VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

State Clearinghouse No. 2011012034

DRAFT

Prepared by:

City of Vallejo 555 Santa Clara Street Vallejo, CA 94590

With the Assistance of:

Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 3875 Atherton Road Rocklin, CA 95765

December 2011 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1.1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE EIR...... 1.1 1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT ...... 1.1 1.3 EIR SCOPE ...... 1.2 1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION ...... 1.2 1.5 AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT EIR ...... 1.3

2.0 SUMMARY ...... 2.1 2.1 PROJECT UNDER REVIEW ...... 2.1 2.2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 2.1 2.2.1 Summary of Initial Study Findings ...... 2.1 2.2.2 Potential Areas of Controversy ...... 2.2 2.2.3 Significant Impacts ...... 2.2 2.2.4 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ...... 2.3 2.2.5 Cumulative Impacts ...... 2.3 2.2.6 Alternatives to the Proposed Project...... 2.3 2.3 SUMMARY TABLE ...... 2.3

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 3.1 3.1 PROJECT SITE ...... 3.1 3.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ...... 3.5 3.3 PROPOSED PROJECT ...... 3.6 3.3.1 Functional Design ...... 3.6 3.3.2 Principal Phases of the Project ...... 3.10 3.3.3 Other Related Improvements...... 3.11 3.3.4 Visual Resource Considerations to the Design ...... 3.12 3.3.5 Temporary Parking During Construction ...... 3.14 3.4 USE OF THIS EIR...... 3.16

4.0 SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION ...... 4.1 4.1 AESTHETICS ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.1 4.1.1.1 Regional/Local ...... 4.1 4.1.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.2 4.1.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.4 4.1.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.4 4.1.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.14 4.1.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.14 4.2 AIR QUALITY ...... 4.18 4.2.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.18 4.2.1.1 Federal ...... 4.18 4.2.1.2 State ...... 4.20

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc i VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

Table of Contents

4.2.1.3 Regional ...... 4.22 4.2.1.4 Local ...... 4.24 4.2.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.25 4.2.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.30 4.2.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.30 4.2.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.30 4.2.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.31 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...... 4.44 4.3.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.44 4.3.1.1 Federal ...... 4.44 4.3.1.2 State ...... 4.45 4.3.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.46 4.3.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.46 4.3.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.51 4.3.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.51 4.3.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.52 4.3.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.53 4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES ...... 4.54 4.4.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.54 4.4.1.1 Federal ...... 4.54 4.4.1.2 State ...... 4.56 4.4.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.59 4.4.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.62 4.4.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.66 4.4.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.66 4.4.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.67 4.4.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.68 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ...... 4.72 4.5.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.72 4.5.1.1 Federal ...... 4.72 4.5.1.2 State ...... 4.72 4.5.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.73 4.5.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.74 4.5.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.82 4.5.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.82 4.5.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.83 4.5.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.83 4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ...... 4.87 4.6.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.87 4.6.1.1 Federal ...... 4.88 4.6.1.2 State ...... 4.89 4.6.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.90 4.6.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.91 4.6.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.94 4.6.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.94 4.6.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.94 4.6.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.95

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc ii VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

Table of Contents

4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ...... 4.98 4.7.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.98 4.7.1.1 Federal ...... 4.98 4.7.1.2 State ...... 4.100 4.7.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.101 4.7.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.101 4.7.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.102 4.7.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.102 4.7.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.102 4.7.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.103 4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ...... 4.106 4.8.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.106 4.8.1.1 Federal ...... 4.106 4.8.1.2 State ...... 4.107 4.8.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.108 4.8.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.110 4.8.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.112 4.8.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.112 4.8.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.114 4.8.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.115 4.9 NOISE IMPACTS ...... 4.122 4.9.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.128 4.9.1.1 Federal ...... 4.128 4.9.1.2 State ...... 4.131 4.9.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.132 4.9.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.135 4.9.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.135 4.9.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.135 4.9.3.2 Criteria of Significance...... 4.136 4.9.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.136 4.10 PUBLIC SERVICES ...... 4.143 4.10.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.143 4.10.1.1 Regional/Local ...... 4.143 4.10.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.143 4.10.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.146 4.10.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.146 4.10.3.2 Criteria of Significance ...... 4.146 4.10.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.146 4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC ...... 4.148 4.11.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.148 4.11.1.1 Federal ...... 4.148 4.11.1.2 State...... 4.148 4.11.1.3 Regional/Local ...... 4.149 4.11.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.150 4.11.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.156 4.11.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.156 4.11.3.2 Criteria of Significance ...... 4.161

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc iii VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

Table of Contents

4.11.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.162 4.12 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ...... 4.180 4.12.1 Regulatory Setting ...... 4.180 4.12.2 Environmental Setting ...... 4.181 4.12.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 4.186 4.12.3.1 Methodology ...... 4.186 4.12.3.2 Criteria of Significance ...... 4.186 4.12.3.3 Project Impacts ...... 4.187

5.0 ALTERNATIVES ...... 5.1 5.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 5.1 5.2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THIS EIR ...... 5.3

6.0 CEQA REQUIRED ASSESSMENT ...... 6.1 6.1 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS ...... 6.1 6.1.1 Growth Inducing Impacts of the Vallejo Transit Center at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street ...... 6.2 6.1.2 Remove Obstacles to Growth ...... 6.2 6.1.3 Require Construction of New Facilities ...... 6.3 6.2 CONSEQUENCES OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ...... 6.3 6.2.1 Environmental Effects Found Not To Be Significant ...... 6.3 6.3 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ...... 6.4 6.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...... 6.4

7.0 REPORT PREPARATION ...... 7.1 7.1 REPORT PREPARERS ...... 7.1 7.2 REFERENCES ...... 7.1 7.3 CONTACTS ...... 7.3

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.3-1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ...... 2.4 Table 3.4-1: Required Permits and Approvals ...... 3.16 Table 4.1-1: Landscape Visual Quality Scale Used in Rating the Areas Potentially Affected by the Project ...... 4.2 Table 4.2-1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Status - San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin ...... 4.19 Table 4.2-2: California Ambient Air Quality Standards and Status - San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin ...... 4.21 Table 4.2-3: Ambient Air Quality Standards ...... 4.26 Table 4.2-4: Description of Pollutants ...... 4.28 Table 4.2-5: Ambient Pollutant Concentrations Measured Near the Project Site by Year ...... 4.29 Table 4.2-6: BAAQMD Adopted Air Quality CEQA Thresholds of Significance ...... 4.31 Table 4.2-7: Summary of Vallejo Transit Center Construction Emissions ...... 4.33 Table 4.2-8: Summary of Vallejo Transit Center Operation Emissions ...... 4.34

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc iv VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

Table of Contents

Table 4.2-9: Summary of Vehicle Trips on Affected Roadways ...... 4.40 Table 4.2-10: Summary of Cumulative Local Risk and Hazard Emissions Sources ...... 4.41 Table 4.3-1: Special-Status Wildlife and Plant Species with Potential Habitat in the Project Area ...... 4.50 Table 4.4-1: Summary of Previous Surveys within 0.5 mile of Project ...... 4.63 Table 4.6-1: Estimated Construction GHG Emissions ...... 4.95 Table 4.6-2: Estimated Operation GHG Emissions ...... 4.96 Table 4.8-1: State of California Watershed Hierarchy Classifications ...... 4.111 Table 4.8-2: Summary of Floodplain Volume Impacts ...... 4.119 Table 4.9-1: Definition of Acoustical Terms ...... 4.124 Table 4.9-2: Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels ...... 4.127 Table 4.9-3: Summary of EPA Noise Levels ...... 4.128 Table 4.9-4: Summary of Human Effects in Areas Exposed to 55 dBA Ldn ...... 4.131 Table 4.9-5: Land Compatibility Standards for Community Noise Environments ...... 4.133 Table 4.9-6: Noise Performance Standards ...... 4.134 Table 4.9-7: Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels (Lmax) ...... 4.138 Table 4.9-8: Typical Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ...... 4.141 Table 4.11-1: Intersection Level of Service Definitions—HCM Methodology ...... 4.158 Table 4.11-2: Intersection Level of Service—Existing Conditions ...... 4.159 Table 4.11-3: Vehicle-Trip Generation ...... 4.160 Table 4.11-4: Project Parking Demand ...... 4.161 Table 4.11-5: Intersection Level of Service—Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions ...... 4.163 Table 4.11-6: Intersection Level of Service—Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions ...... 4.166 Table 5.2-1: Summary of Alternatives ...... 5.4 Table 5.2-2: Comparison of Alternatives ...... 5.6

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1-1: Regional Vicinity ...... 3.2 Figure 3.1-2: Project Location ...... 3.3 Figure 3.1-3: Existing Site layout ...... 3.4 Figure 3.3-1: Overall Site Plan ...... 3.7 Figure 3.3-2: Phasing Plan ...... 3.8 Figure 3.3-3: Phase I Site Layout ...... 3.9 Figure 3.3-4: Potential Temporary Parking Locations ...... 3.15 Figure 4.1-1: Key Observation Point Locations ...... 4.6 Figure 4.1-2: Rendering of Transit Center From Street View ...... 4.8 Figure 4.1-3: Rendering of the Transit Center from Aerial View ...... 4.9 Figure 4.1-4: Rendering of the Transit Center from Plaza View ...... 4.10 Figure 4.1-5: KOP 1 - Photo Simulation from Evans Street at Cyprus ...... 4.12 Figure 4.1-6: KOP 2 - Photo Simulation from Lake Dalwigk Park just South of Chestnut Street and 5th Street ...... 4.13 Figure 4.1-7: Lighting Study ...... 4.17 Figure 4.3-1: Biological Study Area ...... 4.48 Figure 4.3-2: California Natural Diversity Database ...... 4.49 Figure 4.4-1: Area of Potential Effects ...... 4.55 Figure 4.5-1: Regional Geology ...... 4.76 Figure 4.5-2: Soil Survey ...... 4.77

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc v VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

Table of Contents

Figure 4.5-3: Active Fault Zones ...... 4.79 Figure 4.8-1: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map ...... 4.113 Figure 4.8-2: Topographic Map Showing Floodplain Impacts ...... 4.120 Figure 4.9-1: FTA Noise Impact Criteria ...... 4.130 Figure 4.11-1: Study Intersections...... 4.153 Figure 4.11-2: Existing Transit Network ...... 4.154 Figure 4.12-1: Utility ExhibitWastewater Treatment Facilities ...... 4.184

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Notice of Preparation and Initial Study Appendix B Feasibility Study Appendix C Air Quality Calculations Appendix D Cultural Resources Information Appendix E Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessment Appendix F Traffic Impact Study

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc vi VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

1.0 Introduction

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE EIR

In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this report describes the environmental consequences of the Vallejo Transit Center project located at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street in Solano County. The City of Vallejo is the lead agency for environmental review of the proposed project. This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be used by the City of Vallejo, Solano County, Solano County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), and the public in their review of the proposed project and the various approvals required for the project as described in Chapter III of this document. This EIR is designed to provide information about the proposed project and the potential consequences of project approval to: the City of Vallejo and Solano County decision-makers; responsible agencies including Solano County LAFCO, Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Vallejo Water Department and Solano County Water Agency; trustee agencies such as the California Department of Fish and Game; and the general public. This EIR also examines alternative locations for the proposed project, and recommends a set of mitigation measures to reduce or avoid potentially significant impacts.

1.2 PROPOSED PROJECT

The Vallejo Transit Center at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street (Transit Center) is currently a park-and-ride lot located in the City of Vallejo on the south side of Curtola Parkway and west of Lemon Street. This Transit Center was identified as one of several park-and-ride facilities in the I-80/I-680/I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study prepared by Korve Engineering, Inc. in 2004. It is considered by the Solano Transit Authority (STA) as one of the most important mid- term projects for implementation. The site’s proximity to a major freeway interchange (I-80 and I-780) puts the Transit Center in a prime location for continued commuter use.

The project is proposed to be constructed in three major phases. Phase 1 provides a stand- alone four level parking structure with internal ramping system accommodating 420 parking stalls, a civic transit plaza providing bus stops, passenger drop-off, and casual carpool pick-up. Phase 2 of the project provides another 420 stalls in a four-story parking structure of similar functional design to Phase 1, with internal ramping. Phase 2 will also include constructing the infrastructure for and relocating the existing Greyhound bus station. Sufficient details regarding the Greyhound bus station relocation are not known at this time and a supplemental environmental document will be required at a later time. Phase 3 will complete full build-out of the project site, with a 320 stall, four-story expansion structure immediately east of the Phase 2 structure. The proposed project is described in detail in Chapter 3.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 1.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Introduction December 2011

1.3 EIR SCOPE

The City of Vallejo circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for this EIR on October 2010 that included an Initial Study (IS) documenting a list of potential environmental effects that could result from the proposed project. The NOP was mailed to public agencies and organizations considered likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the project. Comments received by the City on the NOP were taken into account during preparation of this EIR. The NOP and written comment letters are provided in Appendix A of this EIR.

The following environmental topics were determined to have a potential for significant environmental impacts in the IS and are addressed as separate sections in this EIR:

 Aesthetics

 Air Quality



i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 1.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Introduction December 2011

Biological Resources  Hydrology and Water Quality

 Cultural Resources  Noise

 Geology and Soils  Public Services

 Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Utilities and Service Systems

 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

The following environmental topics were determined to have no environmental impact as discussed in the IS and are not discussed in this EIR:

 Agriculture and Forest Resources  Population and Housing

 Land Use and Planning  Recreation

 Mineral Resources

1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION

This EIR is organized into the following chapters:

 Chapter 1 – Introduction: Discusses the overall EIR purpose; provides a summary of the proposed action and EIR topics; and summarizes the organization of the EIR.

 Chapter 2 – Summary: Provides a summary of impacts that would result from implementation of the proposed project, and describes mitigation measures recommended to reduce or avoid significant impacts. A discussion of alternatives to the proposed project is also provided.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 1.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Introduction December 2011

 Chapter 3 – Project Description: Provides a description of the project site, site development history, project objectives, required approval process, and details of the project itself.

 Chapter 4 – Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Describes the following for each environmental technical topic: existing conditions (setting); potential environmental impacts and their level of significance; and mitigation measures recommended to mitigate identified impacts. Potential adverse impacts are identified by levels of significance as follows: less-than-significant impact (LTS), significant impact (S), and significant and unavoidable impact (SU). The significance of each impact is categorized before and after implementation of any recommended mitigation measures.

 Chapter 5 – Alternatives: Provides and evaluation of two alternatives to the proposed project including the No Project Alternative.

 Chapter 6 – CEQA Required Assessment Conclusions: Provides additional specifically- required analyses of the proposed project’s growth-inducing effects, provides the required analysis of cumulative impacts and mitigation measures, significant unavoidable impacts, and effects found not to be significant.

 Chapter 7 – Report Preparation: Identifies prepares of the EIR, references used and persons and organizations contacted.

1.5 AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT EIR

This Draft EIR is being distributed directly to agencies, organizations, and interested groups and persons for comment during a 30-day formal review period in accordance with Section 15087 of the State CEQA Guidelines. This Draft EIR and the full administrative record for the proposed Project, including all studies, is available for review during normal business hours Monday through Friday at the City of Vallejo Planning Department, located at:

City of Vallejo Planning Department 555 Santa Clara Street Vallejo, CA 94590 Phone: 707-648-5392

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 1.3 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

2.0 Summary

This chapter provides an overview of the proposed project and the findings outlined in the EIR, including a discussion of alternatives and cumulative project impacts.

2.1 PROJECT UNDER REVIEW

This EIR has been prepared in order to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Vallejo Transit Center and Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street (Project) proposed at the approximately 6 acre site of an existing Park-and-Ride facility in the City of Vallejo (City). Currently, the proposed project site is a Park-and-Ride facility consisting of the Main Lot located between Lake Dalwigk and Lemon Street and the Overflow Lot located to the east of Lemon Street. The proposed project will construct two parking structures built in three phases that will provide approximately 1,160 structured spaces. The first phase will occur on the western most portion of the site and will include the construction of a four level (three supported), two bay structure with entry/exit off of Carlson Street, which will be extended to connect to Curtola Parkway. The second phase will be an almost identical structure located to the east of phase one also with an entry/exit off of Carlson Street. Phase three will consist of a horizontal expansion of the phase two structure that utilizes the phase two ramping system and entry/exit location. Phases one and two will be separated by the bus/pedestrian plaza, and will include stair and elevator towers.

2.2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

This summary provides an overview of the analysis contained in the Initial Study (included as Appendix A) and Chapter 4: Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures. CEQA requires a summary to include discussion of the following:  Summary of the Initial Study findings  Potential areas of controversy  Significant and Significant Unavoidable Impacts  Cumulative Impacts  Alternatives to the Proposed Project

2.2.1 Summary of Initial Study Findings

The Initial Study identified no impacts to the following environmental issues:

 Agriculture and Forest Resources  Population and Housing  Land Use and Planning  Recreation  Mineral Resources

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

The Initial Study identified potentially significant impacts that can be mitigated to a less than significant level with mitigation measures to the following environmental issues:

 Aesthetics  Recreation

 Air Quality  Hazards and Hazardous Materials

 Biological Resources  Hydrology and Water Quality

 Cultural Resources  Noise

 Geology and Soils  Transportation and Traffic

 Population and Housing

2.2.2 Potential Areas of Controversy

One letter from Caltrans was received in response to the IS/NOP. The letter identified comments related to the Traffic Impact Study, Transportation Management Plan (if there is a need to clear a ramp or a portion of the freeway), Cultural Resources, and the need for an Encroachment Permit.

In addition to the comments received, it is anticipated that aesthetics will be a sensitive resource area due to the surrounding residential land uses.

2.2.3 Significant Impacts

Under CEQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as “… a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objectives of historic or aesthetic significance.” (Public Resources Code 15382 and 21068). The proposed project would result in significant impacts to the following environmental issue areas; however, these impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation of mitigation measures recommended in this EIR.

 Aesthetics  Hazards and Hazardous Materials

 Air Quality  Hydrology and Water Quality

 Biological Resources  Noise

 Cultural Resources  Public Services

 Geology and Soils  Transportation and Traffic

 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Table 2.3-1 at the end of this Chapter summarizes the impacts and mitigation measures from the EIR. For a complete description of potential impacts and recommended mitigation measures, please refer to the specific section in Chapter 4 of this EIR.

2.2.4 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts

The impact assessment in the EIR results in no impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project does not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts.

2.2.5 Cumulative Impacts

As discussed in more detail in Chapter 4 by resource area, the proposed project, in conjunction with other foreseeable projects, does not result in significant cumulative impacts.

2.2.6 Alternatives to the Proposed Project

Three alternatives to the proposed project are analyzed in Chapter 5 of this EIR as summarized below.

 The no project alternative assumes the site will remain a Park-and-Ride facility and that a transit center and parking facility will not be constructed.

 The Project is relocated to Admiral Callaghan Lane at Columbus Parkway approximately 4.3 miles to the north.

 The Project is relocated to Admiral Callaghan Lane South of Turner Parkway approximately 3.4 miles to the north.

Each alternative is compared to the proposed project and discussed in terms of relative impacts on the environment.

