted capacity at the time of the certification, and development under the 2030 General Plan would not require expansion of these landfills. Development under the 2030 General Plan would be in compliance with all applicable codes for fire safety and emergency access. Additional school age children by the way of new households in the 2030 General Plan would not exceed existing school capacity and require the construction of new schools. Increased demand for public services and facilities, such as police, transportation improvements or park facilities, will be financed by developer contributions in proportion to the demand generated by project occupants and users. Therefore, the 2030 General Plan would not tax the existing community services facilities, create an unfair burden on existing users, or require the construction of new public facilities that would cause significant, cumulative environmental effects.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-80
Analysis of Proposed Project Consistent with the previous EIR, the increased local population generated by development pursuant to the Proposed Project may increase the need for police services and fire and emergency services. Even so, the Proposed Project would not permit development in new locations or at greater density or intensity than previously analyzed in the prior EIR. Therefore, no additional new or physically altered police facilities over and above those already planned would be required as a result of the Proposed Project. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant and equivalent to those identified in the prior EIR. Construction of new school facilities would be subject to separate project-level CEQA review at the time the design is proposed in order to identify and mitigate project-specific impacts as appropriate. Future facilities will be able to tier from this EIR to identify and mitigate site specific impacts if and when design of those facilities is complete. Similarly, any new parks needed as a result of the Proposed Project would be subject to separate project-level CEQA review at the time the design is proposed in order to identify and mitigate project-specific impacts as appropriate. Therefore, these cumulative impacts would be less than significant. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to public services and recreation. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.14 Transportation Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-81
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b); Not analyzed None No No No c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or Not analyzed None No No No
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? Not analyzed None No No No DISCUSSION a) Circulation System Plan Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that the 2030 General Plan land uses, policies, and bicycle linkages and alignments do not ultimately conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bikeways, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise substantially decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. In particular, 2030 General Plan policies ensure that potential conflicts associated with countywide bicycle planning and impacts to rail safety are less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Since certification of the 2030 GP EIR, the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (CCTA) adopted the 2018 Contra Costa Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (CBPP). Development CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-82
pursuant to the Proposed Project would primarily involve medium and higher density housing and businesses within the Rumrill PDA, consistent with Plans Bay Area 2050 and other regional efforts, which would support increased use of transit to, from and within the PDAs. The Proposed Project would also support CBPP, which plans for new bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements within the Rumrill Corridor Project Area with Goal-8 of the Proposed Project, which would manage circulation and improve connectivity to and along the Rumrill Corridor to ensure safe, efficient mobility for all roadway users. Actions include encouraging residents to walk and bicycle when shopping and visiting the neighborhood (Action RUM-8.c), pursuing funding and prioritize completion of the traffic connect system (Action RUM-8.b), and identifying potential funding sources for the installation of high visibility crosswalks at key intersections along the Corridor (Action RUM-8.d). Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to conflicts with adopted programs, plans, ordinances or policies addressing transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as with the 2030 General Plan. As such, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts than identified in the 2030 GP EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) VMT Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR used the performance measures (level of service ([LOS] and delay index) to identify potential roadway network deficiencies. The previous EIR noted implementation of the 2030 General Plan, in conjunction with regional growth and development and intersection reconfigurations by Caltrans, will increase traffic volumes on local streets by 2030 and affect intersection operations. A mitigation measure was offered that could potentially reduce the impact using just lane designation and signal timing changes. However, the effectiveness of this measure was deemed uncertain due to the uncertainty around traffic flow changes expected to result from the Caltrans