2.3 SUMMARY TABLE

As previously discussed, Table 2.3-1 shows the recommended mitigation measures as they relate to each environmental topic in the EIR that had an impact determined to be significant prior to mitigation. The table is arranged in four columns: 1) impacts; 2) level of significance without mitigation; 3) mitigation measures; and 4) level of significance after mitigation. Levels of significance are categorized as follows: SU = Significant and Unavoidable; S = Significant; LTS = Less than Significant. For a complete discussion of potential impacts and recommended mitigation measures, please refer to the specific discussion in Chapter 4.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.3 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Table 2.3-1: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation AESTHETICS AES-1: Existing visual character or S Mitigation Measure AES-1: Minimize the aesthetic impact of the LTS quality structure through the use of landscaping materials and choice of primary façade materials and colors that borrow from or complement the surrounding environment. Methods to achieve this shall include but are not limited to:  Primary façade colors shall borrow from or complement the dominant colors in the project vicinity. These include light grays, light tans, light yellows, terra cottas and browns. Additional colors that meet the intent of this mitigation measure may be considered at the discretion of the City.  Tree planting along the south side of Curtola Parkway shall be of a large canopy shade tree with mature height equal or greater to the height of the building at 15 years growth. Tree spacing shall be at 35’ on-center minimum or 80% of the mature canopy of the tree, whichever is less. This planting shall be required along the Project’s entire interface along Curtola Parkway during Phase 1 construction to allow the trees to mature at an equal rate and mitigate future phases. These trees are to be retained and protected in future phases. Additionally, accent trees, shrubs, and vines are strongly encouraged. To the extent feasible, maximize tree planting along other property lines and in other non-developed areas within the site boundary. Priority shall be placed on screening views from residential and recreational areas. Accent trees, shrubs, and vines are strongly encouraged.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.4 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation AES-2: New source of substantial S Mitigation Measure AES-2: Minimize the impact of light and glare LTS light or glare from the proposed parking structure on the surrounding environment. Methods to achieve this shall include but are not limited to:  Prohibit use of reflective metal walls and mirrored glass walls as primary building materials for facades.  All major exterior finishes shall be non-reflective and/or shall be painted with low/no-gloss paint.  Utilize screen walls on the building exterior to block or diffuse light and glare from headlights. Light fixtures configured to emphasize close spacing and lower intensity light. Light fixtures shall use luminaries with cut-off or shielding devices that direct the cone of light downward and minimize the visibility of bulbs from the surrounding area. AIR QUALITY AIR-2: Violate air quality standard or S Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Use low VOC coatings for any exterior LTS contribute substantially to an existing or interior surface where the application of architectural coatings or projected air quality violation is necessary. Mitigation Measure AIR-2: All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. Mitigation Measure AIR-3: All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. Mitigation Measure AIR-4: All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. Mitigation Measure AIR-5: All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 mph. Mitigation Measure AIR-6: All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Mitigation Measure AIR-7: Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.5 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. Mitigation Measure AIR-8: All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer‘s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Mitigation Measure AIR-9: Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District‘s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. AIR-4: Expose sensitive receptors to S Mitigation Measure AIR-10: All exposed surfaces shall be watered LTS substantial pollutant concentrations at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe. Mitigation Measure AIR-11: All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph. Mitigation Measure AIR-12: Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. Wind breaks should have at maximum 50 percent air porosity. Mitigation Measure AIR-13: Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast- germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. Mitigation Measure AIR-14: The simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities on the same area at any one time shall be limited. Activities shall be phased to reduce the amount of disturbed surfaces at any one time. Mitigation Measure AIR-15: All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.6 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Measure AIR-16: Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6 to 12 inch compacted layer of crushed rock. Mitigation Measure AIR-17: Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent. Mitigation Measure AIR-18: Minimizing the idling time of diesel powered construction equipment to two minutes. Mitigation Measure AIR-19: The project shall develop a plan demonstrating that the off-road equipment (more than 50 horsepower) to be used in the construction project (i.e., owned, leased, and subcontractor vehicles) would achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent PM reduction compared to the most recent ARB fleet average. Acceptable options for reducing emissions include the use of late model engines, low-emission diesel products, alternative fuels, engine retrofit technology, after-treatment products, add-on devices such as particulate filters, and/or other options as such become available. Mitigation Measure AIR-20: Use low VOC (i.e., ROG) coatings beyond the local requirements (i.e., Regulation 8, Rule 3: Architectural Coatings). Mitigation Measure AIR-21: Requiring that all construction equipment, diesel trucks, and generators be equipped with Best Available Control Technology for emission reductions of NOX and PM. Mitigation Measure AIR-22: Requiring all contractors use equipment that meets CARB‘s most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1: Conflict with Local Policies or S Mitigation Measure BIO-1: If construction begins during the LTS Ordinances breeding season (March 1 to September 1), a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction nesting surveys of the eucalyptus trees 30 days prior to tree removal. If a nest is located, removal of the tree should be postponed until nesting activity is complete as determined by a qualified biologist.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.7 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation CULTURAL RESOURCES CULT-1: Historical Resources S Mitigation Measure CULT-1: Proper handling of Inadvertent LTS Discovery of Historical Resources. If cultural resources are encountered during project construction, construction shall be halted immediately in the subject area and a qualified professional archaeologist consulted. Historic resources may include stone or wood foundations or walls, structures or remains with square nails, and refuse deposits. CULT-2: Archaeological Resources S Mitigation Measure CULT-2: Conduct Worker Awareness LTS Training. Before any work occurs in the project area, including grading, a qualified cultural specialist will conduct mandatory contractor/worker awareness training for construction personnel. The awareness training will be provided to all construction personnel to brief them on the need to avoid impacts on cultural resources, particularly historical resources and human remains and the penalties for not complying with cultural mitigation requirements. If new construction personnel are added to the project, the County will ensure that the personnel receive the mandatory training before starting work. Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Monitoring During Construction. The applicant shall supply a qualified Archaeological Monitor which shall be present at the construction site when mechanical excavation is taking place. The qualified Archaeologist should meet the minimum qualifications for Principal Investigator on federal projects under the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The monitor’s role will be to watch for buried archaeological deposits during excavation. If the Archaeological Monitor identifies archaeological resources during construction, he or she should immediately notify the Site Superintendent, who should halt construction in the immediate vicinity of the find, as necessary. The Site Superintendent and Archaeological Monitor will use flagging tape, rope, or some other means as necessary to delineate the area of the find within which construction will halt. This area should include the excavation trench from which the archaeological finds came as well as any piles of dirt or rock spoil

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.8 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation from that area. Construction should not take place within the delineated find area until consultation with the Caltrans archaeology staff can inspect and evaluate the find. Mitigation Measure CULT-4: Discovery. If a new cultural resources site is discovered during construction, and determined to be significant, a qualified Archaeologist will prepare and implement a mitigation plan in accordance with state regulations. This plan will emphasize the avoidance, if possible, of significant archaeological resources. If avoidance is not possible, recovery of a sample of the deposit from which the archaeologist can define scientific data to address archaeological research questions will be considered an effective mitigation measure for damage to or destruction of the deposit. The mitigation program, if necessary, will be carried out as soon as possible to avoid construction delays. The qualified Archaeologist and archaeological monitor will follow accepted professional standards in recording any finds and will submit the standard Department of Parks and Recreation historic site form (Form DPR 523) and locational information to Caltrans. If the qualified Archaeologist determines that the find is not significant, construction will proceed. If the qualified Archaeologist determines that further information is needed to determine whether the find is significant, Caltrans will be notified, and the consultant will prepare a plan and a timetable for evaluating the find, in consultation with the County and SHPO. Construction will resume at the site as soon as the field data collection phase of any data recovery efforts is completed. Mitigation Measure CULT-5: Repository. If cultural resources are recovered during proposed Project construction, a qualified Archaeologist will arrange for the curation at a qualified curation facility, that is, a recognized, non-profit archaeological repository with a permanent curator, of any archaeological materials collected during the construction monitoring and mitigation program. The archaeologist shall submit field notes, stratigraphic drawings, and other materials developed as part of the archaeological excavation program to the curation facility along

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.9 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation with the archaeological collection. If buried archaeological deposits are found during construction, the archaeologist will prepare a report summarizing the monitoring and archaeological investigatory program implemented to evaluate the find or to recover data from an archaeological site as a mitigation measure. This report will describe the site soils and stratigraphy, describe and analyze artifacts and other materials recovered, and explain the site’s significance. This report will be submitted to the curation facility with the collection. CULT-3: Paleontological Resources S Mitigation Measure CULT-6: If paleontological resources or site(s) LTS are encountered, all work in the area will be stopped within a 100 foot wide buffer zone and a qualified Paleontologist will be immediately contacted for on-site consultation. If determined to be unique and/or significant, a qualified Paleontologist will prepare and implement a mitigation plan. CULT-4: Human Remains S Mitigation Measure CULT-7: Prior to construction, construction LTS personnel shall be briefed regarding procedures to follow in the event buried human remains are encountered. Once encountered, work should stop immediately at the discovery point and within a 100-foot wide buffer zone. The City and Solano County coroner must be notified. If the coroner determines that the find is Native American, the coroner is required to contact the NAHC. The NAHC is required (Public Resources Code 5097.98) to determine the Most Likely Descendant, notify that person, and request that they inspect the burial and make recommendations for treatment or disposal. GEOLOGY AND SOILS GEO-1: Earthquake Fault S Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of building or LTS grading permits, the applicant shall conduct a geotechnical study to evaluate soil conditions and geologic hazards on the Project Site and submit it to the City of Vallejo Engineer and an independent Certified Engineering Geologist (retained by the City) for review and approval. The geotechnical study must be signed by a California- registered professional engineer and must identify the following:  Location of fault traces and potential for surface rupture

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.10 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation  Potential for seismically induced ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, differential settlement, and mudflows  Stability of existing cut-and-fill slopes  Collapsible or expansive soils  Foundation material type  Potential for wind erosion, water erosion, sedimentation, and flooding  Location and description of unprotected drainage that could be impacted by the proposed development  Recommendations for placement and design of facilities, foundations, and remediation of unstable ground GEO-2: Ground Shaking S Mitigation Measure GEO-1 LTS GEO-3: Liquefaction S Mitigation Measure GEO-1 LTS GEO-4: Soil Erosion S Mitigation Measure HYD-1 LTS GEO-5: Unstable soil S Mitigation Measure GEO-1 LTS GEO-6: Expansive soil S Mitigation Measure GEO-1 LTS HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZ-1: Transport, use, or disposal of S Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: If soil export during construction is LTS hazardous materials necessary, the soil will be characterized and handled in accordance with all applicable state and federal waste regulations. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Prior to construction, the City shall require the selected contractor(s) to prepare a hazardous materials management plan that will be implemented to ensure that all contractors transport, store, handle and dispose of construction-related hazardous materials in a manner consistent with the relevant regulations and guidelines. At minimum, these include those measures recommended and enforced by Caltrans, Regional Water Quality Control Board, the local Fire Department, and the Solano County Department of Environmental Health. The City shall ensure, through the enforcement of contractual obligations, that all contractors immediately control the source of any leak and immediately contain any spill utilizing appropriate

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.11 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation spill containment and countermeasures identified within the plan. If required by the City or local fire department, Solano County Department of Environmental Health, or any other regulatory agency, containment media shall be collected and disposed of at an off-site facility approved to accept such media. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment of the areas on the project site owned by Caltrans and Greyhound Bus Station will need to be conducted and included in a supplemental environmental document. If any septic tanks, underground heating oil tanks, or other subsurface structures are located during construction activities, they should be removed per local, state and federal regulations. HAZ-2: Hazardous release due to S Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 LTS accident HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY HYD-1: Violate any water quality S Mitigation Measure HYD-1: The Project will be required to obtain LTS standards or waste discharge coverage under the State’s Construction General Permit (2009- requirements 0009-DWQ). The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be employed to minimize effects on water quality. HYD-2: Alter drainage patterns S Mitigation Measure HYD-1 LTS HYD-4: Impacts to runoff water and S Mitigation Measure HYD-1 LTS drainage capacity HYD-5: Otherwise substantially S Mitigation Measure HYD-2: In accordance with the Municipal LTS degrade water quality Regional Permit (MRP), the project shall implement the following requirements to control pollutants in post-construction stormwater runoff and non-stormwater discharges, which shall be submitted for review with the grading permit application to the VSFCD and the City of Vallejo Public Works Department. • Locations of all stormwater treatment BMPs, sized in accordance with the MRP Provision C.3. shall be shown on a site plan • Roof runoff shall be directed to vegetated areas, as shown on a site plan

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.12 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation  Site runoff shall be treated with oil water separator treatment system and vortex system to remove suspended particles prior to discharging into storm drainage system. • The project applicant shall submit an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan that details the O&M responsibility mechanism and maintenance requirements for all stormwater treatment systems, for the life of the project. HYD-6: Place structures within a S Mitigation Measure HYD-3: The finished floor elevation of the LTS 100-year floodplain proposed parking structure will be at or above 11.5 feet NAVD. The finished floor elevation must be approved by the City of Vallejo Public Works Department prior to issuance of the grading permit. NOISE NOISE-1: Noise exposure S Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: All construction equipment must LTS have appropriate sound muffling devices, which shall be properly maintained and used at all times such equipment is in operation. Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Where feasible, the project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: The construction contractor shall locate on-site equipment staging areas so as to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noise- sensitive receptors nearest the project site. Mitigation Measure NOISE-4: Except as otherwise permitted, construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction will occur on Sundays or Holidays. NOISE-2: Ground borne vibration or S Mitigation Measure NOISE-5: The noisiest construction activities, LTS such as pile driving, shall be restricted to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to noise levels 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. PUBLIC SERVICES PUB-1: Fire Protection Services S Mitigation Measure PUB-1: The parking structures will be built LTS with sprinkler systems installed. In the event of a vehicle fire

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.13 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation within one of the structures, firefighters will be able to use the side to enter. The entrances will not be large enough to accommodate fire engines/apparatuses, but this will not substantially delay firefighter’s response to emergencies. PUB-2: Police Protection Services S Mitigation Measure PUB-2: Two emergency call boxes will be LTS located on each floor of the parking structures near the stairways and elevators. In addition to emergency call boxes, there will be a security office in the structure (one for phase 1 and a second for phases 2 and 3) with a security officer on duty at all times. Video cameras will record activity within the parking structures and be sent to closed circuit televisions within a central office in Vallejo and/or into the security office onsite. The video cameras can be viewed live or recorded. The use of cameras, emergency call boxes and the security officer onsite should help to deter theft and vandalism in the parking structures. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC TRANS-1: Delays in peak commute S Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 (PHASE 1): Signalization at Lemon LTS Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2, Project Exit will improve hours intersection operations to acceptable LOS A with 9.8 seconds of delay per vehicle in the a.m. peak hour, and LOS B with 11.3 seconds of delay per vehicle in the p.m. peak hour. Mitigation Measure TRANS-2 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (Intersection #1). Separating right-turns from the through movement on Lemon Street by combining left-turns with the through movement would allow for northeast-bound right-turn permitted-overlap phasing. The reconfiguration of the northeast-bound approach and the phasing adjustments are expected to improve the intersection’s operation to acceptable LOS C, with 28.7 seconds of delay per vehicle in the a.m. peak hour and 30.6 seconds of delay per vehicle in the p.m. peak hour. There is a potential alignment conflict if the through movements are combined with the left-turn movements; however, this can be addressed by striping a dashed line connecting the centerlines of the northeast- and southwest-bound approaches to direct the northeast-bound through movements to the receiving lane on the

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.14 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation opposite side of the intersection. Mitigation Measure TRANS-3 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2, Project Exit). Signalization of this intersection (Improvement Measure #1) is expected to improve operations in the a.m. peak hour to LOS B with 11.3 seconds of delay per vehicle, and to LOS C with 29.6 seconds of delay per vehicle in the p.m. peak hour. Traffic flow on Lemon Street between Carlson Street and Curtola Parkway could be improved by adjusting the striping on the northeast leg of the intersection to provide a wider receiving lane for left turns from Carlson Street to northeast-bound Lemon Street. Mitigation Measure TRANS-4 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3, Project Entrance). Improvements must be made to address unacceptable queue lengths for the westbound left-turn at this intersection. Signalization of this intersection would improve intersection operations to LOS A, with 5.5 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour and 3.5 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. The 95th percentile queue lengths are expected to be reduced to 99 feet and 34 feet in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, with this measure. This reduction would allow sufficient linear space to accommodate an acceleration lane for buses turning westbound out of the bus loop. Furthermore, with a traffic signal in place, the signal timing could be adjusted as necessary to reduce queue lengths if additional space is required to accommodate bus acceleration. A signal warrant should be completed in 2015 to determine the need at that time. Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Curtola Parkway / Solano Avenue (Intersection #6). Improvements must be made to ensure that the change in the V/C ratio at this intersection does not exceed the allowable threshold. Given the fact that the intersection would continue to operate at acceptable LOS D with the redistribution of traffic, major intersection improvements would not be warranted. Increasing the total cycle length from 90 seconds to 95 seconds in the p.m. peak

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.15 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation hour and assigning this additional time to the more critical approaches is expected to improve the V/C ratio from 0.95 to 0.89, which would result in a -0.03 change, as compared to Cumulative 2035 Conditions. During the p.m. peak hour the intersection would operate at LOS D with 42.7 seconds of delay. No changes would be required for acceptable a.m. operation. Mitigation Measure TRANS-6 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Lemon Street / Benicia Road (Intersection #7). The Project would not affect delay at this intersection compared to Cumulative 2035 Conditions, and would not result in a significant impact at this location. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Nevertheless, improvements would need to be made to ensure that this intersection operates at an acceptable LOS. Adding a separate westbound right-turn lane and providing permitted- overlap phasing for the westbound right-turns is expected to improve the operation of the intersection to LOS D, with 54.6 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour and 46.2 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. However, a new dedicated right- turn lane would require some widening of the east leg of the intersection. There appears to be available right-of-way in the northeast quadrant of the intersection that could be used to accommodate the separate right-turn lane. Mitigation Measure TRANS-7 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Lemon Street / Fifth Street (Intersection #9). The Project would not affect delay at this intersection compared to Cumulative 2035 Conditions, and would not result in a significant impact at this location. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Nevertheless, improvements would need to be made to ensure that this intersection operates at an acceptable LOS. Converting the intersection to a four-way stop and adding a separate northwest-bound right-turn lane is expected to improve the operation of the southeast-bound approach to LOS B with 11.6 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 16.9 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. The northeast and southwest approaches of the intersection currently operate at LOS A and experience only minimal delay.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.16 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Summary December 2011

Environmental Impacts Level of Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Significance without with Mitigation Mitigation With the conversion of the intersection to a four-way stop, LOS would decrease to LOS B in the a.m. peak hour and LOS C in the p.m. peak hour. As a four-way stop-controlled intersection, the intersection average operation would be LOS B with 10.7 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 18.9 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. The addition of a separate right-turn lane to the northwest-bound approach would require widening the southeast leg of the intersection and the elimination of some on-street parking on Fifth Street in the northeast quadrant of the intersection. There appears to be right-of-way in the northeast quadrant of the intersection that could be obtained to accommodate the separate right-turn lane. TRANS-7: Inadequate parking S MITIGATION MEASURE TRANS-8 (PHASE 1): Temporary LTS Parking Facilities. During the 2008 study, a number of sites were capacity considered for the transit center. While ultimately the existing park-and-ride site was selected, one of the sites evaluated in the 2008 study could be used for temporary “satellite” parking during the construction period. The site would need to accommodate the number of spaces taken out of service by construction activities, which would amount to a maximum of approximately 241 vehicles. The size of the temporary satellite facility would be determined once a construction staging plan is developed for the implementation of Phase 1. Property acquisition may be required. Because the bus and carpool staging activities occurring at the park-and-ride require a central location, a shuttle service may also be necessary to connect the satellite lot to the existing park-and- ride during the construction period.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 2.17 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

3.0 Project Description

3.1 PROJECT SITE

Location

The proposed Project is located in the northeastern part of California’s San Francisco Bay Area. The proposed Transit Center, is located in the City of Vallejo (the City), in Solano County on the east side of San Pablo Bay, approximately 22 miles northeast of San Francisco (Figure 3.1-1). The project site is on the south side of Curtola Parkway, both west of Lemon Street (Main Lot) and east of Lemon Street (Overflow Lot), immediately east of Lake Dalwigk (Figure 3.1-2).

The western end of the site is owned by the City of Vallejo, as is a small portion of the eastern end of the site along Lemon Street where Greyhound’s operations are staged. Caltrans owns the balance of the site, but leases a portion of the property under its ownership to the City. Caltrans also owns a parcel approximately one acre in size at the southeast corner of the intersection of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street that is also used as a park-and-ride lot.

Existing Conditions

Currently, the proposed project site is a Park-and-Ride facility consisting of the Main Lot located between Lake Dalwigk and Lemon Street and the Overflow Lot located to the east of Lemon Street. Combined, the Main Lot and the Overflow Lot provide approximately 485 parking spaces (see Figure 3.1-3). Both lots are typically full by 6:30 am, at which time users begin parking on the neighborhood streets to the north and south of Curtola Parkway. Approximately 130 users are estimated to park on neighborhood streets on a daily basis. Further, an estimated 85 users have stopped using the Park-and-Ride lot due to a lack of parking capacity. Existing daily need is estimated to be 700 parking spaces. By 2025 parking demand is projected to require 1,100 spaces and may be as high as 1,200 spaces (See Appendix B).

The proposed Transit Center was identified as one of several park-and-ride facilities in the I- 80/I-680/I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study prepared by Korve Engineering, Inc. in 2004. It is considered by the Solano Transit Authority (STA) as one of the most important mid- term project for implementation. Funding to implement an initial phase of the project was included in Regional Measure 2, approved by Bay Area Voters in March of 2004. The City of Vallejo, the STA, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) are designated as “project sponsors” in the Regional Measure 2 (RM 2) legislation. The City of Vallejo is the lead agency with respect to implementation of this project.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.1-1: Regional Vicinity

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.1-2: Project Location

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.3 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.1-3: Existing Site layout

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.4 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

The site’s proximity to a major freeway interchange (I-80 and I-780) puts the proposed Transit Center in a prime location for continued commuter use. The proposed transit center is consistent with the current use of the site as a Park-and-Ride lot, proposing additional parking and enhancements. Daily users are familiar with the site and will not have to be “retrained” as they would if another site had been selected.

The existing Park-and-Ride facility is currently served by Vallejo Transit Route 80, providing four buses per hour in the peak direction during commute periods with service to El Cerrito del Norte BART Station. Also serving the site is the Benicia Route 78, with hourly service to Benicia, Pleasant Hill, and Walnut Creek BART Stations. Route 78 also provides opportunities for Benicia passengers to transfer to Route 80. With implementation of the Transit Center Project, there is the potential to reroute the Route 200 San Francisco express buses operating from Vallejo’s ferry terminal to stop at the Transit Center prior to entering the I-80 freeway. Additionally, there is an independently operated, staffed Greyhound Bus Lines station on the eastside of the Main Lot if the project.

The layout of the existing park-and-ride facility is generally efficient for eastbound buses, which use a pullout apron on the eastbound curb of Curtola Parkway. For westbound buses, however, the current circulation is not desirable. Buses must compete with commuters to make a left turn onto Lemon Street and enter the site. They then must circulate 500 feet into the lot to pick up passengers before turning around and exiting back onto Lemon Street and making a left turn onto Curtola Parkway. This is inconvenient for both passengers and drivers, and ultimately contributes to congestion and schedule delays. Passengers have expressed dislike for the circuitous bus routings that reverse direction along their commute route.

3.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The proposed project would develop a transit center that will consist of two parking structures built in three phases that will provide approximately 1,160 structured spaces. The objectives of the proposed project are as follows:

 Provide, at the conclusion of Phase 1, enough parking to meet the current demand for parking spaces.

 Provide mode separation between buses and automobiles entering and circulating the site.

 Provide designated areas for automobiles to perform necessary functions on the site, such as cueing for carpool pick-up and kiss-and-ride, and entering and exiting the parking structure. Entry and exit of automobiles and buses will be separated, and an additional signalized automobile exit will be located at the western end of the site. Analysis has been conducted for vehicular site usage that predicts no exacerbation of current congestion on Curtola Parkway or Lemon Street through the year 2025, and actually alleviates congestion currently caused by the park-and-ride lot.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.5 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

 Provide proven and effective passive security features such as centralization of pedestrian use in a central open plaza, design features to “see and be seen” such as open stairwells and glass-backed elevators, and plan the parking structure layout to include long span beams, which reduces the quantity of columns and “hiding places”, and reduces the length of pedestrian travel within the parking structure by creating two shorter buildings rather than a single large one.

 Design the transit plaza for pedestrian activity with unhindered pedestrian travel along the Curtola Parkway sidewalk into and through the site. Also, set the parking structures back from Curtola Parkway to soften street edge, and allow for generous landscaping and sidewalk width.

3.3 PROPOSED PROJECT

3.3.1 Functional Design

Parking at the Vallejo Transit Center at Curtola will be provided by two parking structures built in three phases that will provide approximately 1,160 structured spaces (See Figure 3.3-1). A phasing diagram is shown in Figure 3.3-2 The first phase will occur on the western most portion of the site and will include the construction of a four level (three supported), two bay structure with entry/exit off of Carlson Street (see Figure 3.3-3). The second phase will be an almost identical structure located to the east of phase one also with an entry/exit off of Carlson Street. Phase three will consist of a horizontal expansion of the phase two structure that utilizes the phase two ramping system and entry/exit location. Phases one and two will be separated by the bus/pedestrian plaza, and will include stair and elevator towers.

It is anticipated that the structural system will be cast-in-place, post tensioned concrete floor slabs and beams with mildly reinforced columns. The floor to floor height is 11’2” from the first to second levels and 10’4” at the remaining levels. Users will pay for parking utilizing a pay-on-foot system and the entry/exits will not be gated or controlled.

Functionally, the structure is a two bay, single threaded helix meaning that the driver will travel one level in one 360 degree turn. Flow of traffic will be two way and there are 90 degree parking spaces. A quantitative approach to the functional design of the parking structure, referred to as the “Level of Service” (LOS) approach, has been used to guide the selection of functional design parameters. This approach is patterned after the Level of Service system used by traffic engineers to describe the degree of traffic congestion on streets and at intersections. For traffic engineers, the highest Level of Service, LOS A, indicates virtually free flow of traffic, while the lowest Level of Service, LOS E, indicates the maximum flow of cars that can be accommodated before gridlock occurs. Similarly, the Level of Service Approach used in parking structure design targets various parking structure design parameters that affect user comfort and convenience, and assigns values to these parameters that correspond to Levels of Service. These range from the highest Level of Service (LOS A) to the lowest acceptable Level of Service (LOS D). This Level of Service criteria is used as a means of quantifying the degree of comfort and convenience being provided to users of the parking structure.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.6 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.3-1: Overall Site Plan

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.7 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.3-2: Phasing Plan

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.8 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.3-3: Phase I Site Layout

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.9 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

The parking structure design parameters that affect user comfort and convenience encompass not only the basic stall and parking aisle dimensions, but also a number of other parameters, including:  Lane widths for straight lanes and turns  Turning radii  Ramp slopes  Clearances to obstructions  Entry/exit lane widths  Maximum walking distance within parking facility  Floor-to-floor height  Percent of stalls on flat floors  Number of 360 degree turns to top of structure  Number of spaces searched

For this parking structure, parameters have been selected to correspond to an overall LOS B. A uniform stall width of 8.5 feet is used throughout the parking structure. Compact spaces are not used. 3.3.2 Principal Phases of the Project

Because ownership of the site is divided between the City and Caltrans, and reflecting the objective of meeting long-term demand, it is proposed that the transit center will be constructed in three major phases (See Figure 3.3-2).

Phase 1 provides a stand-alone four-story parking structure with internal ramping system accommodating approximately 420 parking stalls at the western end of the site, a civic transit plaza at grade providing east- and west-bound bus stops, kiss-and-ride drop-off, and casual carpool pick-up just to the east of the parking structure. Additional site improvements include an extension at the western terminus of Carlson Street that will connect Carlson with Curtola Parkway, and re-striping of the surface lot on the eastern portion of the site. The first phase parking structure plus re-striping the remaining surface parking lots will provide the 700 parking spaced required to meet the current demand. Off-site improvements will include:

 A bus lane at the Curtola Parkway curb at the transit plaza for east-bound buses.  A left turn lane in the Curtola median for west-bound buses entering the site.  A traffic signal and Curtola median modification to allow west-bound buses to exit the site.  A traffic signal at Carlson Street and Lemon Street to allow automobile traffic to exit the site.

Phase 2 of the project provides another 420 stall, four-story parking structure of similar functional design to Phase 1, with internal ramping. The eastern wall of this structure will be constructed to allow future connection to the Phase 3 garage. The structure will be located immediately east of the transit plaza. This phase will also include constructing the infrastructure for and relocating (or rebuilding) the Greyhound bus station. However, there is not sufficient information regarding the relocation of the Greyhound bus station at this time and a

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.10 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011 supplemental environmental document will be required when it is time to relocate the Greyhound bus station. The overflow lot is proposed to be re-striped to accommodate the station, bus circulation, and for maximum parking efficiency.

Phase 3 will complete full build-out of the site, with a 320 stall, four-story expansion structure immediately to the east of the Phase 2 structure. This structure will not have internal ramping, and will connect with and use the ramping and exiting system of the Phase 2 structure.

Phasing plans were informed by the current ownership of the site (Figure 3.3-2). The intent is to construct Phase 1 on the western partition of the site that is currently owned by the City of Vallejo. In the interim, the City will enter into discussions with the State of California regarding use / ownership of the eastern portion of the site. The intent is to have an agreement in place by the time Phase 2 is ready to move forward.

3.3.3 Other Related Improvements

In addition to the parking structures proposed by the project to replace the existing surface lots, other improvements are planned for the site, creating a complete transit center replacing the existing park-and-ride lot.

While passenger pick-up/drop-off and waiting areas are currently located in scattered, peripheral locations, the transit center would co-locate these activities in one central pedestrian plaza. Expanded waiting areas would include shelters and seating areas, along with improved commute information.

Casual carpooling would be designated an area of its own, where queues can form without impacting through traffic. In addition, passenger drop-off and pick-up (“kiss-and-ride”) would be accommodated in yet another, separate area. This activity currently takes place along adjacent streets or in parking aisles, impacting circulation.

Commuter buses would stop at the central pedestrian plaza area as well. Buses heading inbound to Vallejo, which currently must take a circuitous route on Lemon, Carlson and loop through the site, will be accommodated with a dedicated left-turn lane westbound on Curtola and with a signalized left-turn to return to westbound Curtola. This will save buses three to five minutes in travel time.

A Greyhound bus station currently shares the site and including the single ingress/ egress point at Carlson and Lemon Streets. The survey conducted to study park-and-ride users determined that Greyhound operates independently of the commuters who use the facility, suggesting that a separate location would be more suitable for the bus station. Accordingly, the project proposes to relocate the Greyhound bus station to the overflow lot at the southeast corner of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.11 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

The following pedestrian improvements are included in the project:  Curtola/Lemon intersection - modify existing traffic signals at the pedestrian crossing to include pedestrian countdown signals.  Lemon/Carlson intersection- add lighted crosswalks HAWK beacon and median refuge.  New Curtola pedestrian crossing at westbound bus intersection with pedestrian signals and median refuge.

A Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) facility is located immediately south of the project site, and traffic associated with it also uses Carlson Street for access, although the facility does not generate significant levels of traffic.

Circulation will be improved by routing Carlson Street one-way westbound along the south side of the project site. The Carlson/Lemon intersection will be improved by removing on-street parking and loading and replacing them with the addition of a northbound left-turn pocket, a southbound right-turn pocket, and a southbound left-turn pocket into the new Greyhound bus station. This new configuration will better facilitate traffic movements and contain passenger pick-up and drop-off activity within the transit center. Safety will be improved as U-turns associated with pick-up and drop-off activity are eliminated.

Carlson Street will be extended along the west end of the project site to a new intersection with Curtola Parkway. This intersection will relieve pressure on the Curtola/Lemon intersection and eliminate the ingress/egress bottleneck at Lemon/Carlson. Vehicles will be provided an acceleration lane making a right turn onto eastbound Curtola, and signalization will afford a protected left-turn onto westbound Curtola.

Overall, the addition of a vertical element to the site (by means of the parking structures) and the civic amenity of the pedestrian plaza will provide a new focus for the surrounding neighborhood and function as a gateway to Vallejo from the two interstate highways that serve the City.

3.3.4 Visual Resource Considerations to the Design

The design of two new parking structures for the Vallejo Transit Center at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street utilizes concrete post and beam moment frame structures, with cast-in-place post- tensioned concrete slabs. By incorporating moment frames at the column-beam connections, lateral forces can be resisted without the use of shear walls in the interior space or on the exterior walls. This lack of solid shear walls allows for a more open plan, with clear site lines across and through the parking structure. This increased visibility in turn, increases the safety for visitors. Both the Phase One and Phase Two parking structures are comprised of two long parking / drive-aisle bays of approximately 63’ wide, for a total width of 126’. With the buildings’ main axes in the east-west direction, the Phase One structure is 300’ long and the Phase Two structure is 505’ long. Both of these long bays have ramped central sections, with parking accommodated on the ramps. The southernmost bay of the structures, running parallel along Carlson Street, is four levels high including the roof level parking. The northern bays, running

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.12 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011 parallel along Curtola Parkway, are three levels high. This stepping back of the building mass reduces the visual impact of the parking structures on the more public Curtola Parkway side.

The design for the parking structures takes cues from the surrounding context, the landscape and wetlands around Lake Dalwigk, and the elevated highway structures of I-80. The design intent is an honest expression of transportation infrastructure, with these long horizontal buildings considered here as elements in the landscape, rather than as street wall buildings in an urban setting. In addition to the light colored concrete frames, the base of the buildings - including the north side ramps - is cast in a darker earthen-toned concrete, giving the impression of the buildings rising up gently from the ground as they extend away from the central pedestrian Transit Plaza. Again, this configuration places the shorter building mass nearest the pedestrian activity. Punched openings in these base level walls allows for sunlight penetration into, and views out of, the structure’s interior. The tallest elements of the Transit Center, the rooftop elevator bank, stairs, and protective canopy, are placed at the southern corner of the parking structures, nearest the pedestrian plaza. These vertical circulation features are located away from the main thoroughfare of Curtola Parkway, but near to the areas of greatest pedestrian access - the drop-off/waiting zones for the casual carpool and kiss-and-ride passengers. Other exterior materials on the parking structures include perforated painted aluminum screen panels, used to obscure the visibility of the cars from the Curtola Parkway perspective and from the residential neighborhood to the north, while still allowing for light and views from within. These screen panels will diffuse the light and glare from the headlights of the parking cars, as they aim towards the residences. Painted composite aluminum panels clad the elevator tower and canopies, and the exposed structural steel on the stairs is painted to match. Tiles of a natural clay material, either ceramic or terra cotta, cover the ground level walls of the restrooms, storage, and security office.

In the Transit Plaza, an extensive canopy follows and protects the direct pedestrian path that connects the parking structures to the various transit waiting areas. This canopy is designed from modular units comprised of a concrete base, painted structural steel frame, profiled metal roof, and wood soffit / roof substrate. In the center of the Transit Plaza, a pair of tall pylons serves as a landmark for the Transit Center, and as a symbolic gateway to the City of Vallejo, when seen from a distance. Constructed of structural steel columns clad in painted aluminum panels, these 40’ tall pylons also help to support the structural overturning load of the pedestrian canopy, particularly at the long-span area crossing the access road. Stainless steel rods, like spokes of a wheel, connect the canopy structure to the upper portions of the pylons. These upper portions of the pylons, approximately 5’ in height, are clad in a perforated painted aluminum panel. A soft light source inside, LED lights with a diffusing lens, allows the pylon to remain visible in the evening or during low-light conditions.

Other sources of site lighting for the Transit Center include lights at the roof level of the parking structure - either pole-mounted or suspended from a steel structure supporting photovoltaic panels. Following the City of Vallejo Outdoor Lighting Guidelines, these light fixtures utilize LED bulbs, and have been selected to avoid light pollution and glare by incorporating a cut-off or shielding design, such that the bulbs are not visible from the surrounding area. The light levels provided at the roof, and at all levels of the parking structure, will average between 3 and 8

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.13 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011 footcandles. In the Transit Plaza, similar light fixtures will be supported from the pedestrian level canopy structure. These fixtures will provide an average lighting level between 1 and 3 footcandles in the general pedestrian areas and a average lighting level of 5 footcandles at the specific transit waiting zones. Other pole-mounted LED light fixtures, in areas like the central landscape waiting plaza, have been selected to avoid light pollution and glare and will provide the same lighting levels as the general pedestrian areas.

3.3.5 Temporary Parking During Construction

During construction of Phase 1 of the project, some of the existing 485 onsite parking spaces will not be available. The portion of the project that will remain as surface parking will be restriped to provide approximately 280 parking spaces. This expansion will be the first step in the construction sequence so the City will provide the difference of 205 parking spaces on a temporary basis via offsite parking.

To serve users of this off-site parking, the City will also reroute the bus service with an additional stop or provide a shuttle service if necessary. Three possible locations for the temporary parking lot are as shown in Figure 3.3-4 and described below. There may be additional off-site locations considered and this decision will be made closer to the time of construction.

 Curtola Parkway at Lemon Street, northwest corner. This is currently a vacant lot or lots and the property is for sale. The site may be available to lease from the current owner during construction. The site is undeveloped and adjacent to single family residential homes to the north. The site is immediately adjacent to the proposed project location, which would be convenient for users and not require a shuttle service. Potential improvements that may be required include paving or engineered gravel fill, lighting, drainage, and security.

 Sonoma Boulevard at Magazine Street, northwest corner. This is currently a vacant lot and the property is for sale. The site may be available to lease from the current owner during construction. The site slopes gently but would not be prohibitive to use as a temporary parking lot. Potential improvements that may be required include paving or engineered gravel fill, lighting, drainage, and security. Some bus rerouting would also be required to serve patrons, as the two sites would be remote from one another.

 PG&E Service Center Parking Lot, south side of Carlson Street. This lot is currently used by PG&E employees and fleet vehicles. The lot has the potential to be restriped for efficiency. It is unknown whether PG&E would be amenable to a temporary shared parking agreement. This site is immediately adjacent to the current park-and-ride lot and users would not have to cross a major intersection to reach the existing transit stop.

All off-site areas used for the temporarily provision of parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure will be restored to pre-project conditions.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.14 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

Figure 3.3-4: Potential Temporary Parking Locations

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.15 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Project Description December 2011

3.4 USE OF THIS EIR

A number of permits and approvals, including discretionary actions listed above, will be required before the development of this project can proceed. The City of Vallejo will be responsible for the majority of approvals required for development. Other agencies also may have some authority related to the project and its approvals. A list of the required permits and approvals that may be required by the City and other agencies is provided in Table 3.4-1.

Table 3.4-1: Required Permits and Approvals Lead Agency Permit/Approval City of Vallejo  Environmental Review  Site Development Review  Building/Grading Permits Responsible Agencies Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control  Approval of storm drain system District  Approval for sewer treatment capacity Caltrans  Encroachment Permit California Regional Water Quality Control  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Board System permit for stormwater discharges

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 3.16 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

4.0 Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation

4.1 AESTHETICS

Aesthetics, as addressed in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), refers to visual considerations in the physical environment (CERES, 2009). Because a person’s reaction and attachment to a given viewshed are subjective, visual changes inherently affect viewers differently. Accordingly, aesthetics analysis, or visual resource analysis, is a systematic process to logically assess visible change in the physical environment and the anticipated viewer response to that change. The Aesthetics section of this EIR describes the existing landscape character of the project area, existing views of the area from various on-the-ground vantage points, the visual characteristics of the proposed project, and the landscape changes that would be associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project, as seen from various vantage points.

Specifically, Section 4.1.1 Regulatory Setting, addresses laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards (LORS) applicable to aesthetics and visual resources. Section 4.1.2 Environmental Setting, describes the existing environment that the proposed Project may affect. Section 4.1.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures, identifies potential environmental impacts resulting from construction and development of the proposed Project.

4.1.1 Regulatory Setting

This section describes the laws, ordinances, regulations, or standards (LORS) relevant to the visual resource issues associated with the proposed Project. No federal, state, or regional LORS are known that would apply to the proposed Project’s visual resource issues. However, visual resource and urban design concerns germane to the proposed Project are addressed in the City of Vallejo General Plan including the amendments.

4.1.1.1 Regional/Local

Vallejo General Plan

The Vallejo General Plan includes several policies related to aesthetics related goals and policies which pertain to the project. The Plan’s most specific aesthetics-related policies are directed at hillside projects, however this project does not occur in an area of the City governed by these policies. The goals and policies that apply are as follows:

Urban Design Goal 2: To have within each neighborhood an image, sense of purpose and means of orientation.

Policy 3: Respect the character of older development nearby in the design of new buildings including bulk and texture.

Other Services Goal 1: To provide an efficient and financially sound system of urban services to protect the health, safety and general welfare of Vallejo area residents. i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Policy 11c: Landscape areas should provide adequate visual access to all entrances

Parking Goal 1: To have the parking need satisfied primarily in well-designed off-street parking facilities.

4.1.2 Environmental Setting

This section discusses the existing visual character of the region, the existing visual conditions in the vicinity of the proposed Project Site, and the onsite aesthetic characteristics. Also discussed are the existing sources of light and glare within the proposed Project Site and a characterization of the viewers and their sensitivity to visual quality change. This information was collected from site photographs and surveys conducted by Stantec from December 2010 through July 2011.

The factors for landscape evaluation has been established by landscape perception and assessment research that has taken place over the past 25 years. The final landscape quality ratings developed based on these considerations were expressed in terms of the six landscape quality classes listed in Table 4.1-1. This methodology was chosen for its ability to support an objective evaluation and provides a robust framework for the qualitative ratings because it is based on the findings of the full range of available research on the ways in which the public evaluates visual quality. In addition, the scale has a common-sense quality and is easily understood because it defines landscape quality in relative terms, contrasting landscapes that are average in visual quality with those that are above and below average, and those that fall at the top and bottom of the landscape quality spectrum.

Table 4.1-1: Landscape Visual Quality Scale Used in Rating the Areas Potentially Affected by the Project Rating Explanation Outstanding Visual A rating reserved for landscapes with exceptionally high visual quality. Quality These landscapes will be significant regionally and/or nationally. They usually contain exceptional natural or cultural features that contribute to this rating. They will be what we think of as “picture post card” landscapes. People will be attracted to these landscapes to be able to view them. High Visual Quality Landscapes that have high quality scenic value. This may be due to cultural or natural features contained in the landscape or to the arrangement of spaces contained in the landscape that causes the landscape to be visually interesting or a particularly comfortable place for people. These are often landscapes which have high potential for recreational activities or in which the visual experience is important. Moderately High Landscapes which have above average scenic value but are not of high Visual Quality scenic value. The scenic value of these landscapes may be due to man- made or natural features contained within the landscape, to the arrangement of spaces, in the landscape or to the two-dimensional attributes of the landscape.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Rating Explanation Moderate Visual Landscapes which have average scenic value. They usually lack Quality significant man-made or natural features. Their scenic value is primarily a result of the arrangement of spaces contained in the landscape and the two-dimensional visual attributes of the landscape. Moderately Low Landscapes that have below average scenic value but not low scenic Visual Quality value. They may contain visually discordant man-made alterations, but the landscape is not dominated by these features. They often lack spaces that people will perceive as inviting and provide little interest in terms of two-dimensional visual attributes of the landscape. Low Visual Quality Landscapes with low scenic value. The landscape is often dominated by visually discordant man-made alterations; or they are landscapes that do not include places that people will find inviting and lack interest in terms of two-dimensional visual attributes.

Visual Characteristics of the Site Vicinity

The project site’s immediate surroundings include areas of varying degrees of visual quality, character and sensitivity from low to moderately high.

The area to the north consists of Curtola Parkway and the Starr and Cypress Knoll residential subdivisions. Curtola parkway is a four lane roadway with a planted center median and detached sidewalks with a planted zone between curb and sidewalk. A small segmented precast concrete wall helps visually separate the roadway from the residential neighborhood to the north. The wall appears to have significant recurring graffiti issues along its length. Consistent plantings of maple street trees occur in the center median. Shrub plantings are large massings of uniform species. The residential subdivisions to the north of Curtola Parkway consist of mostly older detached single-story single-family dwellings. There is little consistency in architectural and landscape character, form, or materials. Maintenance levels of structures and property grounds are equally inconsistent. The dwellings are served by overhead utilities, a source of significant visual blight. The visual quality and character of this area ranges from moderately low to low. The visual sensitivity of this area can be considered moderate since it contains residential properties, many of which have unobstructed views to the project site.

The area to the east of Lemon Street both north and south of Curtola Pkwy/I-780 consists of single family residential subdivisions. These neighborhoods are similar in age and character to the neighborhoods north of the project site. They are also serviced by overhead utility lines which create a significant visual blight.

The area to the south of the project site is industrial in appearance with single-story warehouse- type structures, portable structures, large expanses of pavement absent of significant landscape improvements, exposed/overhead utilities and frequent use of chain link fencing w/ barbed-wire security measures. This area can be considered to be of low visual quality and character.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.3 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The area to the west of the Project site is Lake Dalwigk Park. This is a mostly naturalized park, the majority of which is either open water or aquatic vegetation such as cattails. Visual access to open water views varies throughout the year as the water level is dependent on storm water feeds from urban areas. The southern portion of the park includes a children’s play area, picnic tables, basketball courts, restrooms, and manicured turf play area. A perimeter walking trail and pedestrian bridge provide access over Curtola Parkway to Wilson Park. Lake Dalwigk Park can be considered of moderately high visual quality, character and sensitivity. The project will be significantly visible from the pedestrian bridge connecting the two parks. Since this is primarily for recreational use, this view can also be considered moderately sensitive. Dense evergreen tree plantings combined with distance, topography and viewing angle significantly limit visibility of the project site from Wilson Park. The view from Wilson Park is therefore not considered sensitive.