ramp improvements. The previous EIR stated this impact is cumulatively significant, though the 2030 General’s Plan’s contribution to the significant cumulative effect is found to be less than considerable with this mitigation measure implemented. Analysis of Proposed Project Subsequent to certification of the 2030 GP EIR, the passage of Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) changed the way transportation impact analysis is conducted as part of CEQA compliance. Automobile delay, level of service (LOS), and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion can no longer be the basis for determining significant impacts under CEQA. In December 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) completed an update to the CEQA Guidelines to implement the requirements of SB 743. The guidelines state that vehicle miles travelled (VMT) must be the metric used to determine significant transportation impacts. The guidelines require all lead agencies in California to use VMT-based thresholds of significance in CEQA documents published after July 2020.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-83
CCTA published an implementation guide5 to assist lead agencies in their CEQA VMT analysis consistent with new requirements of the CCTA Growth Management Program (GMP). The guidance is intended to apply to the VMT evaluation of land use projects under CEQA. Compliance with the requirements of the implementation guide is mandatory as part of fulfillment of local jurisdictions’ requirements under the CCTA GMP. Local jurisdictions may choose to apply methods and thresholds that are more stringent than what is outlined in the guidance. The City of San Pablo has not adopted thresholds for VMT; therefore, the CCTA VMT analysis methodology is used for the purpose of this analysis. To evaluate impacts from the Proposed Project, the recommended metrics and thresholds for an addendum is the net difference in residential and employment VMT, described below: • Residential: A significant impact would occur if the VMT for a residential project (VMT/capita) is substantially higher than the prior General Plan for the 2035 Countywide average. • Employment-Generating: A significant impact would occur if the VMT for an employment project (VMT/employee) is substantially higher than the prior General Plan for the 2035 Countywide average. Accordingly, for the purpose of this analysis, the Proposed Project would result in a significant impact if proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed respective thresholds for the entire County. The following scenarios were analyzed using the Contra Costa Countywide travel demand model. Buildout of the 2030 General Plan was also reported in a separate scenario (as represented by the 2035 CCTA model) for cumulative comparison. • 2035 Countywide No-Build. Represents existing San Pablo General Plan and regional land use resulting from buildout as represented by the Contra Costa County General Plan. • 2035 Proposed Rumrill Corridor Buildout. Projected 2035 land use resulting from the Proposed Project and added to the Contra Costa County General Plan. Based on the established thresholds for a cumulative assessment under this Addendum, Table 3.14-1 summarizes the residential VMT results for San Pablo based on the cumulative 2035 County level no-build and 2035 County level buildout (of the Proposed Project). As shown in Table 3.14-1, with the San Pablo buildout, the VMT/Capita reduces from 16.9 to 16.7 VMT per capita. Ta bl e 3 . 1 4-1 Residential VMT per Capita Summary Year Scenario Area VMT/Capita Potential Impact? 2023 Existing Contra Costa County 17.3 - 2035 No Project Contra Costa County 16.9 - 2035 With the Proposed Project Contra Costa County 16.7 No Source: CCTA Model, Kittelson & Assoc. Inc., 2025 5 Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), 2021. Growth Management Program Implementation Documents Implementation Guide, Appendix F – VMT Analysis Methodology for Land Use Projects in Contra Costa. Available: https://ccta.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/GMP_Implementation_Guide_FINAL_02172021.pdf CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-84
Table 3.14-2 summarizes the employment VMT results for the Proposed Project based on the cumulative 2035 County level no-build and 2035 County level buildout plus the Proposed Project. As shown in Table 3.14-2, with the San Pablo buildout, the VMT/Employee remains at 15.3 at the county level. Ta bl e 3 . 1 4-2 Employment VMT per Job Summary Year Scenario Area VMT/Employee Potential Impact? 2023 Existing Contra Costa County 14.9 - 2035 No Project Contra Costa County 15.3 - 2035 With the Proposed Project Contra Costa County 15.3 No Source: CCTA Model, Kittelson & Assoc. Inc., 2025 Based on the approach and VMT analysis for the Proposed Project, the results indicate no substantial increase in VMT/capita or VMT/employee. Therefore, the VMT results conclude that the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact for VMT. As such, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts than identified in the 2030 GP EIR. No additional analysis is required. c-d) Traffic Hazards, Emergency Access Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR did not analyze the impacts the 2030 General Plan would have on hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment), nor impacts on inadequate emergency access. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. As such, it would not require the construction of new roads or the realignment of existing roadways. Individual developments associated with the Proposed Project would be required to be assessed for impact to emergency vehicle access and designed in accordance with all City applicable design standards for emergency access within and around the site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no impact with respect to hazards related to roadway design or emergency access. The Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts than identified in the 2030 GP EIR. No additional analysis is required. e) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR used the performance measures (level of service ([LOS] and delay index) to identify potential roadway network deficiencies. The previous EIR noted implementation of the 2030 General Plan, in conjunction with regional growth and development and intersection Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-85