The smaller 15 acre parcel east of Lemon Street and south of Curtola Parkway may be used in a later phase of the project and is currently used as an overflow lot for the park and ride. The topography of the eastern parcel is generally flat to accommodate the parking area. It is generally of the same character and quality of the main park-and-ride lot. No major improvements are currently proposed for this parcel although it has been studied as a potential relocation site for the Greyhound terminal. Further analysis may be required if the site is selected as the preferred location for the Greyhound terminal.

Visual Characteristics of the Site

The project is located along Curtola Parkway west of the Interstate 80 (I-80) and I-780 interchange. I-780 westbound becomes Curtola Parkway at its intersection with Lemon Street on the east side of the project. The dominant visual characteristics of the site include large expanses of asphalt, concrete pedestrian walkways, pedestrian and vehicular way finding signage, large parking lot lighting standards and a relatively significant number and diversity of small to medium sized trees. A few large trees are concentrated at the east and west ends of the site. Additional features such as pedestrian benches, transit shelters and trash receptacles are present at the bus stop on Curtola Parkway. The visual impact of the site varies significantly depending on the presence of vehicles. As a heavily used commuter park and ride facility, the lot is often full of vehicles. Large quantities of parked vehicles are generally considered to be visually unappealing. These vehicles can be a substantial source of glare on sunny days. The Greyhound bus station is located on the eastern end of the site. It is a small non-descript single story grey building. The existing site is of moderately low to low visual quality.

4.1.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.1.3.1 Methodology

The potential impacts associated with the proposed Project were evaluated through a comparison of the existing environmental setting described in the previous section anticipated against the proposed characteristics of the Project. To inform the final impact judgments required by CEQA, the changes are evaluated from locations determined to be most sensitive to change. These locations are referred to as Key Observation Points or KOPs. i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.4 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Sensitive Viewing Areas and Key Observation Points

To assess the potential impacts on visual resources, two (2) Key Observation Points (KOPs) were selected for detailed analysis. Photo simulations of the proposed project were developed to further aid in communication of these impacts. The sensitive viewing areas selected for analysis are indicated on Figure 4.1-1, Key Observation Points (KOPs). Sensitivity of residential and recreational (users of adjacent Lake Dalwigk Park) viewers is considered high. Commuters are not considered sensitive viewers.

The discussion of the existing views seen from the KOPs includes ratings of the visual quality of the landscapes that they represent. These ratings were developed based on a series of in-field observations, review of photos of the area, review of methods for assessment of visual quality, and review of research on public perception of the environment and scenic beauty ratings of landscape scenes. The final assessment of the visual quality of the views from each of the KOPs was made based on an evaluation of a broad spectrum of landscape assessment factors and consideration of them together in a holistic way. The factors considered included evaluation of:

 Distance from the proposed Project Site, numbers of viewers, and the presence of residential or recreational uses

 Natural features, including topography, water courses, rock outcrops, and natural vegetation

 The positive and negative effects of the proposed man-made alterations and built structures on visual quality

 Visual composition, including assessment of the complexity and vividness of patterns in the landscape

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.5 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-1: Key Observation Point Locations

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.6 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Visual Characteristics of the Proposed Project

Artist illustrations are provided of the proposed facility as Figure 4.1-2, Figure 4.1-3, and Figure 4.1-4. By designing the proposed facility with a lack of continuous solid walls, there are clear site lines across and through the structure. This increased visibility increases safety.

The exterior colors of the structure help minimize the visual resource impact of the project. The lower portion of the structure is a darker earthen-toned concrete, giving the impression of the buildings rising up gently from the ground as they extend away from the central pedestrian Transit Plaza. The tallest elements of the Transit Center, the rooftop elevator bank, stairs, and protective canopy, are placed at the southern corner of the parking structures, nearest the pedestrian plaza. These vertical circulation features are located away from the main thoroughfare of Curtola Parkway, but near to the areas of greatest pedestrian access.

Other exterior materials on the parking structures include perforated painted aluminum screen panels, used to obscure the visibility of the cars from the Curtola Parkway perspective and from the residential neighborhood to the north, while still allowing for light and views from within. These screen panels will diffuse the light and glare from the headlights of the parking cars, as they aim towards the residences. Painted composite aluminum panels clad the elevator tower and canopies, and the exposed structural steel on the stairs is painted to match. Tiles of a natural clay material, either ceramic or terra cotta, cover the ground level walls of the restrooms, storage, and security office.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.7 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-2: Rendering of Transit Center From Street View

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.8 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-3: Rendering of the Transit Center from Aerial View

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.9 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-4: Rendering of the Transit Center from Plaza View

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.10 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Key Observation Points

KOP 1: Evans Avenue at Cypress Avenue Views from this location are representative of the residential area to the north of the project (see Figure 4.1-5). Grade generally slopes uphill from south to north in this neighborhood, which allows for greater visibility of the project from a larger number of homes than if the area were level. This viewpoint is approximately 400 ft from the project. The existing views to the site from this viewpoint are of moderately low to low visual character due to obtrusive foreground elements such as powerlines and distant discordant and undesirable elements such as parked cars, industrial buildings and graffiti. Large trees and adjacent structures often obscure or block portions of the view. The background element is a residential neighborhood set in a vegetated hillside with many trees. The pattern and color variation of this hillside residential is much more consistent than the middle ground industrial and parking elements.

Due to the large number of residential viewers from this location the proposed project was simulated into the photograph to further study the visual impacts. Distant views to the south across the site from the residential neighborhood will be affected as a substantial built form will be introduced into the middleground of the view. The degree to which these views are obstructed/blocked is relative to the viewpoint elevation. In general, the closer a viewer in this area is to the site, the lower the elevation and therefore the greater the degree of obstruction. From this vantage point a majority of the distant hillside view is maintained. The impact of the structure in the middle ground of the viewshed is softened by street trees and landscape plantings. The combination of browns, tans, greys and greens are familiar from the existing background features, though they are present in larger, more linear and uniform swaths. The materials of the façade have a segmented/patterned and semi-transparent quality which help reduce the mass of the structure. Although the middleground of the viewshed is substantially altered, the presence of trees is maintained and the less desirable elements are either contained or blocked from view by the structure.

KOP 2: Lake Dalwigk Park just south Chestnut Street and 5th Street Views from this location are representative of recreational users of Lake Dalwigk Park and somewhat representative of the residential area to the southwest of the project (see Figure 4.1- 6). From the residences the trees in the immediate foreground would block a majority of the view and would make the impacts discussed herein less significant. Topography is generally flat as Lake Dalwigk is a low-lying area between the viewpoint and the Project. The west end of the project site is approximately one-third of a mile or 1,500 feet from this point. The existing views from this viewpoint can be considered moderately high visual quality and can vary throughout the year depending on water level and density of aquatic vegetation. The foreground and middleground are generally comprised of seasonal grasses, aquatic vegetation such as cattails, and open water. The project site is on the edge of the distant middleground and the majority of site features simply blend into the background from this vantage point. Cars and lightpoles are visible but are not prominent. The background is comprised of rooftops and a significant mixed- species tree canopy. The hillside and ridgeline of Sulphur Springs Mountain South is prominent above the horizon line.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.11 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-5: KOP 1 - Photo Simulation from Evans Street at Cyprus

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.12 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-6: KOP 2 - Photo Simulation from Lake Dalwigk Park just South of Chestnut Street and 5th Street

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.13 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Due to the presence of both recreational and residential viewers and the relatively high visual quality of the Lake Dalwigk Park area, the proposed project was simulated into the photograph to further study the visual impacts. The Project will be clearly visible, however several aesthetic considerations allow the project to blend into the background to a degree. Measures to break up solid masses on the Project’s exterior allow the complexity of patterning of lights and darks in the background to blend with those of the façade. To a degree, the consistency of the patterning and linear nature contrast with the randomness of the existing rooftop and tree matrix, but from this distance these differences are not prominent or obtrusive in the overall viewshed. Tree planting along the southern side of the project could serve to further lessen the impact and break the regularity of this patterning. The structure remains below the treeline and the ridgeline which helps preserves the overall character of the viewshed from this perspective. The colors of the project are borrowed from and complement the background pallette. 4.1.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The following section provides the criteria of significance and presents a discussion of potential impacts to aesthetics that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

 Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista

 Substantially alter or damage a major landform or scenic resource, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway

 Substantially alter or degrade the existing visual character or quality of the proposed Project Site and its surroundings

 Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the findings made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

 Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista

 Substantially alter or damage a major landform or scenic resource, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway

4.1.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.14 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT AES-1: Substantially alter or degrade the existing visual character or quality of the proposed Project Site and its surroundings

The Project will convert the existing Park-and-Ride surface parking lot to two four-story parking structures with a civic transit plaza. The impacts to views from representative sensitive vantage points surrounding the project have been documented in the Key Observations Points (KOPs) section of this chapter. Many of the visual characteristics of the site will be substantially altered. Notably, a surface parking lot will be replaced with a large built structure. The visual detailing and massing of the structure along with planned landscape improvements around its perimeter will serve to soften the structure’s visual impact. Non-obtrusive color and material selections for the structure that are borrowed from and/or complement the existing viewshed will serve to further lessen the visual impacts. Tree planting at the base of the structure’s west end will mature over time and serve to lessen the impact of the structure. These efforts will be sufficient to maintain or even improve the visual quality of the site and its surroundings. The visual impacts of the site from the neighborhood to the north of the site are the most changed. Tree planting in the landscape area between the building and sidewalk is the best method to mitigate these impacts. The temporary provision of approximately 205 off-site parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure is not expected to substantially alter or degrade the existing visual quality or character of the Project Site’s surroundings.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure AES-1: Minimize the aesthetic impact of the structure through the use of landscaping materials and choice of primary façade materials and colors that borrow from or complement the surrounding environment. Methods to achieve this shall include but are not limited to:

 Primary façade colors shall borrow from or complement the dominant colors in the project vicinity. These include light grays, light tans, light yellows, terra cottas and browns. Additional colors that meet the intent of this mitigation measure may be considered at the discretion of the City.

 Tree planting along the south side of Curtola Parkway shall be of a large canopy shade tree with mature height equal or greater to the height of the building at 15 years growth. Tree spacing shall be at 35 feet on-center minimum or 80% of the mature canopy of the tree, whichever is less. This planting shall be required along the Project’s entire interface along Curtola Parkway during Phase 1 construction to allow the trees to mature at an equal rate and mitigate future phases. These trees are to be retained and protected in future phases. Additionally, accent trees, shrubs, and vines are strongly encouraged.

To the extent feasible, maximize tree planting along other property lines and in other non-developed areas within the site boundary. Priority shall be placed on screening views from residential and recreational areas. Accent trees, shrubs, and vines are strongly encouraged.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.15 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT AES-2: Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area

The project will replace a lighted surface parking lot with a lighted parking structure and transit plaza. Light levels in the structure will be higher than those in the existing parking lot. The project has taken significant measures to reduce light spill/trespass out of the structure and to screen or block headlights from projecting out from the structure into adjacent areas (see Figure 4.1-7). Site lighting will be constructed in conformance with City of Vallejo Outdoor Lighting Guidelines. This will help to meet safety and security concerns known to be an issue with the current facility. Illumination levels and frequency of lighting on the project site will increase from the current conditions due to the nature of the project, which increases the overall density and volume of constructed and lit features. However, it is proposed to be done in a sensitive manner which takes into account the adjacency of residential areas, limiting any adverse effect inherent in the project. The installation of traffic signals immediately adjacent residential structures has the potential to create a new source of substantial light that will adversely affect nighttime views from the residences. The temporary provision of approximately 205 off-site parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure may necessitate the installation of lighting for safety and security. This lighting would be temporary, located in an urban area with existing lighting in the surrounding area, and is therefore not expected to create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure AES-2: Minimize the impact of light and glare from the proposed parking structure on the surrounding environment. Methods to achieve this shall include but are not limited to:

 Prohibit use of reflective metal walls and mirrored glass walls as primary building materials for facades

 All major exterior finishes shall be non-reflective and/or shall be painted with low/no- gloss paint

 Utilize screen walls on the building exterior to block or diffuse light and glare from headlights

 Light fixtures configured to emphasize close spacing and lower intensity light. Light fixtures shall use luminaries with cut-off or shielding devices that direct the cone of light downward and minimize the visibility of bulbs from the surrounding area.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.16 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.1-7: Lighting Study

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.17 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.2 AIR QUALITY

This section presents existing air quality conditions in the Project area (including the Project site, applicable air district jurisdiction, and air basin) and provides a description of the regulatory framework for air quality management on a federal, state, regional, and local level. Mitigation measures that would reduce impacts, where applicable, are also discussed. The analysis of air quality impacts is based on air quality regulations administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) with each agency responsible for different aspects of the proposed Project’s activities. The roles of these agencies are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.1 below Information in this section is based on the project description provided by the Project proponent, the Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (Appendix A) and project-specific criteria air pollutant emission estimates (Appendix C). Other sources used in the assessment include the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (BAAQMD 2011a), recommended analysis methods, and planning documents described further throughout this section. 4.2.1 Regulatory Setting

Federal, State, and Local Air Quality Agencies

Air quality within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) is addressed through the efforts of various federal, state, regional, and local government agencies. These agencies work jointly as well as individually to improve air quality through legislation, regulations, planning, policymaking, education, and a variety of programs. The agencies primarily responsible for improving the air quality within the basin are discussed below along with their individual responsibilities.

4.2.1.1 Federal

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)

The principal air quality regulatory mechanism on the federal level is the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) and in particular, the 1990 amendments to the FCAA and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) that the amendments established. The USEPA is responsible for enforcing these regulatory mechanisms.

The USEPA also has regulatory and enforcement jurisdiction over emission sources beyond state waters (outer continental shelf), and those that are under the exclusive authority of the Federal government, such as aircraft, locomotives, and interstate trucking. The USEPA’s primary role at the state level is to oversee the state air quality programs. The USEPA sets federal vehicle and stationary source emission standards, as well as providing research and guidance in air pollution programs. In response to its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each state to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan describing how the state will achieve the federal NAAQS by specified dates, depending on the severity of the air quality within the state or air basin. Air quality attainment plans are discussed in further detail below.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.18 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The NAAQS identify levels of air quality for seven “criteria” pollutants that are considered the maximum levels of ambient (background) air pollutants considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. The seven criteria pollutants include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) (is a form of NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2 is a form of SOx), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), and lead (Pb). Particulate matter is the general term used for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. For air quality purposes, these particles are classified by size: fine particulates (i.e., PM2.5) have a diameter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers, and respirable or coarse particulates (i.e., PM10) have a diameter less than or equal to 10 micro meters. The federal NAAQS and the relevant health effects of the criteria pollutants are summarized in Table 4.2-3: Ambient Air Quality Standards.

The basin is currently classified by the USEPA as a non-attainment/marginal area for the 8-hour

O3 standard (the 1-hour standard was revoked as of June 15, 2005). The basin was also recently designated non-attainment for the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standard. Additionally, it has been designated as an attainment/maintenance area for the 1-hour and 8-hour standards for CO, and has been designated attainment/unclassifiable for the annual standard for NO2 and the 24-hour PM10 standard. The basin has been designated as an attainment area for the quarterly and the 3-month rolling lead standards and the 24-hour and annual SO2 standards.

The status of the SFBAAB with respect to attainment with the NAAQS is summarized in Table 4.2-1.

Table 4.2-1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Status - San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin

Pollutant Averaging Time Designation/Classification

Ozone (O3) 8 Hour Non-attainment/Marginal Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 Hour, 8 Hour Attainment/Maintenance

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Arithmetic Mean Attainment/Unclassifiable

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 24 Hour, Annual Arithmetic Mean Attainment Respirable Particulate Matter 24 Hour Attainment/Unclassifiable (PM10)

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24 Hour, Annual Arithmetic Mean Non-attainment Calendar Quarter, 3 Month Lead (Pb) Attainment Rolling Source: Environmental Protection Agency 2010

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.19 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Hazardous Air Pollutants

Regulation of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) under federal regulations is achieved through federal and state controls on individual sources. Federal law defines HAPs as non-criteria air pollutants with short-term (acute) and/or long-term (chronic or carcinogenic) adverse human health effects. The 1990 FCAA Amendments offer a comprehensive plan for achieving significant reductions in both mobile and stationary source emissions of HAPs. Under the 1990 FCAA Amendments, a total of 189 chemicals or chemical families were designated HAPs because of their adverse human health effects. Title III of the 1990 FCAA Amendments amended Section 112 of the FCAAA to replace the former program with an entirely new technology-based program. Under Title III, the USEPA must establish maximum achievable control technology emission standards for all new and existing “major” stationary sources through promulgation of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). Major stationary sources of HAPs are required to obtain an operating permit from the BAAQMD pursuant to Title V of the 1990 FCAA Amendments.

4.2.1.2 State

California Air Resources Board (CARB)

The California Air Resources Board (CARB), a department of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), oversees air quality planning and control throughout California by administering the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Its primary responsibility lies in ensuring implementation of the 1989 amendments to the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), responding to the FCAA requirements and regulating emissions from motor vehicles and consumer products sold in California. CARB has established emission standards for vehicles sold in California and for various types of equipment available commercially. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions.

Like the USEPA, the CARB has established ambient air quality standards for the state. The amendments to the CCAA establish these California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), and a legal mandate to achieve these standards for the earliest practical date. These standards apply to the same seven criteria pollutants as the FCAA, and also include sulfates (SO4), visibility reducing particulates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride (CH2=CH-Cl). The CCAA standards are more stringent than the Federal standards and in the case of PM10 and SO2, far more stringent. The CCAA requires air pollution control districts to achieve the state standards by the earliest practicable date. The CAAQS and the relevant health effects of the criteria pollutants are summarized in Table 4.2-3: Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Based on monitored pollutant levels, the CCAA divides O3 non-attainment areas into four categories—moderate, serious, severe, and extreme—to which progressively more stringent planning and emission control requirements apply.

The SFBAAB is a non-attainment area for the California 1-hour and 8-hour ozone standards. In regard to particulate matter, the basin is designated as non-attainment for the California 24-hour and annual PM10 standards, as well as the California annual PM2.5 standard. The basin is

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.20 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 designated as attainment or unclassifiable for all other CAAQS. The ozone precursors, ROG and NOx, in addition to PM10 and PM2.5, are the pollutants of concern for projects located within the basin. The status of the basin with respect to attainment with the CAAQS is summarized in Table 4.2-2 below.

Table 4.2-2: California Ambient Air Quality Standards and Status - San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin Pollutant Averaging Time Designation/Classification

1 Ozone (O3) 8 Hour Non-attainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1 Hour, 8 Hour Attainment

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Arithmetic Mean Attainment

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 24 Hour, Annual Arithmetic Mean Attainment Respirable Particulate Matter 24 Hour Non-attainment (PM10)

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24 Hour, Annual Arithmetic Mean Non-attainment Calendar Quarter, 3 Month Lead (Pb) 2 Attainment Rolling

Sulfates (SO4) Attainment

Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) Unclassified Vinyl Chloride 2 Unclassified Visibility Reducing Particles Unclassified

Source: California Air Resources Board 2010 1 CARB has not issued area classifications based on the new state 8-hour standard. The previous classification for the 1-hour ozone standard was Serious. 2 CARB has identified lean and vinyl chloride as “toxic air contaminants” with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined.

Toxic Air Contaminants

The CARB is also responsible for regulations pertaining to Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). California law defines TACs as air pollutants having carcinogenic or other health effects. Assembly Bill (AB) 1807 (the Tanner Bill, passed in 1983) established the State Air Toxics Program and the methods for designating certain chemicals as TACs. A total of 245 substances have been designated TACs under California law; they include the federal HAPs adopted as TACs in accordance with AB 2728. The Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588) seeks to identify and evaluate risk from air toxic sources, although AB 2588 does not directly regulate air toxics emissions. Under AB 2588, sources emitting more than 10 tons per year of any criteria air pollutant must estimate and report their emissions, and high priority facilities are required to submit a health risk assessment and communicate the results to the affected public. Depending on risk levels, emitting facilities are required to implement

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.21 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 varying levels of risk reduction measures. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is responsible for implementing AB 2588 in the basin.

The BAAQMD is currently working to control the effects of TACs from local hot spots and ambient background concentrations. The control strategy involves reviewing new sources to ensure compliance with required emission controls and limits, maintaining an inventory of existing sources to identify major TAC emissions and developing measures to reduce TAC emissions. The BAAQMD publishes the results of the various control programs in an annual report, which provides information on the current TAC inventory, AB 2588 risk assessments, TAC monitoring programs, and TAC control measures and plans.

One of the TACs being controlled by the BAAQMD is particulate matter (PM) from diesel-fueled engines, also known as diesel exhaust particulate. In 1998, CARB identified diesel exhaust particulate as TAC. Compared to other TACs, diesel exhaust particulate emissions are estimated to be responsible for about 70 percent of the total ambient air toxics risk in the basin. On a statewide basis, the average potential cancer risk associated with these emissions is over 500 potential cancer cases per million people exposed. In addition to these general risks, diesel exhaust particulate can also present elevated localized or near-source exposures.

4.2.1.3 Regional

Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)

Management of air quality in the basin is the responsibility of the BAAQMD. The BAAQMD is responsible for bringing and/or maintaining air quality in the basin with federal and state air quality standards. Specifically, the BAAQMD has responsibility for monitoring ambient air pollutant levels throughout the basin and developing and implementing attainment strategies to ensure that future emissions will be within federal and state standards.

Clean Air Plans

As discussed previously, the FCAA and CCAA require preparation of plans to reduce air pollution to healthful levels. The BAAQMD has responded to this requirement by preparing a series of Clean Air Plans (CAP), the most recent and rigorous of which was approved in June 2010. The 2010 CAP continues the air pollution reduction strategy established by the 2000 CAP and represents the fourth triennial update to the 1991 CAP, following previous updates in 1994,

1997, 2000. The 2010 CAP is designated to address attainment of the state standard for O3 (BAAQMD, 2010a).

The 1997 CAP contained stationary and mobile source control measures, which included developing rules to reduce vehicle trips to and from major residential developments, shopping centers and other indirect sources; encouraging cities and counties to plan for high-density development; and clustering development with mixed uses in the vicinity of mass transit stations. The 2000 CAP included changes in the organization and scheduling of some previous control measures, some new stationary source control measures, revisions to previous

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.22 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 stationary source measures and deletion of some control measures deemed no longer feasible by BAAQMD staff.

The 2010 CAP serves to update the 2000 CAP and the 2005 Ozone Strategy (discussed below) in accordance with the requirements of the California Clean Air Act to implement “all feasible measures” to reduce ozone. The 2010 CAP provides a control strategy to reduce ozone, particulate matter (PM), air toxics, and greenhouse gases in a single, integrated plan and provide a platform to review progress in improving air quality in recent years. Additionally, the 2010 CAP establishes emission control measures to be adopted or implemented in the 2010- 2012 timeframe. The transportation control measures (TCM) in the 2010 CAP are unchanged from the 1997 CAP. The 2010 CAP continues to discourage urban sprawl while strongly endorsing high-density mixed-use developments near transit centers that reduce the need for commuting by personal vehicle.

Ozone Strategy

The BAAQMD developed the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan as a guideline to achieve the federal 1-hour ozone standard. The 2001 Attainment Plan was approved by CARB in 2001 and by the USEPA in 2003. In April 2004, the USEPA determined the SFBAAB had attained the federal 1- hour ozone standard. Due to the attainment status of the basin, the 1-hour ozone requirements set forth in the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan were no longer required. A year later, in 2005, the federal 1-hour ozone standard was revoked by the USEPA for a new and more health- prospective 8-hour standard. The SFBAAB was designated as marginal non-attainment for the federal 8-hour ozone standard. Although designated as non-attainment, areas designated as marginal non-attainment or less were not required to submit new attainment plans. Nonetheless, the control measures and strategies described in the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan for the 1- hour standard will also help achieve attainment with the 8-hour standard.

The 2005 Ozone Strategy is a comprehensive document mapping how the SFBAAB will achieve attainment of the state 1-hour ozone standard as expeditiously as possible and how the basin will reduce transport of ozone and ozone precursors to neighboring air basins. The 2005 Ozone Strategy was prepared by the BAAQMD in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The document outlines how the basin will meet the CCAA planning requirements and transport mitigation requirements through implementation of control measures and strategies. The 2005 Ozone Strategy describes its plans to implement stationary source control measures through District regulations; mobile source control measures through incentive programs; and transportation control measures through transportation programs in cooperation with MTC, transit agencies, and local governments.

BAAQMD Rules and Regulations

The BAAQMD is responsible for limiting the amount of emissions that can be generated throughout the basin by stationary sources. Specific rules and regulations have been adopted that limit emissions that can be generated by various uses and/or activities and identify specific pollution reduction measures that must be implemented in association with various uses and

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.23 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 activities. These rules regulate not only the emissions of the state and federal criteria pollutants, but also the emissions of toxic air contaminants. The rules are also subject to ongoing refinement by the BAAQMD.

Some emission sources subject to these rules are regulated through the BAAQMD’s permitting process. Through this permitting process, the BAAQMD also monitors the amount of stationary emissions being generated and uses this information in developing the CAP.

BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines

In April 1996, the BAAQMD prepared its BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines as a guidance document to provide lead government agencies, consultants, and project proponents with uniform procedures for assessing air quality impacts and preparing the air quality sections of environmental documents for projects subject to CEQA. The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines were updated in June 2010. The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines document describes the criteria that the BAAQMD uses when reviewing and commenting on the adequacy of environmental documents, such as this Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The BAAQMD Guidelines recommend thresholds for use in determining whether projects would have significant adverse environmental impacts, identify methodologies for predicting project emissions and impacts, and identify measures that can be used to avoid or reduce air quality impacts.

Association of Bay Area Governments

The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is a council of governments for the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and Solano. ABAG is a regional planning agency and serves as a forum for regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. ABAG also serves as the regional clearinghouse for projects requiring environmental documentation under federal and state law. In this role, ABAG reviews proposed projects to analyze their impacts on ABAG’s regional planning efforts.

Although ABAG is not an air quality management agency, it is responsible for several air quality planning issues. Specifically, as the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the nine counties, it is responsible, pursuant to Section 176(c) of the 1990 Amendments to the FCAA, for providing current population, employment, travel and congestion projections demographic, and employment factors influencing expected transportation demand, including land use forecasts. ABAG is also responsible for preparing and approving the portions of the basin’s CAP relating to demographic projections and integrated regional land use, housing and employment, as well as transportation programs, measures, and strategies.

4.2.1.4 Local

City of Vallejo General Plan. Key goals and policies relating to Air Quality in the Vallejo General Plan include the following:

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.24 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Air Quality Goal 2: To reduce the air quality impact associated with future development in Vallejo.

Air Quality Goal 2, Policy 3: Require air quality mitigation for new development not amenable to TSM methods. Retail commercial and residential development; in particular, do not lend themselves to trip reduction through TSM. As part of the environmental review process, these types of uses should be required-to provide air quality mitigation by providing funding for off-site improvements to improve air quality. 'Examples of such improvements are pedestrian/bicycle amenities, transit support, transit amenities such as bus shelters, or additional park-and-ride lots.

Air Quality Goal 3, Policy 4: Encourage energy conservation measures in all new development and energy conserving retrofitting of existing buildings wherever feasible. 4.2.2 Environmental Setting

The Project area is located in the City of Vallejo, which is located in southwestern Solano County within the boundaries of the SFBAAB (or Basin). The topography and climate of the basin combine to make it an area in which poor air quality could occur. The climate of the Bay Area is Mediterranean in character, with mild, rainy winter weather from November through March and warm, dry weather from June through October. In summer, the Pacific high-pressure system typically remains near the coast of California. The subsidence of warm air over the cooler marine air associated with the Pacific high creates frequent summer atmospheric temperature inversions. Subsidence inversions may be several hundred to several thousand feet deep, effectively trapping pollutants in a stagnant volume of air near the ground with little dispersion ability. Typically, May through October is considered the ozone smog season. Transport studies have shown precursor emissions generated in the East Bay are often transported to other regions of the Bay Area and beyond (e.g., Central Valley) that are more conducive to the formation of ozone. In winter, the Pacific high-pressure system moves southward, allowing ocean-formed storms to move through the region. The frequent storms and infrequent periods of sustained sunny weather are not conducive to ozone formation.

The prevailing wind direction in the project area is from the southwest. Sea breezes dominate the area during the spring and summer months. Maximum wind speeds in the area reach approximately 9 to 10 miles per hour during the summer months. The dominance of the sea breeze results in a mild, relatively cool climate. Low clouds and fog are common in spring and summer. The project site often experiences persistent afternoon winds in the spring and summer months.

Regional Air Quality

The determination of whether a region’s air quality is healthful or unhealthful is made by comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to national and state standards. Health- based air quality standards have been established by California and the Federal government for the following criteria air pollutants: O3, CO, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and Pb. These standards were established to protect sensitive receptors with a margin of safety from adverse health

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.25 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

effects due to exposure to air pollution. California has also established standards for sulfates, visibility-reducing particles, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. The state and national ambient air quality standards for each of the monitored pollutants and their effects on health are summarized below in Table 4.2-3: Ambient Air Quality Standards and in further detail following the table.

Table 4.2-3: Ambient Air Quality Standards Federal Air Averaging State Standard Primary Most Relevant Health Effects Pollutant Time Standard

(a) Short-term exposures: (1) Pulmonary function 1-hour 0.090 ppm — decrements and localized lung edema in humans and animals; and (2) Risk to public health implied by 8-hour 0.070 ppm — alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals; (b) Long-term exposures: Risk to public health Ozone (O ) 3 implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and 3-year altered pulmonary morphology in animals after long-term (annual 4th- — 0.075 ppm exposures and pulmonary function decrements in highest daily chronically exposed humans; (c) Vegetation damage; and max) (d) Property damage.

1-hour 20.0 ppm 35 ppm (a) Aggravation of angina pectoris and other aspects of Carbon coronary heart disease; (b) Decreased exercise tolerance Monoxide in persons with peripheral vascular disease and lung (CO) 8-hour 9.00 ppm 9.0 ppm disease; (c) Impairment of central nervous system functions; and (d) Possible increased risk to fetuses

8-hour 0.18 ppm — (a) Potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups; (b) Risk to Nitrogen public health implied by pulmonary and extra-pulmonary Dioxide Annual biochemical and cellular changes and pulmonary (NO ) 2 arithmetic 0.03 ppm 0.053 ppm structural changes; and (c) Contribution to atmospheric mean discoloration.

1-hour 0.25 ppm —

8-hour 0.04 ppm — (a) Bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms which Sulfur may include wheezing, shortness of breath and chest Dioxide 24-hour — 0.14 ppm tightness, during exercise or physical activity in person (SO ) 2 Annual with asthma arithmetic — 0.030 ppm mean

3 3 Respirable 24-hour 50 µg/m 150 µg/m (a) Excess deaths from short-term exposures and Particulate exacerbation of symptoms in sensitive patients with Annual Matter respiratory disease; and (b) Excess seasonal declines in arithmetic 20 µg/m3 — (PM ) pulmonary function, especially in children. 10 mean

3 Fine 24-hour — 35 µg/m (a) Increased hospital admissions and emergency room Particulate visits for heart and lung disease; (b) Increased respiratory Matter Annual symptoms and disease; and (c) Decreased lung function arithmetic 12 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 (PM2.5) and premature death mean

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.26 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Federal Air Averaging State Standard Primary Most Relevant Health Effects Pollutant Time Standard

(a) Decrease in ventilator function; (b) Aggravation of Sulfates asthmatic symptoms; (c) Aggravation of cardio-pulmonary 24-hour 25 µg/m3 — (SO4) disease; (d) Vegetation damage; (e) Degradation of visibility; and (f) Property damage

30-day 1.5 µg/m3

Rolling 3- (a) Increased body burden; and (b) Impairment of blood Lead (Pb) 1 0.15 µg/m3 month formation and nerve conduction

Quarterly 1.5 µg/m3

In sufficient amount to produce extinction Visibility 8-hour (10 coefficient of (a) Visibility impairment on days when relative humidity is Reducing a.m. to 6 — 0.23/km due to less than 70% Particles p.m.) particles when relative humidity is < 70% Hydrogen Sulfide 1-hour 0.03 ppm — (a) Odor annoyance (H2S) Vinyl 24-hour 0.01 ppm — (a) Known carcinogen Chloride 1 Source: BAAQMD 2011 20 µg/m3 = microgram per cubic meter; ppm = parts per million by volume; — = No criteria/not available

1 CARB has identified lean and vinyl chloride as “toxic air contaminants” with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.27 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Description of Pollutants Table 4.2-4 presents a general description of the sources, and physical and health effects for air pollutants that may be associated with the proposed Project.

Table 4.2-4: Description of Pollutants Pollutant Sources Health Effects

Aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular Atmospheric reaction of organic gases Ozone (O ) diseases; reduced lung function; increased 3 with nitrogen oxides in sunlight cough and chest discomfort

Stationary combustion of solid fuels; Reduced lung function; aggravation of Fine Particulate Matter construction activities; industrial respiratory and cardiovascular diseases;

(PM10 and PM2.5) processes; atmospheric chemical increases in mortality rate; reduced lung reactions function growth in children

Motor vehicle exhaust; high temperature Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) stationary combustion; atmospheric Aggravation of respiratory illness reactions

Incomplete combustion of fuels and Aggravation of some heart diseases; reduced other carbon-containing substances, Carbon Monoxide tolerance for exercise; impairment of mental such as motor vehicle exhaust; natural (CO) function; birth defects; death at high levels of events, such as decomposition of exposure organic matter

Combination of sulfur-containing fossil Aggravation of respiratory diseases; reduced Sulfur Dioxide (SO ) fuels; smelting of sulfur-bearing metal 2 lung function ore; industrial processes

Behavioral and hearing disabilities in children; Lead (Pb) Contaminated soil nervous system impairment

Source: BAAQMD, 2011

Current Air Quality A region’s air quality is considered to be in attainment of the state standards if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for the criteria pollutants are not exceeded or equaled in any consecutive three year period. The project site is located within the SFBAAB, which includes all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo, San Francisco, and Santa Clara counties as well as the southern half of Sonoma County and the southwestern portion of Solano County. The region is named for its geographical formation surrounding the San Francisco Bay. The air quality in the basin is affected by the pollutants generated within dense population centers, heavy vehicular traffic, and industry. However, as mentioned above, coastal sea breezes tend to transport pollutants generated with the SFBAAB to inland locations such as the Central Valley.

The air pollutants within the Basin are primarily generated by two categories of sources: stationary and mobile. Stationary Sources are known as “point sources” which have one or more emission sources at a single facility, or “area sources: which are widely distributed and

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.28 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 produce many small emissions. Point sources are usually associated with manufacturing and industrial uses and include sources such as refinery boilers or combustion equipment that produce electricity or process heat. Examples of area sources include residential water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and consumer products, such as barbecue lighter fluid or hair spray. Mobile sources refer primarily to operational and evaporative emissions from motor vehicles.

To identify ambient concentrations of criteria pollutants, the BAAQMD operates 31 air quality monitoring stations throughout the basin. The nearest monitoring station is approximately 0.5 miles north of the Project site, located at 304 Tuolumne Street in Vallejo. This monitoring station monitors Ozone, CO, NO2, SO2, PM2.5, PM10, Lead, and Toxics.

Table 4.2-5 lists the concentrations registered and the exceedances of CAAQS and the NAAQS that have occurred at this monitoring station from 2008 through 2010.

Table 4.2-5: Ambient Pollutant Concentrations Measured Near the Project Site by Year

State Year Air Pollutant Standard 2008 2009 2010

Ozone (O3)

Maximum 1-hour concentration (ppm) 0.109 0.104 0.091

Maximum 8-hour concentration (ppm) 0.075 0.074 0.081

Number of days exceeding state 1-hour standard 0.090 ppm, 1 2 0

Number of days exceeding state 8-hour standard 0.070 ppm 3 1 2

Number of days exceeding federal 8-hour standard 0.075 ppm 0 0 1

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Maximum 8-hour concentration (ppm) 2.31 2.23 1.94

Number of days exceeding state and federal 8-hour standard 9.0 ppm 0 0 0

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

Maximum 24-hour concentration (ppm) 0.003 0.003 0.002

Number of days exceeding state 24-hour standard 0 0 0

Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)

Maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 42.1 na na

Number of days exceeding state 24-hour standard 0 na na

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

Maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 51.2 38.9 29.5

Number of days exceeding federal 24-hour standard 7 5 0 Sources: (i) CARB 2010; (ii) USEPA Air Quality Database (USEPA 2007). na= Insufficient or no data available to determine value. 1 Parts by volume per million of air (ppm), micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3) 2 The federal 8-hour ozone standard was changed to 0.075 ppm in 2008

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.29 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Sensitive Receptors. The BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as facilities where sensitive population groups (children, elderly, acutely and/or chronically ill) are likely to be located. These land uses include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. Residential neighborhoods surround the project site, and Lake Dalwigk, a neighborhood park facility, is located to the north of the project site. No other known sensitive receptors are located near the project site. 4.2.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.2.3.1 Methodology

The analysis in this section focuses on the nature and magnitude of the change in the air quality environment due to implementation of the Project. Air pollutant emissions associated with the Project would result from operation of the proposed development and from project-related traffic volumes. Construction activities would also generate emissions at the Project site and on roadways resulting from construction-related traffic. Specifically, both construction and operation phase air emissions that would occur as a result of Project implementation were estimated using California Air Resources Board’s URBEMIS 2007 Version 9.2.4. URBEMIS is a modeling tool used to calculate air pollutant emissions from land use development projects. The emissions generated by these activities were then compared to thresholds of significance established by the BAAQMD to determine the significance of impacts.

4.2.3.2 Criteria of Significance

Significance criteria listed below are derived from Appendix G of the state CEQA Guidelines. For the purposes of this EIR, impacts to air quality would be significant if implementation of one of the proposed Project would:  Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan  Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation  Result in 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 (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)  Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations  Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people  Expose the public to TACS that would increase the probability of contracting cancer for the maximally exposed individual that exceeds 10 in one million; or  Exposed the public to non-carcinogenic TACS that would result in an acute and chronic Hazard Index greater than one.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.30 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (BAAQMD 2010) recommend analytical methodologies and provide evaluation criteria for determining the level of significance of project impacts under the above listed general criteria. The BAAQMD’s evaluation for determining air quality impacts provide defined screening thresholds for pollutant emissions. The following project-level criteria listed in Table 4.2-6 are used in this EIR to define significance.

Table 4.2-6: BAAQMD Adopted Air Quality CEQA Thresholds of Significance Pollutant Construction Operational Related Related

Criteria Air Pollutants and Average Daily Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Maximum Annual Emissions (tpy) Precursors (Regional) Emissions (Lbs/day)

ROG 54 54 10

NOx 54 54 10

PM10 82 (exhaust only) 82 (exhaust only) 15

PM2.5 54 (exhaust only) 54 (exhaust only) 10

PM10/ PM2.5 (fugitive dust) Best Management None Practices

Local CO None 9.0 ppm (8-hour avg), 20.0 ppm (1-hour avg)

Risk and Hazards – New Source Same as Operational Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR (Individual Project) Thresholds** Increased cancer risk of > 10.0 in a million Increased non-cancer risk of >1.0 Hazard Index (Chronic or Acute) 3 Ambient PM2.5 increase: > 0.3 µm/m annual average Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from fence line of source or receptor

Risk and Hazards – New Receptor Same as Operational Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR (Individual Project) Thresholds** Increased cancer risk of > 10.0 in a million Increased non-cancer risk of >1.0 Note: Threshold Effective Date Hazard Index (Chronic or Acute) 3 May 1, 2011 Ambient PM2.5 increase: > 0.3 µm/m annual average Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from fence line of source or receptor

Risk and Hazards – New Source Same as Operational Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR (Cumulative Thresholds) Thresholds** Cancer: > 100 in a million (from all local sources) Non-cancer >10.0 Hazard Index (from all local sources) (Chronic) 3 PM2.5 increase: > 0.8 µm/m annual average (from all local sources) Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from fence line of source or receptor

Accidental Release of Acutely None Storage or use of acutely hazardous materials locating near receptors or Hazardous Air Pollutants receptors locating near stored or used acutely hazardous materials considered significant

Odors None Complaint History – 5 confirmed complaints per year averaged over three years

4.2.3.3 Project Impacts

Potential Project impacts are analyzed below for all three phases of Project construction and operation of the Project at build out in the year 2035.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.31 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT AIR-1: Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Plan

As shown below in IMPACT AIR-2, construction emissions have been mitigated below mass thresholds of significance and operation emissions are below the thresholds of significance. Because these emissions are below the thresholds of significance, they are not anticipated to obstruct implementation of the 2010 Clean Air Plan. Furthermore, the Project does not include population growth or other sources of emissions which have not been considered in future emissions planning inventories. However, the 2010 Clean Air Plan includes 55 control measures aimed at reducing air pollutant emissions to further improve air quality within the region and continue to make progress towards meeting air quality standards. The Project would therefore conflict with the 2010 Clean Air Plan if applicable control measures adopted by the BAAQMD to reduce emissions are not adhered to during project implementation. The control measures focus on stationary sources, mobile sources, transportation, land use and local impacts, and energy and climate measures. The proposed Project would not conflict with any of the control measures and is designed to promote ride-sharing, the use of public transportation systems, and reduce congestion. These Project objectives are consistent with the control measures and goals included in the 2010 Clean Air Plan. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2010 Clean Air Plan. This is a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are necessary. Level of Significance Less than Significant

IMPACT AIR-2: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation

Implementation of the proposed Project will result in criteria air pollutant emissions during the construction and operation phases of the Project. Operation of Project does not include any stationary emissions sources. Projected criteria air pollutant emissions resulting from Project implementation were estimated using URBEMIS 2007 Version 9.2.4. The BAAQMD has established significance criteria and recommended mitigation measures that are phase specific (construction and operation). As such, criteria air pollutant emissions have been estimated and evaluated separately for the construction and operation of the Project. Potential air quality impacts from Project construction and operation are presented below. Construction. Construction of the Project will occur in three phases. Construction activities will result in criteria air pollutant emissions from construction equipment and vehicle exhaust, fugitive dust from grading activities, and off-gas from paving and coating application activities. Table 4.2-7 below presents the estimated unmitigated and mitigated construction emissions for each phase and calendar year of construction as well as whether or not a significance threshold will be exceeded. The URBEMIS model results are attached as Appendix C.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.32 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Table 4.2-7: Summary of Vallejo Transit Center Construction Emissions

Emissions in Pounds per Day PM PM PM PM ROG NO CO SO 10 10 2.5 2.5 x x (exhaust) (dust) (exhaust) (dust) Unmitigated Phase 1 Peak Daily 3.24 21.54 20.61 0.02 1.42 15.00 1.31 3.13 Emissions (2013) Unmitigated Phase 1 Peak Daily 58.34 9.97 11.44 0.01 0.50 0.06 0.45 0.02 Emissions (2014) Unmitigated Phase 2 Average Daily 49.99 11.17 9.52 0.01 0.49 7.60 0.45 1.59 Emissions (2025) Unmitigated Phase 3 Average Daily 53.84 11.16 9.37 0.01 0.49 7.60 0.45 1.59 Emissions (2035) 82 54 BAAQMD Threshold 54 54 -- -- (exhaust BMPs (exhaust BMPs only) only) BMPs BMPs Exceeds Threshold? Yes No NA NA No No required required Mitigated Phase 1 Peak Daily 3.24 21.54 20.61 0.02 1.42 15.00 1.31 3.13 Emissions (2013) Mitigated Phase 1 Peak Daily 52.51 9.97 11.44 0.01 0.50 0.06 0.45 0.02 Emissions (2014) Mitigated Phase 2 Average Daily 44.99 11.17 9.52 0.01 0.49 7.60 0.45 1.59 Emissions (2025) Mitigated Phase 3 Average Daily 48.45 11.16 9.37 0.01 0.49 7.60 0.45 1.59 Emissions (2035) Exceeds Threshold BMPs BMPs No No NA NA No No After Mitigation? required required

As shown in Table 4.2-7, the daily mass emissions rates for NOX and PM exhaust (PM10 and

PM2.5) are below the established BAAQMD significance criteria and are therefore a less than significant construction air quality impact. The daily mass emission rate for ROG exceeds the BAAQMD threshold for Phase 1 construction in 2014. ROG emissions for the 2013 construction year for Phase 1 as well as Phases 2 and 3 are below the BAAQMD emission threshold. The exceedance of the ROG significance threshold in 2014 is therefore a significant impact. Mitigation Measure AIR-1 listed below will be implemented during construction to reduce ROG emissions. As shown in Table 4.2-7, daily ROG emissions after mitigation will be below the BAAQMD significance criteria and are therefore significant but mitigable to less than significant.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.33 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Soil disturbing activities such as grading has the potential to result in substantial fugitive dust emissions in the form of PM10 and PM2.5 that can contribute to exceedances of PM10 and PM2.5 air quality standards for which the BAAQMD is already designated non-attainment The proposed Project’s fugitive dust emissions are estimated in Table 4.2-7. The BAAQMD evaluates the significance of fugitive dust emissions on incorporating recommended best management practices (BMPs) rather than mass emission thresholds. Projects that incorporate all of the BAAQMD recommended BMPs will have a less than significant fugitive dust air quality impact. Mitigation Measures AQ-2 through AQ-9 listed below will be implemented to reduce the significance of fugitive dust emissions to less than significant in accordance with the BAAQMD BMPs.. Operation. Operation of the proposed Project would result in criteria air pollutant emissions from the operation of vehicles utilizing the transit center as well as area sources such as facility maintenance activities (landscaping). The Project site currently provides a stop for the regional Vallejo Transit Baylink Express Route 80 and Benicia Route 78 as well as a stop for the Vallejo local Route 1. With construction of the transit center, there is the potential to reroute the San Francisco Express Route 200 buses operating from the Vallejo Ferry Terminal to stop at the Transit Center prior to entering the I-80 freeway. Local Route 6 could also be re-routed to incorporate a stop at the Transit Center. The potential new routes stopping at the proposed transit center would be rerouted from less than a mile away; therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not add a substantial distance to the existing bus route. Operation emissions were estimated for Project build out in the year 2035 after all three construction phases are completed and begin operation. The emissions estimates assume 4,804 vehicle trips are generated each day as a result of operating the transit center (AECOM, 2011). Daily and annual mass emission estimates from Project operation are presented and compared to the applicable BAAQMD significance criteria below in Table 4.2-8.