reconfigurations by Caltrans, will increase traffic volumes on local streets by 2030 and affect intersection operations. A mitigation measure was offered that could potentially reduce the impact using just lane designation and signal timing changes. However, the effectiveness of this measure was deemed uncertain due to the uncertainty around traffic flow changes expected to result from the Caltrans ramp improvements. The previous EIR stated this impact is cumulatively significant, though the 2030 General’s Plan’s contribution to the significant cumulative effect is found to be less than considerable with this mitigation measure implemented. Analysis of Proposed Project Development pursuant to the Proposed Project would result in increased development in the Project Area and would generate additional vehicle trips on the local and regional roadway network. However, any such development would still be required to adhere to the Rumrill Corridor Plan goals, policies, and actions that seek to manage circulation and improve connectivity to and along the Rumrill Corridor to ensure safe, efficient mobility for all roadway users. Development under the Proposed Project would be consistent with such policies and regulations by increasing housing opportunities in already developed areas, which is an integral part of VMT reduction and encouraging transportation alternatives, such as walking and biking. The Proposed Project would not exceed the established threshold of significance for residential nor employment-base land uses, as previously analyzed. As such, this impact would not be cumulatively considerable. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts or new checklist questions related to transportation. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.15 Utilities and Service Systems Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, Less than Significant None No No No CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-86
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years; Less than Significant None No No No c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments; Less than Significant None No No No
d. Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid Less than Significant None No No No
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-87
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? waste reduction goals; or e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Not analyzed None No No No DISCUSSION a) Relocation or Expansion of Utilities Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR found that while population at buildout of the General Plan would slightly exceed that of the ABAG 2005 projections used to project water demand in the East Bay Municipal Utilities District service area, the additional demand would be minimal in relation to total available supply. With implementation of 2030 General Plan policies for water conservation, including PSCU-I-24 calling for the establishment of water conservation standards for new development and PSCU-I-25 calling for reduced water use in municipal operations, impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Water Water is supplied to the Project Area by the East Bay Municipal Utilities District (EBMUD). Prior to delivering water to customers, EBUD water is treated at its six treatment plants to ensure compliance with applicable standards. These facilities include Upper San Leandro in Oakland, San Pablo in Kensington, Sobrante in El Sobrante, and plants located in and named for Orinda, Lafayette and Walnut Creek. Since the certification of the prior EIR, in 2020, EBMUD prepared an Urban Water Management Plan to ensure that sufficient water supplies are available to meet existing and future water needs, and that steps are in place should a critical water shortage occur. The UWMP accounts for ABAG projections through 2040. Table 3.15-1 provides the forecasted water demands projections in five- CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-88