Table 4.2-8: Summary of Vallejo Transit Center Operation Emissions Emissions in Pounds per Day

ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Area Source Emissions 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Vehicle Emission 11.56 12.50 118.78 0.34 60.81 11.45 Estimates Total Operation 12.32 12.50 118.78 0.34 60.82 11.46 Emissions BAAQMD Threshold 54 54 -- -- 82 54 Exceeds Threshold? No No NA NA No No Emissions in Tons per Year

ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Area Source Emissions 0.15 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vehicle Emission 1.86 1.78 20.98 0.06 11.10 2.09 Estimates Total Operation 2.01 1.78 21.12 0.06 11.10 2.09 Emissions BAAQMD Threshold 10 10 -- -- 15 10 Exceeds Threshold? No No NA NA No No

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.34 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The above operation emissions estimates consider the emissions associated with vehicle trip generation for the transit center at Project build out and does not discount baseline emissions from vehicles trips that are already utilizing the existing park-and-ride facility located at the Project site. As shown in Table 4.2-8, estimated operation emissions are below the BAAQMD mass emissions thresholds of significance.

Local Carbon Monoxide Impact Analysis

In lieu of an adopted mass emissions threshold of significance for CO emissions, the BAAQMD assesses the significance of CO emissions based on the Project’s potential to exceed the CO air quality standard (9.0 ppm 8-hour average and 20.0 ppm 1-hour average). To determine if a project has the potential to exceed the CO air quality standard, the BAAQMD has established a project-level CO screening procedure. Specifically, the Project would result in a less than significant impact to localized CO concentrations if the following screening criteria are met:

1) Project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans. 2) The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at effected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour. 3) The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited.

The Solano Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) identifies, plans, and prioritizes the transportation needs of Solano County. The goals of the Solano CPT are to preserve and enhance quality of life, maintain facilities and services, enhance regional and local mobility, expand travel choices, improve accessibility and safety, and support economic development. The Arterials, Highways, and Freeways element has a goal of developing a balanced transportation system that reduces congestion and improves access and travel choices through the enhancement of roads. In this section of the report the I-80/I-680/I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study was identified as a need (City of Vallejo, 2008).

The 2004 I-80/I-680/I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study focused on developing a long range, multi-modal transportation plan for Solano County freeways, projecting population growth in Solano County through 2025 and modeling resulting freeway traffic impacts. The report identified transportation improvements and timeframes for implementation that would accommodate the increases in vehicular traffic and resulting congestion. The study identified the expansion of the Lemon St & Curtola Pkwy park-and-ride facility (proposed Project) as the most important mid-term project for implementation.

The purpose of the Project is to accommodate existing park-and-ride facility use, future demand at Project build out in 2035, and reduce congestion on roadways and intersections potentially affected by the Project. The Project’s design generally reflects the recommendations made in the I-80/I-680/I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study to address observed shortcomings of

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.35 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 the existing park-and-ride facility. Therefore, the Project is consistent with applicable congestion management programs and plans and meets criteria 1 of the CO screening methodology.

The Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the Project concluded that the Project will result in a total of 4,804 daily vehicle trips and a peak vehicle trip rate of 1,171 vehicle trips per hour (AECOM, 2011). This value is considerably lower than the 44,000 vehicles per hour threshold identified above in criteria 2 and the 24,000 vehicles per hour threshold identified in criteria 3. Therefore, the Project meets criteria 2 and 3 of the CO screening methodology.

Based on the above discussion, the Project meets all screening criteria for localized CO impacts and according to the BAAQMD guidelines, will therefore have a less than significant localized CO air quality impact.

Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Use low VOC coatings for any exterior or interior surface where the application of architectural coatings is necessary. Mitigation Measure AIR-2: All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. Mitigation Measure AIR-3: All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. Mitigation Measure AIR-4: All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. Mitigation Measure AIR-5: All vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 mph. Mitigation Measure AIR-6: All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. Mitigation Measure AIR-7: Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. Mitigation Measure AIR-8: All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer‘s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. Mitigation Measure AIR-9: Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District‘s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.36 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT AIR-3: 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 (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)

The BAAQMD evaluates the cumulative significance of emissions increases for non-attainment criteria air pollutants on the basis of operation mass emissions thresholds of significance (presented in Tables 4.2-6 and 4.2-8). If daily average or annual emissions of operational- related criteria air pollutants or precursors would exceed any applicable threshold, the proposed Project would result in a cumulatively significant air quality impact. As shown in Table 4.2-8, emissions of criteria air pollutants from project operation will not exceed any average daily or annual mass emissions thresholds. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant cumulative increase in criteria air pollutant emissions for which the BAAQMD is non-attainment.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are necessary.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT AIR-4: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations

There are a number of urban or industrialized communities within the SFBAAB where exposure to TACs is relatively high in comparison to others. These communities are referred to by the BAAQMD as impacted communities. The Project site is not located within an impacted community. The potential for Project construction and operation to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations are evaluated separately below. Construction. The BAAQMD has established the following criteria to determine if construction of a project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Specifically, a project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations if any of the following thresholds of significance are exceeded:  Non-compliance with a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan  An excess cancer risk level of more than 10 in one million , or a non-cancer (i.e., chronic or acute) risk greater than 1.0 HI from a single source would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution

3  An incremental increase of greater than 0.3 ug/m annual average PM2.5 from a single source would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.37 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Construction-related activities will result in the generation of TACs, specifically DPM, from on-road haul trucks and off-road equipment exhaust emissions. Due to the variable nature of construction activity, the generation of TAC emissions in most cases would be temporary, especially considering the short amount of time such equipment is typically within an influential distance that would result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations. Concentrations of mobile-source DPM emissions are typically reduced by 70 percent at a distance of approximately 500 feet. In addition, current models and methodologies for conducting health risk assessments are associated with longer-term exposure periods of 9, 40, and 70 years, which do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities. This results in difficulties with producing accurate estimates of health risk. Additionally, the implementation of the Basic Construction Mitigation Measures which is recommended for all proposed projects would also reduce DPM exhaust emissions (BAAQMD, 2011a). The City of Vallejo does not have a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan. The BAAQMD has prepared a screening table that lists the minimum distance required between the fence line of a construction site and a nearby sensitive receptor to ensure that cancer and non-cancer risks associated with the project are less than significant per the BAAQMD significance thresholds. The screening table is limited to the construction of residential, commercial and industrial land uses which are not applicable to the proposed Project land use. However, construction of a commercial or industrial land use of comparable size to the proposed Project is listed in the screening table as having a potential to exceed BAAQMD local risk and hazard thresholds of significance at receptors located within 100 meters (328 feet) of the nearest construction site boundary. The screening table is based on the conservative assumption that all on-road haul truck activity will occur on the fence line of the project site and all off-road construction activity will be concentrated on a ¼ acre area at the project fence line. The actual risk associated with a more realistic distribution of emissions will likely predict substantially lower risk than those listed in the screening table. It should be noted that a project that fails the screening procedure may or may not actually result in significant health risks associated with construction emissions (BAAQMD, 2010b). There are residential land use receptors located adjacent to the Project site along Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street as well as a the potential temporary off-site parking area located at the northwest corner of Sonoma Boulevard at Magazine Street that could be affected by Project construction activities. The proposed Project site is approximately 6 acres which will be constructed in three phases. The first phase will be constructed on approximately three acres as well as limited activities off-site to provide 205 temporary off-site parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure. Phases 2 and 3 will be constructed on 1.5 acres each. Construction equipment will primarily be mobile in nature, operate across the entire construction site, only operate in the same location for limited periods, and operate intermittently during a work day. These Project characteristics will reduce the Project’s potential to exceed the local risk and hazard thresholds of significance during construction. However, it has been conservatively assumed that the thresholds could be exceeded based on the BAAQMD screening criteria for construction of other land use types of similar size as the Project. Mitigation Measures AIR-2 through AIR-9 listed above are the BAAQMD Basic Construction Mitigation Measures recommended for all construction projects to reduce construction emissions, particularly DPM. To further reduce construction emissions, Mitigation i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.38 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Measures AIR-10 through AIR-22 will be implemented during Project construction to minimize a potential exceedance of the local risk and hazard thresholds of significance. The Project does not include any other component that could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, risks, or hazards. The Project does not involve the storage or use of any substantial volume of acutely hazardous materials. In addition, the Project site is not located in an area known to contain ultramafic rocks which could contain naturally occurring asbestos. Therefore, Project construction is not expected to be a source of occurring asbestos that could impact sensitive receptors as a result of construction disturbances. Operation. The BAAQMD recommends that a project’s potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations be evaluated on a project-specific and cumulative basis. The project-specific and cumulative analyses are presented below. Individual Project Analysis The BAAQMD has established the project-specific criteria to determine if operation of a project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Specifically, a project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations if any of the following thresholds of significance are exceeded:  Non-compliance with a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan;  An excess cancer risk level of more that 10 in one million , or a non-cancer (i.e., chronic or acute) risk greater than 1.0 HI from a single source would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution;

3  An incremental increase of greater than 0.3 ug/m annual average PM2.5 from a single source would be a significant cumulatively considerable contribution. There are residential land uses (receptors) adjacent to the Project Site that could be impacted by

TAC and PM2.5 emissions. The City of Vallejo does not have a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan. The BAAQMD recommends a phased approach for assessing community risks and hazards from TACs and PM2.5. The recommended methodology is detailed in the BAAQMD’s Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards (BAAQMD,

2011b). Project operation emissions of TACs and PM2.5 will primarily occur from vehicles operating on adjacent roadways. The Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (AECOM, 2011) estimates that the Project would result in 4,804 vehicle trips per day at Project build out. It was further estimated that 70 percent of the trips would occur on Curtola Parkway (3,363 trips/day) and 30 percent would occur on Lemon Street (1,441 trips/day). The BAAQMD developed roadway screening tables for all California highways and surface streets. The BAAQMD has determined that roadways and highways with less than 10,000 average daily vehicle trips would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (BAAQMD, 2011d). Because the Project would result in less than 10,000 daily vehicle trips on any affected roadway, the Project would not be expected to exceed an established local risk and hazard threshold of significance. However as a conservative approach to assess individual Project risk and hazard impacts, the baseline traffic counts on affected roadways were added to the estimated Project-related traffic count increases and re-screened using the BAAQMD highway and roadway screening tables.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.39 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Existing traffic count data for the affected roadways was obtained from the California Environmental Health Tracking Program’s traffic volume linkage tool. The traffic linkage tool estimates there are 8,710 average daily vehicle trips on Curtola Parkway and 7,320 average daily vehicle trips on Lemon Street (CEHTP, 2011). Table 4.2-9 below summarizes the existing and Project-related traffic volumes on each affected roadway as well as the screening threshold used to determine the significance of local risks and hazards from Project operation. Table 4.2-9: Summary of Vehicle Trips on Affected Roadways Roadway Existing Estimated Existing Risk and Hazard Estimated Lifetime Daily Project Plus Project Screening Table PM2.5 Cancer Vehicle Daily Daily Thresholds Concentration Risk Trips Vehicle Vehicle Trips Trips

20,000 vehicle trips/day Curtola 8,710 3,363 12,073 Receptor at 10 feet 0.160 3.68 Parkway East-West roadway

10,000 vehicle trips/day Lemon 7,320 1,441 8,761 Receptor at 10 feet 0.096 2.42 Street North-South roadway

A shown in Table 4.2-9, the existing traffic with the addition of Project-related traffic on both affected roadways is expected to result in less than an excess cancer risk level of 10 in one million. In addition, the PM2.5 concentration on each affected roadway is estimated to be below the threshold of significance of an incremental increase of greater than 0.3 ug/m3 annual average

PM2.5. The BAAQMD screening tables do not include acute or chronic non-cancer hazards since the maximum hazards estimated from the highest traffic volume roadways modeled by the BAAQMD were significantly below the thresholds. The Project would not exceed an acute or chronic non-cancer hazard threshold of significance. Considering the above, individual Project operation would not expose receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. This is a less than significant impact. Full Build Out

The BAAQMD recommends assessing whether a Project’s TAC and PM2.5 emissions would contribute to a cumulatively significant local risk and hazard impact. The BAAQMD recommends that TAC and PM2.5 emissions from roadways with more than 10,000 average daily vehicle trips and permitted stationary source emissions located within 1,000 feet of the Project boundaries be considered in the cumulative analysis. Specifically, the BAAQMD has established criteria to determine if a project’s contribution of TAC and PM2.5 emissions would be cumulatively considerable. Specifically, a project would cumulatively expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations if any of the following thresholds of significance are exceeded:  Non-compliance with a qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan;  An excess cancer risk level of more that 100 in one million or a chronic hazard index greater than 10 for TACs; or,

 0.8 ug/m3 annual average PM2.5 i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.40 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The only roadways within 1,000 feet of the Project boundaries with over 10,000 annual average daily vehicle trips (with the addition of Project-related traffic) are Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street. In addition, there are four BAAQMD permitted stationary sources located within 1,000 feet of the Project site boundaries (BAAQMD, 2011c). Each of these sources and their respective cancer risk level, chronic hazard index, and PM2.5 concentrations are summarized below in Table 4.2-10.

Table 4.2-10: Summary of Cumulative Local Risk and Hazard Emissions Sources Estimated PM2.5 Cancer Risk Level Concentration Emissions Source Chronic Hazard Index (per million) (ug/m3 annual average)

Negligible per BAAQM Curtola Parkway 3.68 0.160 Guidelines Negligible per BAAQM Lemon Street 2.42 0.096 Guidelines Vallejo Rent-All 0 0 0

Manuel’s Auto Body 0 0.001 0

Cumulative Total 6.1 0.001 0.256

BAAQMD Cumulative 100 10 0.8 Threshold of Significance Exceed Threshold? No No No

As shown in Table 4.2-10, risk and hazard data are not readily available for two stationary emissions sources located within 1,000 feet of the Project site boundaries. Without the addition of these two sources, the cancer risk level, chronic hazard index, and PM2.5 concentrations are well below the thresholds of significance. It is unlikely that the addition of the two other sources (Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Murga, Strange, and Chalmers, Inc.) are substantial enough to exceed the cumulative local risks and hazards thresholds of significance. It should also be noted the total number of estimated daily vehicle trips associated with the Project at build out were considered within this analysis. Because a portion of the estimated daily vehicle trips at Project build out are already using the existing park and ride facility and are considered baseline emissions, the risk and hazard metrics for Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street summarized in Table 4.2-10 are likely overestimated. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant cumulative local risk and hazards impact.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.41 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure AIR-10: All exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe. Mitigation Measure AIR-11: All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph. Mitigation Measure AIR-12: Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. Wind breaks should have at maximum 50 percent air porosity. Mitigation Measure AIR-13: Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. Mitigation Measure AIR-14: The simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground- disturbing construction activities on the same area at any one time shall be limited. Activities shall be phased to reduce the amount of disturbed surfaces at any one time. Mitigation Measure AIR-15: All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site. Mitigation Measure AIR-16: Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a 6 to 12 inch compacted layer of crushed rock. Mitigation Measure AIR-17: Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent. Mitigation Measure AIR-18: Minimizing the idling time of diesel powered construction equipment to two minutes. Mitigation Measure AIR-19: The project shall develop a plan demonstrating that the off-road equipment (more than 50 horsepower) to be used in the construction project (i.e., owned, leased, and subcontractor vehicles) would achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent PM reduction compared to the most recent ARB fleet average. Acceptable options for reducing emissions include the use of late model engines, low-emission diesel products, alternative fuels, engine retrofit technology, after-treatment products, add-on devices such as particulate filters, and/or other options as such become available. Mitigation Measure AIR-20: Use low VOC (i.e., ROG) coatings beyond the local requirements (i.e., Regulation 8, Rule 3: Architectural Coatings). Mitigation Measure AIR-21: Requiring that all construction equipment, diesel trucks, and generators be equipped with Best Available Control Technology for emission reductions of NOX and PM. Mitigation Measure AIR-22: Requiring all contractors use equipment that meets CARB‘s most recent certification standard for off-road heavy duty diesel engines.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.42 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT AIR-5: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people

The proposed Project involves the construction and operation of a transit center which would not introduce a new receptor that would be impacted by existing or reasonably foreseeable sources of objectionable odors. The Project does not include any component that has the potential to generate objectionable odors. A transit center is not a land use/type of operation that the BAAQMD identifies as being a source of odors (BAAQMD, 2011). The Project will therefore not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people and will result in a less than significant odor impact.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are necessary. Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.43 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

This section of the EIR addresses the existing biological resources in the project site and the proposed Project’s potential impacts on these resources. This section also provides the relevant environmental and regulatory settings and discusses mitigation measures developed to reduce potential impacts where applicable.

4.3.1 Regulatory Setting

As it relates to land use decisions, “biological resources” generally include plant and animal species and the habitats that support these species. Due to the importance of California’s native ecological systems from a biological, heritage, and economic standpoint, impacts on such resources, especially those that are rare or those with high ecological values, are considered an adverse environmental impact under CEQA.

Individual plant and animal species listed as rare, threatened or endangered under state and federal Endangered Species Acts, and the natural communities or habitats that support them, are of particular concern. Other sensitive, natural communities (such as wetlands, riparian woodlands and oak woodland) that are critical to wildlife or ecosystem function are also key biological resources.

Regulations often mandate that project applicants obtain permits prior to the commencement of urban development activities, with measures to avoid and/or mitigate impacts required as permit conditions.

4.3.1.1 Federal

Federal Endangered Species Act

The federal ESA defines species as “endangered” and threatened” and provides regulatory protection for listed species. The federal ESA provides a program for conservation and recovery of threatened and endangered species, and conservation of designated critical habitat that the USFWS has determined is required for the survival and recovery of these listed species. Section 9 of the federal ESA prohibits the “take” of species listed by USFWS as threatened or endangered. To “take” is defined as to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in such conduct.” In recognition that take cannot always be avoided, Section 10(a) of the federal ESA includes provisions for take that is incidental to, but not the purpose of, otherwise lawful activities. Section 10(a)(1)(B) permits (incidental take permits) may be issued if take is incidental and does not jeopardize the survival and recovery of the species.

Section 7(a)(2) of the federal ESA requires all federal agencies, including the USFWS and the BLM, to evaluate projects with respect to any species for listing or already listed as endangered or threatened and any designated critical habitat for the species. Federal agencies must undertake programs for the conservation of endangered and threatened species, and are prohibited from authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action that will jeopardize a listed i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.44 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 species or destroy or modify its critical habitat. As defined in the federal ESA, “individuals, organizations, states, local governments, and other non-Federal entities are affected by the designation of critical habitat only if their actions occur on Federal lands, require a Federal permit, license, or other authorization, or involve Federal funding.”

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)

The MBTA makes it unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, or possess any migratory bird or part, nest, or egg of any such bird listed in wildlife protection treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and other countries of the former Soviet Union. Similar to the federal ESA, the MBTA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for incidental take. Due to potential presence of migratory birds on the proposed Project site, project compliance with the MBTA was considered in this evaluation.

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC Section 668)

The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act provides for the protection of the bald eagle and the golden eagle by prohibiting, except under certain specified conditions, the taking, possession, and commerce of such birds. If compatible with the preservation of bald and golden eagles, the Secretary of the Interior may permit the taking, possession and transportation of bald and golden eagles and nests for scientific or religious purposes, or for the protection of wildlife, agricultural or other interests. The Secretary of the Interior may authorize the take of golden eagle nests, which interfere with resource development or recovery operations. Bald eagles may not be taken for any purpose unless the Secretary issues a permit prior to the taking.

Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands (May 24, 1977)

This Executive Order establishes a national policy to avoid adverse impacts on wetlands whenever there is a practicable alternative. On projects with federal actions or approvals, impacts on wetlands must be identified in the environmental document. Alternatives that avoid wetlands must be considered. If wetland impacts cannot be avoided, then all practicable measures to minimize harm to those wetlands must be included. This must be documented in a specific Wetlands Only Practicable Alternative Finding in the final environmental document for a proposed individual improvement project.

4.3.1.2 State

California Endangered Species Act of 1984: California Fish and Game Code Sections 2050 -2098

The California Endangered Species Act provides for the protection and management of plant and animal species listed as threatened or endangered, or designated as candidates for such i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.45 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 listing. This Act requires consultation between the CDFG and other state agencies to ensure that projects do not jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species or habitats essential for the continued survival of any threatened or endangered species. The administering agency for this act is the CDFG. Due to the potential presence of state-listed rare, threatened, or endangered species on or near the proposed Project Site, project compliance with the California ESA was considered in this evaluation. Because there are no impacts to any species listed under this Act, the proposed Project will not be in violation of this Act.

California Species Protection Act of 1970: California Fish and Game Sections 900-903

The California Species Protection Act includes provisions for the protection and enhancement of the birds, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles of California. The administering agency for this Act is the CDFG. Because there are no impacts to biological resources, the proposed Project will comply with this act.

Native Plant Protection Act (Fish and Game Code Sections 1900-1913)

California’s Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) requires all state agencies to establish criteria for determining if a species, subspecies, or variety of native plant is endangered or rare. Provisions of the NPPA prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of the CDFG at least 10 days in advance of any change in land use, which would adversely impact listed plants. This requirement allows CDFG to salvage listed plant species that would otherwise be destroyed.

4.3.1.3 Regional/Local

Vallejo General Plan

The key goal and policy that relate to biological resource and are applicable to the project site are listed below:

Policy XI.A.1 Water Resources: Retain major drainage swales, particularly those indicated as blue line streams on U.S. Geological Survey Maps.

Goal X1.B Fish and Wildlife Resources: To protect valuable fish and wildlife habitats.

Policy X1.B. 1: Cluster units so that more open space areas are left in a natural state. 4.3.2 Environmental Setting

The proposed Project Site is located on land that is highly disturbed and currently a paved park- and-ride lot. There are small areas of grass (~1ft2 each) with young ornamental trees dispersed on the lot between parking spots. Two mature Eucalyptus trees are located on the northern edge of the parking lot. Not only is the area highly disturbed, but most of the surrounding area is highly developed with residential houses and businesses. There is very little green space in the vicinity and surrounding area, with the exception of Lake Dalwigk Park which is adjacent to the southwest of the Project Site. Wildlife species potentially found on the project site include those

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.46 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 adapted to urban areas such as European starlings, house sparrows, pigeons, etc. Species observed at Lake Dalwigk Park included Canada Geese, American coots, black-necked stilts, mallards, herring gulls, great egret, and northern shovelers.

A Biological Study Area (BSA) was defined as the proposed Project boundary with a 100 ft buffer on the western end of the site, see Figure 4.3-1: Biological Study Area Map. Construction will be limited to the existing disturbed parking lot. Pedestrian transects were conducted along the Project site including a 100 foot buffer along the western edge of the site into Lake Dalwigk Park.

A search for any listed and/or proposed species (sensitive species) previously identified in the region of the Project locations was performed using the following lists: the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Federal Endangered and Threatened Species Regional Species List, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), California Natural Diversity Database Search (CNDDB), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants list (CNPS). A one quad search of the Mare Island region was performed for each of these agencies using the United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle system. The results from this preliminary search of the Mare Island quad were used for baseline information during the biological surveys to create a table of sensitive species that might occur in the Project vicinity [see Figure 4.3-2: CNDDB and Table 4.3-1: Species List, Threatened and Endangered Flora and Fauna Species Potentially Occurring in Solano County Near the Project Location].

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.47 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.3-1: Biological Study Area

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.48 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.3-2: California Natural Diversity Database

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.49 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Table 4.3-1: Special-Status Wildlife and Plant Species with Potential Habitat in the Project Area Potential Within Common Name Scientific Name Status Suitable Habitat Project Site Invertebrates breed where milkweed species found; feed on Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus NL flowering plants U Reptiles/Amphibians dense, emergent riparian vegetation; still/slow California red-legged frog Rana aurora draytonii T/SC moving water bodies D ponds, lakes, rivers, streams, creeks, marshes Northwestern pond turtle Actinemys marmorata SSC and irrigation ditches D Fish Pogonichthys floodplains; lower-elevation Sacramento splittail macrolepidotus SSC waters Birds Melospiza melodia Suisun song sparrow maxillaris SSC salt marshes; brushy areas D Melospiza melodia San Pablo song sparrow samuelis SSC salt marshes; brushy areas D Laterallus jamaicensis California black rail coturniculus T salt marshes D open grasslands with White-tailed kite (nesting) Elanus leucurus SSC scattered trees D Rallus longirostris mudflats; marshes; tidal California clapper rail obsoletus E sloughs D saltmarsh common Geothlypis trichas thick tangled vegetation in yellowthroat sinuosa SSC wetlands D tricolored blackbird (nesting grasslands; agricultural colony) Agelaius tricolor SSC fields D Northern harrier (nesting) Circus cyaneus SSC grasslands D Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos C rolling foothills, mountains D Mammals salt marshes, endemic to Reithrodontomys San Francisco Bay Salt-marsh harvest mouse raviventris E marshes D Suisun shrew Sorex ornatus sinuosus SSC salt marshes D Plants Monardella villosa ssp. Openings in chaparral, Robust monardella Globosa List 1B cismontane woodland D Northern Coastal Salt Marsh Spartina foliosa List 1B saline emergent wetland D freshwater/brackish Mason's lilaeopsis Lilaeopsis masonii List 1B marshes U

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.50 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Potential Within Common Name Scientific Name Status Suitable Habitat Project Site Fragrant Fritillary Fritillaria liliacea List 1B hilly grasslands D Western Leatherwood Dirca occidentalis List 1B moist, shaded slopes D freshwater/brackish Suisun Marsh aster Symphyotrichum lentum List 1B marshes U lathyrus jepsonii var. Delta tule pea jepsonii List 1B forests; estuaries D chaparral ragwort Senecio aphanactis List 2 coastal sage scrub D Cordylanthus mollis ssp. soft bird's beak Mollis E coastal/inland salt marshes D Diablo helianthella Helianthella castanea List 1B open grasslands D Centromadia parryi ssp. Congdon's tarplant Congdonii List 1B grasslands on lower slopes D Agency Codes CDFG California Department of Fish and Game (California Wildlife Habitat Relationship System USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Species Reports) Status Codes C USFWS species of concer/candidate for listing E Endangered SC CDFG species of special concern T Threatened NL Not Listed U Unlikely probability of presence on site D Discountable probability of presence on site List 1B Rare or Endangered in California List 2 Rare or Endangered in California but more common elsewhere

4.3.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.3.3.1 Methodology

A Stantec biologist performed a reconnaissance level field survey of the Biological Study Area (see Figure 4.3-1) on December 21, 2010 via a pedestrian assessment of the area. Wildlife species documented on the project site included 1 American crow, 1 American kestrel and 2 pigeons. The trees on site included ~ 106 ornamental tree species dispersed between parking spots on the lot. No trees on site would provide habitat for wildlife species. A count of bird species using Lake Dalwigk Park was conducted. Species observed using the lake/park included 68 American coots, 12 black-necked stilts, 63 mallards, 29 herring gulls, 1 great egret, 8 northern shovelers, 1 turkey vulture, and 2 American crows. Detection methods used were by sight and sound.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.51 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.3.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The following section provides the criteria of significance and presents a discussion of potential impacts to biological resources that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

The proposed project would have a significant effect on biological resources if it would:

 Result in substantial reduction in numbers of, restriction in range for, or loss of habitat for a population of any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS

 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 CDFG or USFWS

 Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means

 Create substantial interference 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

 Conflict with the provisions of an approved local, regional, or state policy or ordinance protecting biological resources

 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the findings made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

 Result in substantial reduction in numbers of, restriction in range for, or loss of habitat for a population of any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS

 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 CDFG or USFWS

 Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.52 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Create substantial interference 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

 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan

4.3.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

IMPACT BIO-1: Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances

No local tree ordinances exist for the removal of trees in Vallejo or Solano County. Trees on the project site include small islands of young, planted ornamental trees within the park-and-ride lot and some large eucalyptus trees along the northern boundary. The eucalyptus trees could provide potential nesting habitat for migratory birds. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, this is considered a less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: If construction begins during the breeding season (March 1 to September 1), a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction nesting surveys of the eucalyptus trees 30 days prior to tree removal. If a nest is located, removal of the tree should be postponed until nesting activity is complete as determined by a qualified biologist.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.53 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES

This Cultural Resources section provides contextual background information on historical resources in the proposed Project Site, including the area’s prehistoric, ethnographic and historical settings. This section also summarizes the results of cultural surveys of the proposed Project Site, analyzes the proposed Project’s potential impacts on cultural resources, and identifies mitigation measures to address adverse impacts. This section analyzes the potential effects to cultural resources within the proposed Project Area of Potential Effect (APE) (see Figure 4.4-1). For the purposes of this analysis, the APE is defined as the immediate proposed Project Site. This section is based on the cultural resource inventory conducted by Stantec Archaeologists and discussed in the Archaeological Survey Report (July, 2011). The cultural evaluation was conducted in compliance with Section 5024.1 of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) to identify archaeological or historical resources in the area of potential effect.

For the purpose of CEQA, “historical resources” generally refer to prehistoric and historical archaeological sites and the built environment. Historical resources can also include areas determined to be important to Native Americans such as “sacred sites.” Sacred sites are most often important to Native American groups because of the role of the location in traditional ceremonies or activities.

4.4.1 Regulatory Setting

4.4.1.1 Federal

National Historic Preservation Act

The National Historic Preservation Act was enacted in 1966 as a means to protect cultural resources that are eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The law sets forth criteria that are used to evaluate the eligibility of cultural resources. The NRHP is composed of districts, sites, buildings, structures, objects, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture that are significant to American History. Virtually any physical evidence of past human activity can be considered a cultural resource. Although not all such resources are considered to be significant and eligible for listing, they often provide the only means of reconstructing the human history of a given site or region, particularly where there is no written history of that area or that period. Consequently, their significance is judged largely in terms of their historical or archeological interpretive values. Along with research values, cultural resources can be significant, in part, for their aesthetic, educational, cultural and religious values.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.54 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.4-1: Area of Potential Effects

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.55 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Advisory Council Regulations, Protection of Historic Properties (36 CFR 800)

These regulations establish procedures for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. These regulations define the Criteria of Adverse Effect, define the role of State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in the Section 106 review process, set forth documentation requirements, and describe procedures to be followed if significant historic properties are discovered during implementation of an undertaking. Prehistoric and historic resources deemed significant (i.e., eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, per 36 CFR 60.4) must be considered in project planning and construction. The responsible federal agency must submit any proposed undertaking that may affect NRHP-eligible properties to the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for review and comment prior to project approval.

4.4.1.2 State

California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)

Created in 1992 and implemented in 1998, the CRHR is “an authoritative guide in California to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change.” Certain properties, including those listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and California Historical Landmarks numbered 770 and higher, are automatically included in the CRHR. Other properties recognized under the California Points of Historical Interest program, identified as significant in historic resources surveys or designated by local landmarks programs, may be nominated for inclusion in the CRH if the State Historical Resources commission determines that it meets one or more of the following criteria, which are modeled on NRHP criteria:

 Criterion 1: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.

 Criterion 2: It is associated with the lives of person important in our past.

 Criterion 3: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction; represents the work of an important creative individual; or possesses high artistic values.

 Criterion 4: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory.

Furthermore, under PRC Section 4852(c), a cultural resource must retain integrity to be considered eligible for CRHR. Specifically, it must retain sufficient character or appearance to be recognizable as a historical resource and convey reasons of significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to retention of such factors as location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.56 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Typically, a prehistoric archaeological site in California is recommended eligible for listing in the CRHR based on its potential to yield information important in prehistory or history (Criterion 4). Important information includes chronological makers such as projectile point styles or obsidian artifacts that can be subjected to dating methods or undisturbed deposits that retain their stratigraphic integrity. Sites such as these have the ability to address research questions.

California Historical Landmarks

California Historical Landmarks (CHLs) are buildings, structures, sites, or places that have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific or technical, religious, experimental, or other value and that have been determined to have state wide historical significance by meeting at least one of the criteria listed below. The resource also must be approved for designation by the County Board of Supervisors (or the city of town council in whose jurisdiction it is located); be recommended by the State Historical Resources Commission; and be officially designated by the Director of California State Parks. The specific standards now in use were first applied in the designation of CHL #770. CHLs#770 and above are automatically listed in the CRHR.

To be eligible for designation as a landmark, a resource must meet at least one of the following criteria:

 It is the first, last, only, or most significant of its type in the state or within a large geographic region (Northern, Central, or Southern California);

 It is associated with an individual or group having a profound influence on the history of California; or

 It is a prototype of, or an outstanding example of, a period, style, architectural movement or construction or is one of the more notable works or the best surviving work in a region of a pioneer architect, designer, or master builder.

California Points of Historical Interest

California points of historical interest are sites, buildings, features, or events that are of local (city or county) significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific or technical, religious, experimental, or other value. Points of historical interest designated after December 1997 and recommended by the State Historical Resources Commission are also listed in the CRHR. No historic resource may be designated as both a landmark and a point. If a point is later granted status as a landmark, the point designation will be retired. In practice, the point designation program is most often used in localities that do not have a locally enacted cultural heritage or preservation ordinance.

To be eligible for designation as a point of historical interest, a resource must meet at least one of the following criteria:

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.57 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 It is the first, last, only, or most significant of its type within the local geographic region (city or county);

 It is associated with an individual or group having a profound influence on the history of the local area; or

 It is a prototype of, or an outstanding example of, a period, style, architectural movement or construction or is one of the more notable works or the best surviving work in the local region of a pioneer architect, designer, or master builder.

Native American Heritage Commission

Section 5097.91 of the California PRC established the NAHC, whose duties include the inventory of places or religious or social significance to Native Americans and the identification of known graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands. Section 5097.98 of the PRC specifies a protocol to be followed when the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner.

California Public Records Act

Sections 6254(r) and 6254.10 of the California Public Records Act were enacted to protect archaeological sites from unauthorized excavation, looting, or vandalism. Section 6254(r) explicitly authorized public agencies to withhold information from the public relating to “Native American graves, cemeteries, and sacred places maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission.” Section 6254.10 specifically exempts from disclosure request for “records that relate to archaeological site information and reports, maintained by, or in the Historical Resources Commission, the State Lands Commission, the NAHC, another state agency, or a local agency, including the records that the agency obtains through a consultation process between a Native American tribe and a state or local agency.”

Health and Safety Code, Sections 7050 and 7052

Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, declares that, in the event of the discovery of human remains outside of a dedicated cemetery, all ground disturbance must cease and the county coroner must be notified. Section 7052 establishes a felony penalty for mutilating, disinterring, or otherwise disturbing human remains, except by relatives.

California Penal Code, Section 622.5

The California Penal code, Section 622.5, provides misdemeanor penalties for injuring or destroying objects of historic or archaeological interest located on public or private lands, but specifically excludes the landowner.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.58 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Public Resources Code, Section 5097.5

Public Resources Code, Section 5097.5, defines as a misdemeanor the unauthorized disturbance or removal of archaeological, historic, or paleontological resources located on public lands.

4.4.1.3 Regional/Local

City of Vallejo General Plan

The Vallejo General Plan contains the following objectives, policies, and programs relevant to considerations of the cultural and historic resource impacts of the proposed project:

Historic Preservation Goal: Preserve and improve historically and architecturally significant structures and neighborhoods.

Objectives:

1. Develop pride and awareness of Vallejo’s heritage, both locally and elsewhere. 2. Assist property owners in the restoration of significant buildings. 3. Protect significant buildings from exterior alterations that would diminish their historic or architectural significance. 4. Prevent the demolition of significance. 5. Prevent the demolition of significant buildings when it is economically feasible to restore them. Policies:

1. Promote Vallejo’s heritage. 2. Assist property owners in their restoration efforts. This includes providing information on preservation resources and assisting in the placement of structures on the National Register of Historic Places. 3. The City will regulate changes in the exteriors of structures in the Heritage District, Historic District, and designated City landmarks to enhance the value of Vallejo’s heritage. 4. The City will seek private and public funding for historic preservation. 5. The State Historic Building Code will be used as permitted by state law and the State’s Architect’s Office on any structure on the Historic Resources Inventory or in the Architectural Heritage and the St. Vincent’s Historic Districts.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.59 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Solano County General Plan

The Solano County General Plan specifically refers to a number of policies and procedures for working with Native American groups, protecting cultural resources and ensuring professional treatment of cultural resources when they cannot be avoided. The following is taken virtually verbatim from pp. RS 41-RS 46, Chapter 4 of the county general plan:

Goals regarding Native American Cultural Places:

 Create a dialogue between County and tribal governments in order to identify cultural places and consider such sites in land use planning decisions.

 Develop a program to systematically avoid conflicts with Native American cultural places by ensuring that local and tribal governments are provided with information early in planning processes.

 Evaluate the potential for permanently protecting certain Native American cultural places by designating them as open space.

 Develop proper management and treatment plans for cultural places.

 Develop a program to enable tribes to manage their cultural places.

Policies

RS.P-38: Identify and preserve important prehistoric and historic structures, features, and communities.

RS.P-39: Tie historic preservation efforts to the County’s economic development pursuits, particularly those relating to tourism.

RS.P-40: Consult with Native American governments to identify and consider Native American cultural places in land use planning.

Implementation Programs - Development Review

RS.I-25: Require cultural resources inventories of all new development projects in areas identified with medium or high potential for archeological or cultural resources. Where a preliminary site survey finds medium to high potential for substantial archaeological remains, the County shall require a mitigation plan to protect the resource before issuance of permits. Mitigation may include:

 Having a qualified archaeologist present during initial grading or trenching (monitoring);

 Redesign of the project to avoid archaeological resources (this is considered the strongest tool for preserving archaeological resources);

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.60 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Capping the site with a layer of fill; and/or

 Excavation and removal of the archaeological resources and curation in an appropriate facility under the direction of a qualified archaeologist.

 Alert applicants for permits within early settlement areas to the potential sensitivity. If significant archaeological resources are discovered during construction or grading activities, such activities shall cease in the immediate area of the find until a qualified archaeologist can determine the significance of the resource and recommend alternative mitigation.

Coordination with Other Agencies and Organizations

RS.I-26: Work with federal and state agencies to identify, evaluate, and protect the county’s important historic and prehistoric resources. Programs administered by such agencies may include:

 California Historic Landmarks

 California Points of Historical Interest

 California Register of Historic Resources

 National Register of Historic Places

 State Historic Building Code

Ongoing Planning Efforts, Public Outreach and Education

RS.I-27: Refer to the state Senate Bill 18 guidelines and requirements regarding cultural resources. Programs the County will engage in may include:

 Ensuring local and Native American governments are provided with information early in the planning process, working with Native American governments to preserve and protect Native American cultural sites by designating them as open space where possible,

 Providing management and treatment plans to preserve cultural places, and

 Working with Native American groups to manage their cultural places.

RS.I-28 Protect and promote the county’s historic and prehistoric resources by:

 Providing educational programs to the public, staff, and commissions that promote awareness of the county’s history and the value in preserving historic or prehistoric resources; and exploring and developing historic or prehistoric sites that can be used appropriately as visitor oriented destinations.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.61 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

RS.I-29: Develop historic preservation programs and development guidelines to prevent the loss of significant historic buildings and structures. This should be done in conjunction with Program SS.I-16.

4.4.2 Environmental Setting

Paleoenvironment

The Project area is situated within the Coast Range geomorphic province, which extends from Oregon to the north and the Santa Ynez fault to the south. The Project area lies on the San Pablo Bay north shoreline east of Carquinez Straits. Much of the Coast Range is composed of marine and terrestrial sedimentary deposits underlain by either granitic rock or, as in the case of the project area, the Jurassic to upper Cretaceous Franciscan formation (Graymer et. al. 1994). The section of rocks along the southern shoreline between Pinole and Vallejo includes six of the most widespread divisions of sedimentary series in the Coast Range region. The formations or groups represented are the Chico (Upper Cretaceous), Martinez (Eocene), Monterey (earlier Miocene), San Pablo (later Miocene, Pinole tuff [Pliocene]) and overlying Pleistocene deposits. The Project area is largely covered with both Holocene and recent period fill. Fossils occur in all the formations of the San Pablo Bay section and at least six different faunas are reported. Pleistocene shale in the San Pablo section contains abundant marine shellfish remains as well as a variety of mammal bones representing elephant, horse, camel, bison, ground sloth, antelope, lion, wolf, and other forms (Lee et. al. 1916).