year increments through the year 2050. Cumulative water conservation and recycled water use goals are anticipated to be met and therefore subtracted from the forecasted demand to reach the planning level of demand (PLOD). Table 3.15-1: Average Annual Water Demand Forecast 2050 Demand Projections (MGD) 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Forecasted Water Demand 245 254 264 277 287 297 Water Conservation -53 -58 -61 -63 -65 -66 Recycled Water -6 -6 -6 -13 -13 -13 Raw Water -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 Planning Level of Demand (Rounded) 186 90 194 201 209 218 Source: EBMUD, Urban Water Management Plan, Table 3-1, 2020. Available: https://www.ebmud.com/download_file/force/9151/735?UWMP-2020-FINAL-bookmarks.pdf As the UWMP accounts for ABAG population projections through 2040 to calculate projected water demand through 2040, since the Proposed Project buildout population is within the 2030 General Plan and considering San Pablo’s marginal size in proportion to EBMUD’s service area (2.3 percent), the water agency should not encounter any difficulty meeting demand under the Proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years, and this impact is less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. Wastewater Treatment/Storm Water Drainage Development of the Proposed Project would continue to be served with wastewater collection and treatment service at the West County Wastewater District treatment plant located in the City of Richmond, where there is an existing capacity of up to 12.5 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd)6 The Proposed Project would result in up to 408 housing units and 369 new jobs by 2031. Assuming an average wastewater flow of 250 gallons per day (gpd) for residential projects, consistent with Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Policy published by the State Water Resources Control Board, and an average of 30 gpd per employee, consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's general estimate of wastewater generation, the Proposed Project would generate an additional 0.11 mgd of wastewater upon buildout in 2031, well within the existing 12.5 mgd excess capacity of the West County Wastewater District. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not require the construction or expansion of facilities beyond what was analyzed in the previous EIR, and this impact is less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would 6 West County Wastewater (WCW), 2025. About Us. Available: https://www.wcwd.org/about-us/ Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-89
not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. No additional analysis is required. Further, buildout of the Proposed Project would primarily involve infill development within the Rumrill PDA, where intensification of development has long been planned. As such, the construction of new or expansion of existing water and sewer conveyance infrastructure over and above that already planned and analyzed in the prior EIR would not be required to meet Proposed Project needs. New development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be required to comply with stormwater regulations, including National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and Contra Costa Clean Water C.3 provisions requiring the control of stormwater volume and velocity, minimizing the need for new or expanded public stormwater infrastructure. Development pursuant to the Proposed Project would also be required to adhere to San Pablo Municipal Code Chapter 8.40 Stormwater Management and Discharge Control that contains regulations related to stormwater management and drainage requirements for development projects. Therefore, impacts related to the construction or expansion of utility infrastructure would be less than significant, and overall, the Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts than analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR. No additional analysis is required. Power and Telecommunication Facilities As the Proposed Project is currently served by existing power and telecommunications infrastructure, the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. b) Water Supply Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted EBMUD should not encounter any difficulty meeting demand under the General Plan. General Plan policies would ensure that new developments are designed with low-flush toilets and other water saving features. The 2030 GP EIR stated the City would continue cooperative efforts with EBMUD to promote water conservation to the public. The General Plan also includes relevant policies designed to reduce water use, such as PSCU-I-23, PSCU-I-24, PSCU-I-25, PSCU-I-26, and PSCU-I-27. These policies include coordination with EBMUD to provide clean water supply, establishment of water saving and conservation standards for new development, reduction of water use in municipal buildings, and adoption of a Water Conservation Ordinance. In consideration of these policies, even though the 2030 General Plan will cause an increase in water demand that may or may not exceed supply, the overall impact would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project Since the certification of the prior EIR, in 2020, EBMUD prepared an UWMP to ensure that sufficient water supplies are available to meet existing and future water needs, and that steps are in place should a critical water shortage occur. As the UWMP accounts for ABAG projections through 2040, therefore accounting for the population growth of the Proposed Project, EBMUD should not encounter any difficulty meeting demand under the Proposed Project. The General Plan also includes relevant policies designed to reduce water use, such as PSCU-I-22, PSCU-I-23, PSCU-I- CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-90
24, PSCU-I-25, and PSCU-I-26. These policies include coordination with EBMUD to provide clean water supply, establishment of water saving and conservation standards for new development, reduction of water use in municipal buildings, and adoption of a Water Conservation Ordinance. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years, and this impact is less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. c) Wastewater Treatment Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR noted the West County Wastewater District treatment plant has sufficient capacity to meet projected treatment needs. At buildout of the General Plan, San Pablo’s population was expected to grow by only 10 percent while the rest of WCWD’s service area is unlikely to grow by more than 20 percent. Added together, they are unlikely to exceed the treatment plant’s available capacity. Although treatment plant capacity is not an issue, the 2030 GP EIR noted the WCWD will likely require new infrastructure, such as new pipelines, force mains, and pump-stations to meet future demands. To ensure that new development do not adversely affect the wastewater conveyance system, the General Plan includes a policy that requires new developments contribute to the cost of new wastewater facilities in proportion to the demand generated by project occupants and users. Additionally, the City aims to continue cooperative efforts with the WCWD to address planning capacity and identify deficiencies in the wastewater collection system. These policies and other policies would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Analysis of Proposed Project As noted above, development of the Proposed Project would continue to be served with wastewater collection and treatment service at the West County Wastewater District treatment plant located in the City of Richmond. The Proposed Project would generate an additional 0.12 mgd of wastewater upon buildout in 2031, well within the existing 12.5 million capacity of the West County Wastewater District. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not require the construction or expansion of facilities beyond what was analyzed in the previous EIR, and this impact is less than significant. There is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. No additional analysis is required. d-e) Solid Waste Reduction Goals and Conflict with Solid Waste Regulations Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that, with implementation of the solid waste reduction policies in the 2030 General Plan, West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (WCCIWMA) solid waste collection and landfill capacity would be sufficient to serve projected need under the 2030 General Plan and that impacts would be less than significant.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-91
Analysis of Proposed Project Since the 2030 GP EIR was certified, several new State laws that require solid waste diversion and reduction have been enacted, including AB 341- Mandatory Commercial Recycling, AB 1826- Mandatory Commercial Organics Recycling, AB 1884- Bans on Single-Use Plastic Straws, and SB 1383—Organics Recycling. Additionally, the City has adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that incorporates strategies for solid waste reduction and diversion from landfill. Compliance with new State law and implementation of CAP strategies in combination with continued implementation of solid waste reduction policies in the 2030 General Plan would help ensure that the Proposed Project would not increase per capita solid waste generation above the levels analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR. As discussed above, buildout of the Proposed Project would result in a substantially similar increment of growth as analyzed in the 2030 GP EIR. As such, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact related to solid waste generation, as with the 2030 General Plan. Additionally, new development pursuant to the Proposed Project would be required to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste and associated impacts would be less than significant. As such, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the Proposed Project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. No additional analysis is required. f) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR found that while population at buildout of the General Plan would slightly exceed that of the ABAG 2005 projections used to project water demand in the East Bay Municipal Utilities District service area, the additional demand would be minimal in relation to total available supply. With implementation of 2030 General Plan policies for water conservation, including PSCU-I-24 calling for the establishment of water conservation standards for new development and PSCU-I-25 calling for reduced water use in municipal operations, impacts would be less than significant. The 2030 GP EIR noted EBMUD should not encounter any difficulty meeting demand under the General Plan. General Plan policies would ensure that new developments are designed with low-flush toilets and other water saving features. The 2030 GP EIR stated the City would continue cooperative efforts with EBMUD to promote water conservation to the public. The General Plan also includes relevant policies designed to reduce water use, such as PSCU-I-23, PSCU-I-24, PSCU-I-25, PSCU-I-26, and PSCU-I-27. These policies include coordination with EBMUD to provide clean water supply, establishment of water saving and conservation standards for new development, reduction of water use in municipal buildings, and adoption of a Water Conservation Ordinance. In consideration of these policies, even though the 2030 General Plan will cause an increase in water demand that may or may not exceed supply, the overall impact would be less than significant. The 2030 GP EIR noted the West County Wastewater District treatment plant has sufficient capacity to meet projected treatment needs. At buildout of the General Plan, San Pablo’s population was expected to grow by only 10 percent while the rest of WCWD’s service area is unlikely to grow by more than 20 percent. Added together, they are unlikely to exceed the treatment plant’s available capacity.
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-92
Although treatment plant capacity is not an issue, the 2030 GP EIR noted the WCWD will likely require new infrastructure, such as new pipelines, force mains, and pump-stations to meet future demands. To ensure that new development do not adversely affect the wastewater conveyance system, the General Plan includes a policy that requires new developments contribute to the cost of new wastewater facilities in proportion to the demand generated by project occupants and users. Additionally, the City aims to continue cooperative efforts with the WCWD to address planning capacity and identify deficiencies in the wastewater collection system. These policies and other policies would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. The 2030 GP EIR determined that, with implementation of the solid waste reduction policies in the 2030 General Plan, West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (WCCIWMA) solid waste collection and landfill capacity would be sufficient to serve projected need under the 2030 General Plan and that impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard. The Proposed Project would generate additional demand for water and wastewater, stormwater, solid waste services, power, and telecommunications services, the effects of which were considered in the prior EIR. Regarding water supply, consistent with the prior EIR, East Bay Municipal Utility District is able to meet water demand in a normal, non-drought year. Buildout of the Proposed Project would not exceed the projected growth analyzed in the GP EIR and would be within the General Plan buildout analyzed in the previous 2030 GP EIR. Thus, the contribution of the Proposed Project would not be cumulatively considerable, and cumulative impacts would be equivalent to those detailed in the prior EIR. With regards to wastewater treatment and distribution, the West County Wastewater District water treatment plant has adequate capacity to serve the 2031 population service area, and the impact is not cumulatively considerable. For stormwater drainage facilities, future developments within the Project Area must meet the requirements of the City of San Pablo NPDES Phase II permit with the California State Water Board, the Municipal Code, and other applicable local, state, and federal requirements. With compliance to these regulations, impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. In addition, the Proposed Project would not be a substantial contributor to the City’s solid waste at the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority solid waste collection and landfill capacity and the impact would not be cumulatively considerable. Finally, PG&E and AT&T still expected to be able to meet overall demand for electricity and natural gas for all its customers, including Contra Costa County, in the future. PG&E will continue to maintain and upgrade its electrical and natural gas distribution systems as needed based on future demand trends. Therefore, the impact of the Proposed Project on power infrastructure would not be cumulatively considerable. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-93
CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts related to utilities and service systems. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project. 3.16 Wildfire Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant None No No No b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire Not Discussed None No No No
CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-94
Would the project: Environmental Issue Area 2030 GP EIR Findings Mitigation Measures Does the Proposed Project Involve New or More Severe Impacts? New Circumstances Involving New or More Severe Impacts? New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Not Discussed None No No No
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No Impact None No No No
DISCUSSION a-d) Emergency Response/Evacuation, Wildfire Risks, Infrastructure, Flooding or Landslides Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The 2030 GP EIR determined that buildout of the 2030 General Plan would not increase the threat of wildfire hazards as less than one percent of the Planning Area is designated as high or very high threat of wildfire by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and because buildout would occur primarily on urban infill sites away from designated high and very high wildfire threat.
Chapter 3: Environmental Analysis
3-95
Analysis of Proposed Project Subsequent to the certification of the 2030 GP EIR, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to incorporate new criteria for the evaluation of impacts related to wildfire and CAL FIRE updated its maps of High and Very High Wildfire Severity Zones (VHFHSZ). As described above under the Hazards section, based on CAL FIRE mapping, areas in the southeast of San Pablo, west of I-80 are classified as VHFHSZ and adjacent areas outside the City limit in Wildcat Canyon are also classified as VHFHSZ. Implementation of the Proposed Project would include targeted revisions and technical amendments of the General Plan, which would not expose people and structures to significant impacts. Buildout of the Proposed Project would primarily involve infill development within the Rumrill Corridor Project Area on the west side of I-80, which is not within a VHFHSZ. New residential construction would be required to comply with California Building Code standards designed to reduce the risk of loss and damage associated with wildfire. As discussed under the Hazards section, the Proposed Project would involve continued implementation of Safety and Noise Element policies that would protect San Pablo residents and business from potential fire hazards and further support the wildfire risk reduction and emergency evacuation strategies contained in the Contra Costa County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) and Contra Costa County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), including SN-I-16 through SN-1-19 and SN-I-31 through SN-I-34. Policies would continue work with the County Fire Department to make San Pablo more resilient to fire hazards, work cooperatively with the Fire Department to promote public awareness of fire safety, and require sprinklers in addition to fire breaks or fire door in all mixed use development and buildings exceeding 5,000 square feet to protect residential uses from non-residential uses, which typically pose a higher fire risk, applicable to development under the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more adverse impacts than identified in the 2030 GP EIR and impacts from the Proposed Project on emergency response and emergency evacuation plans would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. As the Proposed Project would primarily involve infill development within the Project Area and involves updates to the General Plan, it would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure, like roads or water sources, that may exacerbate fire risk. As such, this impact would be less than significant. Further, most of the Project Area is in an area of low landslide susceptibility and no downright slope, as noted in the Geology and Soils section. Further, development on within the Project Area with slope stability hazards would be subject to the provisions of the California Building Code, adopted and incorporated into the Municipal Code, which regulate analysis of slope instability and requirements for drainage and grading. Compliance with NPDES and local Municipal Code regulations would reduce impacts related to flooding and landslides to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, there is no new information identifying new significant effects and the proposed project would not introduce impacts or create more severe impacts than those identified in the previous EIR. Therefore, overall implementation of the Proposed Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency evacuation or response plan; would not exacerbate wildfire risk and expose CEQA Addendum - Rumrill Corridor Plan and General Plan Update 3-96
people to pollutant concentrations from wildfire; would not require the installation of infrastructure that may exacerbate wildfire risk; or expose people or structure to significant downslope risks. Overall, impacts would be less than significant, and no additional analysis is required. e) Cumulative Impacts Summary of 2030 GP EIR Findings The previous EIR noted that implementation of the 2030 General Plan is not expected to increase the threat of wildfire hazards as most land use changes in the 2030 General Plan are in existing urban infill sites. As stated in the prior EIR, less than one percent of the Planning Area has a high or very high threat of wildfire according to wildfire hazard data provided by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Cumulative impacts are not evaluated in the previous EIR. Analysis of Proposed Project The Proposed Project would involve strategies that would lead to improved environmental conditions, economic opportunities, and housing development sites for a segment of Rumrill Boulevard, , as well as targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. In addition, any development must be constructed in accordance with federal, state, regional, and local requirements, which are intended to ensure the safety of county residents and structures to the extent feasible. Further, implementation of the implementation of Safety and Noise Element, which includes policies that support the wildfire risk reduction and emergency evacuation strategies contained in the HMP and CWPP, including SN-I-16 through SN-1-19 and SN-I-31 through SN-I-34, would further reduce risks. Thus, implementation of the Proposed Project would not impair an emergency response or emergency evacuation plan; as such, there would not be a cumulatively considerable impact with impacts equivalent as those identified in the prior EIR. Further, the Proposed Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the Project Area. The Proposed Project includes targeted revisions and technical amendments to the General Plan. Development pursuant to the Proposed Project would consist on infill, medium, and high-density development in already urbanized areas of Rumrill Corridor Plan. Compliance with local and state regulations and plans pertaining to wildfire would help reduce impacts regionally; the Proposed Project’s contribution to wildfire risks is not considered cumulatively considerable. Given that the Proposed Project would not introduce new cumulative impacts or create more severe cumulative impacts than those identified in the previous EIR, no additional analysis is required. APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES None. CONCLUSION There is no new information identifying new significant effects, nor is there an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts or new checklist questions related to wildfires. The conclusions from the previous EIR remain unchanged when considering the implementation of the Proposed Project.
4-1
4 List of Preparers A list of contributing City staff and consultant team members, their titles, and affiliations, is provided below. CITY OF SAN PABLO • Elizabeth “Libby” Tyler, Ph.D., FAICP, Community Development Director • Sandra Castaneda Marquez, MPA, Associate Planner CONSULTANTS Dyett and Bhatia • Andrew Hill, Principal • Karen Chavez, Planner • Isha Bhattarai, Senior GIS Specialist