The Bay Area environment changed substantially over time. A relatively rapid sea-level rise occurred between 9,000 and 6,000 B.C., forming the San Francisco Bay from the Francisco Valley. San Pablo Bay is part of San Francisco Bay. After 4,000 B.C. rising sea-level slowed and marshes developed around San Francisco Bay (Bickel 1978). Marshes are rich in food resources, including shellfish, fish, and fowl. During this period numerous shell middens developed as a consequence of prehistoric period shellfish exploitation. Many of the marshlands surrounding the San Francisco Bay were established no more than 3,000 years ago (Moratto 1984). Due to the continually rising sea levels, most earlier-period sites may have been submerged or destroyed. The most dramatic changes occurred during the 1855-1884 period of hydraulic gold mining in the Sierra Nevada. Mining-related sediments washed into many streams and a considerable amount of fine silt was carried into San Pablo Bay resulting in mud flat deposition and shoaling. Submerged prehistoric sites may have been buried during the siltation process. The nature of prehistoric period marshes and associated sites can only be inferred because of the substantial changes resulting from siltation.

During the prehistoric period, the Bay Area featured a mosaic of plant communities ranging from salt marsh to redwood.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.62 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Archival Research

Summary of methods and results The records search for this project was conducted on December 1, 2010 by Lisa Hagel of the Northwest Information Center (See summary sheet in Appendix D). The materials consulted during the background search included:

 Sites in or within a .5 mile radius of the project area  Studies in or within .5 mile radius of the project area  OHP Historic Properties Directory  California Inventory of Historical Resources  Ethnographic information (Kroeber 1925; Johnson in Heizer, ed. 1978)  Historic Maps: 1862 Plat of the U.S. Reservation, No. 7 1863 and 1869 GLO Plat map, T3N, R3W 1872 J.S. Henning, Map of Solano County, California 1898 USFS Karquines Quadrangle 1002 (reprinted 1909) USFS Napa Quadrangle The search was designed to include all known cultural resources recorded within .5 mile of the project area, and all survey project reports produced within .5 mile of the project area. The protocol for this search was discussed with the staff members at the Northwest Information Center.

All of the properties listed in the relevant section of the Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File are located outside of the Area of Potential Effect.

Previous surveys completed within 0.5 mile of the project area are summarized in Table 4.4-1: Summary of Previous Surveys.

Table 4.4-1: Summary of Previous Surveys within 0.5 mile of Project Northwest Information Results Author (see full Center Report Detail references in References Record section) S-33600 (overview rpt.) No sites within project Meyer and Rosenthal 2007 area S-35031 (overview rpt.) No sites within project URS 2008 area S-9462 (overview rpt.) No sites within project Miller 1977 area

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.63 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Northwest Information Results Author (see full Center Report Detail references in References Record section) S-848 (overview rpt.) No sites within project Frederickson 1977 area S-1784 (overview rpt.) No sites within project Chavez 1979 area S-899 (within proj. area) No sites within project Frederickson 1978 area S-22817 (within 0.5 mile) No sites within 0.5 mile Nelson, et. al. 2000 S-2663 (within 0.5 mile) No sites within 0.5 mile Damon 1980 S-22300 (within 0.5 mile) No sites within 0.5 mile Holson, et. al. 1989 S-5131 (within 0.5 mile) No sites within 0.5 mile Busby 1979

SUMMARY OF OTHERS WHO WERE CONSULTED Native American Consultation On January 24, 2011, a letter was faxed to the Native American Heritage Commission requesting a Sacred Lands file search related to the project location. The file search was negative and the Commission provided a list of tribal contacts for the proposed project. On February 16, 2011, letters were prepared and sent to each of the tribal contacts. One response was received, dated March 8, 2011 from Chairman Marshall McKay of the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation recommending that a monitor be present during construction due to the sites’ proximity to a waterway. Listed tribal contacts not affiliated with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation were followed up by telephone contact.

Ethnography The ethnographic group known to have resided in the area of the project is known as the Patwin (sometimes referred to as the Wintun). Little is known regarding the Patwin culture, as they were gone prior to the advent of scientific investigations in the area. Their region extended westward at least to the Napa River and possibly into the Sonoma Valley. To the north, they extended to present-day Napa and eastward along Suisan Bay. The group also extended into the Sacramento Valley (Frederickson 1977).

The highest level of political development was the tribelet, which consisted of a primary village with related satellite villages (Johnson 1978). Subsistence relied upon hunting and fishing, conducted by individuals or small groups. Nets were utilized for fishing and fishing weirs were constructed across rivers. Mussels were gathered in river beds and numerous other animals were hunted including deer, antelope, bear, and numerous birds including geese, ducks and quail. Turtles and other small animals were also hunted. Gathering included the seeds of sunflowers, clover, bunch grass, wild oats, etc. to be pounded into a meal. Wood, bone and

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.64 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 stone were commonly used in the manufacture of tools. Obsidian was utilized for arrows, drill points and spearheads. Boats made of tule balsa were bound with grapevine and often were 20 feet in length (Johnson 1978). Four different types of structures were utilized by the Patwin. They included the family house, the ceremonial dance house, the sudatory and the menstrual hut. Each was earth covered, and semi-subterranean.

Prehistory Very few cultural resources investigations have occurred in the near vicinity of the project area. Early occupation of this general region is dated from 3,000 to 2,000 BC. Determination of prehistoric life ways and culture has been determined based upon archaeological excavations conducted in the area of San Francisco Bay. Sites near the bay consisting of large shell mounds indicated permanent habitation. The exploitation of marine life for food was supplemented by seasonal camps in surrounding mountains. Acorn gathering and hunting comprised major seasonal activities at a distance from the bay area. Artifacts that have been found representative of this time period include chipped stone tools, milling stones, mortars and pestles, bone implements and shell ornaments. Subsequently, the Middle and Late horizons saw additional permanent villages along the shore.

It is suggested that the Patwin occupied the area in question at least by the Late Horizon. Most of the archaeological work in this region has occurred within Napa Valley to the north, in the San Joaquin and Sacramento River valleys to the east, and further west along the shores of San Francisco Bay. Early archaeological investigations recorded hundreds of shell mounds surrounding San Francisco Bay. In 1909, Nelson located a shell mound on Mare Island, directly across Mare Island Straight from the project site. The site was destroyed shortly thereafter. (Frederickson 1977).

History The initial European contact in this region occurred as early as the 1770’s, during the Spanish expedition of Ayala and Canizares. In 1823, Mission San Francisco Solana was established in the present town of Sonoma. In 1826, this region began to feel the effects of the Mexican revolt against colonial Spain. Towns and pueblos began appearing in California as the result of the influx of Californios – individuals receiving land grants from the Mexican republican government. In 1834, Mexico began the secularization of all of the missions in California. It was originally planned to turn the land back to the indigenous groups, but this did not occur, as the administrators assigned to manage the land ended up retaining it in their possession. In 1835, Vallejo’s Rancho was established. It was during these years that the major impact occurred to the Patwin culture. Missionizing efforts took a heavy toll on the indigenous cultures in the area. By the mid-1800s, the impact of American settlement in the area caused the displacement of most of the remaining indigenous groups.

In 1846, California was conquered by the United States. Although the treaty of Hidalgo required that Native Americans be recognized as citizens, this requirement was largely ignored. Five years later, attempts were made to establish reservations and treaties throughout the entire state. Although originally involving 140 different tribes, the treaties were eventually all rejected

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.65 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 by Congress, and prior to 1860, the government began abandoning reservations throughout the state.

Field Methods On December 21, 2010, a cultural resources survey was conducted of the proposed project area. Despite the fact that the original ground surface was not visible, the entire area was surveyed. The survey confirmed that all natural soil on the project site had been imported for the purpose of providing fill for construction, as well as for landscaping. An area of open landscaping with trees and grass exists at the northwestern end of the project area. This area was inspected intensively for any evidence of cultural materials.

The survey was conducted by Robert Larkin, RPA. Mr. Larkin has over twenty years of experience in cultural resource management throughout the southwest United States, and six years of experience specifically within the central and northern portions of California.

Study Findings and Conclusions No evidence of cultural isolates, prehistoric or historic features or structures, or sites was discovered during the survey. Based upon previous archaeological investigations, however, this specific location was identified as potentially sensitive for prehistoric archaeological sites and or features (see Frederickson 1978). As a result of the tribal consultation, Chairman Marshall McKay of the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation also recommended that a monitor be present during construction due to the sites’ proximity to a waterway. Recommendations are made for archaeological monitoring during construction of the proposed Transit Center. A qualified archaeologist should be onsite during construction activities. Prior to construction activities, a Monitoring and Discovery Plan should be prepared and approved by Caltrans.

Unidentified Cultural Materials If previously unidentified cultural materials are un-earthed during construction, it is Caltrans’ policy that work be halted in that area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find. This eventuality should be planned for with the preparation of the Monitoring and Discovery Plan. Additional archaeological survey will be needed if project limits are extended beyond the present survey limits.

4.4.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.4.3.1 Methodology

To evaluate the proposed Project’s potential effects on significant cultural resources, including prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, Stantec Consulting conducted a Screen Level Cultural Analysis, which included a literature review of the entire proposed Project Site.

CEQA states that if no impacts on significant cultural resources will occur, it is adequate to note the resource and the effect on it, but no further consideration or the CEQA process is required (Title 14 California CCR Section 15063.5).

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.66 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.4.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The following section provides the criteria of significance and presents a discussion of potential impacts to cultural resources that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

The proposed project would have a significant effect on cultural resources if it would:

 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5

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

 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature

 Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries

Section 21083.2(g) further defines “unique archaeological resource” for purposes of determination as to whether a project may have a significant effect on archaeological resources. As used in this section “unique archaeological resource” means an archeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:

 Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information

 Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available of its type

 Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person

CEQA does not define a unique paleontological resource but for the purposes of this EIR, a paleontological resource or site is considered “unique” where it meets any of the following criteria:

 It is the best example of its kind locally or regionally

 Illustrates a geologic principle

 Provides a critical piece of paleobiological data

 Encompasses any part of a “type locality” of a fossil or formation

 Contains a unique or particularly unusual assemblage of fossils

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.67 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Occupies a unique position stratigraphically

 Occupies a unique position, proximally, distally or laterally within a formation’s extent or distribution

According to State CEQA Guidelines (CCR Title 14, 15064.5), a project with an effect that may cause substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resources is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment (CCR Title 14, 15064.5(b). The guidelines further state that a substantial adverse change in the significance of a resource means the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historic resource would be materially impaired. Actions that would materially impair the significance of a historical resource are any actions that would demolish or adversely alter those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and qualify it for inclusion in the CRHR or in a local register or survey that meet the requirements of PRC Sections 5020.1(k) and 5024.1(g).

4.4.3.3 Project Impacts

To evaluate the proposed Project’s potential effects on significant cultural resources, including prehistoric and historic archaeological sites, Stantec Consulting conducted a Screen Level Cultural Analysis, which included a literature review and field surveys in all areas of potential permanent and temporary impacts where development would occur.

The potential exists for the presence of buried sites with undisturbed or partially undisturbed cultural deposits throughout the proposed Project Site.

CEQA states that if no impacts on significant cultural resources will occur, it is adequate to note the resource and the effect on it, but no further consideration or the CEQA process is required (Title 14 California CCR, Section 15063.5).

On December 21, 2010, a cultural resources survey was conducted of the proposed project area. Despite the fact that the original ground surface was not visible, the entire area was surveyed. The survey confirmed that all natural soil on the project site had been imported for the purpose of providing fill for construction, as well as for landscaping. An area of open landscaping with trees and grass exists at the northwestern end of the project area. This area was inspected intensively for any evidence of cultural materials.

The survey was conducted by Robert Larkin, RPA. Mr. Larkin has over twenty years of experience in cultural resource management throughout the southwest United States, and six years of experience specifically within the central and northern portions of California.

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.68 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT CULT-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5

There are no known significant historic-period features or resources within the proposed area of disturbance. However, the possibility for encountering unanticipated cultural resources during construction of the Proposed Project does exist. Therefore, Mitigation Measure CULT-1 is required to reduce impact to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure CULT-1: Proper handling of Inadvertent Discovery of Historical Resources. If cultural resources are encountered during project construction, construction shall be halted immediately in the subject area and a qualified professional archaeologist consulted. Historic resources may include stone or wood foundations or walls, structures or remains with square nails, and refuse deposits.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT CULT-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5

No evidence of cultural isolates, prehistoric or historic features or structures, or sites was discovered during the survey. Based upon previous archaeological investigations, however, this specific location was identified as potentially sensitive for prehistoric archaeological sites and or features (see Frederickson 1978). In addition, a similar statement was made by Chairman Marshall McKay of the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation recommending that a monitor be present during construction due to the sites’ proximity to a waterway. Implementation of mitigation measures CULT-2 through CULT-5 will reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure CULT-2: Conduct Worker Awareness Training. Before any work occurs in the project area, including grading, a qualified cultural specialist will conduct mandatory contractor/worker awareness training for construction personnel. The awareness training will be provided to all construction personnel to brief them on the need to avoid impacts on cultural resources, particularly historical resources and human remains and the penalties for not complying with cultural mitigation requirements. If new construction personnel are added to the project, the County will ensure that the personnel receive the mandatory training before starting work.

Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Monitoring During Construction. The applicant shall supply a qualified Archaeological Monitor which shall be present at the construction site when mechanical excavation is taking place. The qualified Archaeologist should meet the minimum qualifications for Principal Investigator on federal projects under the Secretary of the Interior’s

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.69 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The monitor’s role will be to watch for buried archaeological deposits during excavation. If the Archaeological Monitor identifies archaeological resources during construction, he or she should immediately notify the Site Superintendent, who should halt construction in the immediate vicinity of the find, as necessary. The Site Superintendent and Archaeological Monitor will use flagging tape, rope, or some other means as necessary to delineate the area of the find within which construction will halt. This area should include the excavation trench from which the archaeological finds came as well as any piles of dirt or rock spoil from that area. Construction should not take place within the delineated find area until consultation with the Caltrans archaeology staff can inspect and evaluate the find.

Mitigation Measure CULT-4: Discovery. If a new cultural resources site is discovered during construction, and determined to be significant, a qualified Archaeologist will prepare and implement a mitigation plan in accordance with state regulations. This plan will emphasize the avoidance, if possible, of significant archaeological resources. If avoidance is not possible, recovery of a sample of the deposit from which the archaeologist can define scientific data to address archaeological research questions will be considered an effective mitigation measure for damage to or destruction of the deposit. The mitigation program, if necessary, will be carried out as soon as possible to avoid construction delays.

The qualified Archaeologist and archaeological monitor will follow accepted professional standards in recording any finds and will submit the standard Department of Parks and Recreation historic site form (Form DPR 523) and locational information to Caltrans.

If the qualified Archaeologist determines that the find is not significant, construction will proceed. If the qualified Archaeologist determines that further information is needed to determine whether the find is significant, Caltrans will be notified, and the consultant will prepare a plan and a timetable for evaluating the find, in consultation with the County and SHPO. Construction will resume at the site as soon as the field data collection phase of any data recovery efforts is completed.

Mitigation Measure CULT-5: Repository. If cultural resources are recovered during proposed Project construction, a qualified Archaeologist will arrange for the curation at a qualified curation facility, that is, a recognized, non-profit archaeological repository with a permanent curator, of any archaeological materials collected during the construction monitoring and mitigation program. The archaeologist shall submit field notes, stratigraphic drawings, and other materials developed as part of the archaeological excavation program to the curation facility along with the archaeological collection.

If buried archaeological deposits are found during construction, the archaeologist will prepare a report summarizing the monitoring and archaeological investigatory program implemented to evaluate the find or to recover data from an archaeological site as a mitigation measure. This report will describe the site soils and stratigraphy, describe and analyze artifacts and other materials recovered, and explain the site’s significance. This report will be submitted to the curation facility with the collection.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.70 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT CULT-3: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature

No unique geologic features or paleontological resources are known to exist in the project area; however undocumented paleontological resources could be encountered during construction. If any paleontological resources are uncovered during the construction of the project, implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-6 will serve to minimize any impacts to a level that is less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure CULT-6: If paleontological resources or site(s) are encountered, all work in the area will be stopped within a 100 foot wide buffer zone and a qualified Paleontologist will be immediately contacted for on-site consultation. If determined to be unique and/or significant, a qualified Paleontologist will prepare and implement a mitigation plan.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT CULT-4: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries

There are no known human burials or remains within the proposed area of disturbance. However remote, the possibility for encountering human remains during construction of the proposed Project does exist. Therefore, Mitigation Measure CULT-2 is required to reduce impact to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure CULT-7: Prior to construction, construction personnel shall be briefed regarding procedures to follow in the event buried human remains are encountered. Once encountered, work should stop immediately at the discovery point and within a 100-foot wide buffer zone. The City and Solano County coroner must be notified. If the coroner determines that the find is Native American, the coroner is required to contact the NAHC. The NAHC is required (Public Resources Code 5097.98) to determine the Most Likely Descendant, notify that person, and request that they inspect the burial and make recommendations for treatment or disposal.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.71 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

This section describes the geologic and soil characteristics of the project site and the potential geology and soils impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project. The regulatory setting applicable to geology and soils is presented in Section 4.5.1. A description of the environmental setting (affected environment) for geology and soils is presented below in Section 4.5.2, including discussion of the geologic setting (soils and geologic formations; faults and seismic history), and geologic and seismic hazards (slope stability; soil hazards; faults and seismicity; strong ground shaking; fault rupture; liquefaction). The impact analysis, including discussion of project impacts and associated mitigation measures, is presented in Section 4.5.3. Additional descriptions of erosion and sediment impacts on surface water (e.g., turbidity) and mitigation measures are presented in Section 4.8, “Hydrology and Water Quality.”

4.5.1 Regulatory Setting

4.5.1.1 Federal

Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq.), formerly the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, was enacted with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality through the regulation of point source and certain non-point source discharges to surface water. Those discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process (CWA Section 402). Projects that disturb one or more acres of land are required to obtain NPDES coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (General Permit), Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. The General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect stormwater runoff.

Requirements of the federal CWA and associated SWPPP requirements are described in further detail in Section 4.8 (Hydrology and Water Quality)

4.5.1.2 State

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resource Code Sections 21000- 21177.1).

CEQA was adopted in 1970 and applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize or approve projects that may have adverse environmental impacts. CEQA requires that agencies inform themselves about the environmental effects of their proposed actions, consider all relevant information, provide the public an opportunity to comment on the environmental issues, and avoid or reduce potential environmental harm whenever feasible. Relevant CEQA

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.72 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 sections include those for protection of geological and mineral resources and the protection of soil from erosion.

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972

In response to the 1971 San Fernando earthquake, which damaged numerous homes, commercial buildings, and other structures, California passed the Alquist-Priolo (AP) Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. The goal of the AP Earthquake Fault Zoning Act is to avoid or reduce damage to structures like that caused by the San Fernando earthquake, by preventing the construction of buildings on active faults.

In accordance with this law, the State of California maps active faults and the surrounding earthquake fault zones for all affected areas. Any project that involves the construction of buildings or structures for human occupancy, such as an operation and maintenance building, is subject to review under the AP Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Structures for human occupancy must be constructed at least 50 feet (15 meters) from any active fault.

California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990

The Seismic Hazardous Mapping Act is designated to protect the public from the effects of strong ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, other ground failures, or other hazards caused by earthquakes. The Seismic Hazardous Mapping Act requires site-specific geotechnical investigation to identify the hazards and formulation of mitigation measures before the permitting of most developments designed for human occupancy.

Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigation Seismic Hazards in California, (California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1997) constitutes for guidelines for evaluating seismic hazards other than surface fault rupture, and for recommending mitigation as required by Public Resources Code Section 2695(a). The Project Site is a transit center and is not delineated as for human occupancy.

California Building Code

The California Building Code requires extensive geotechnical analysis and engineering for grading, foundations, retaining walls, and other structures, including criteria for seismic design. The Bay Area is located within Zone 4, which is expected to experience the greatest effects from earthquakes, and requires the most stringent requirements for seismic design. The proposed project must be designed according to the latest seismic design standards, and would be required to meet all relevant California Building Code Requirements for seismic safety.

4.5.1.3 Regional/Local

Vallejo General Plan Policies. Five key General Plan policies in the Safety Element (VIII) that specifically address soils and geology or hazards are applicable to the proposed project.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.73 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Policy 8.B.2: Evaluate all new development for potential seismic hazards using the Geotechnical Hazards Map (Plate 1 in Appendix 1) as a guide for determining the need for additional geologic investigation.

Policy 8.B.3: Evaluate the compatibility of existing zoning as well as future land use allocation, with known geologic risk zones, or those that may be identified in the future.

Policy 8.B.10.e: At the discretion of the Building Official, certain of the more important or critical use structures in Groups I, II and II (such as hospitals, schools, high-rise buildings and fire stations, etc.) should be specified as requiring more conservative seismic design parameters utilizing the maximum credible earthquake (rather than the maximum probable earthquake). Other less important uses in Groups I, II and III (such as certain utilities, roads, and small isolated dams) could be designed utilizing the maximum probable earthquake, as are the ordinary types of construction in Groups IV and V.

Policy 8.B.10.f: Future detailed study of the Southampton Fault should be undertaken, including subsurface exploration between Garthe Ranch and Blue Rock Springs Creek, geophysical profiling of Southampton Bay and Carquinez Strait to confirm the continuity of the fault zone, microseismic monitoring along the fault, and a triangulation survey of the fault trace to detect possible fault creep.

Policy 8.B. 11.a: At the discretion n of the City Engineer or Building Official, all development (or only certain more important land uses) within the tentatively classified potentially active fault zones (the Franklin and Southampton Faults) may be required to comply with the State requirements for the evaluation of the fault rupture hazard. State criteria prohibits construction of habitable structures across such potentially active faults (or multiple fault lines within the zone) and require a minimum setback of 50 feet from such faults, unless specifically approved by a registered geologist. No habitable structures should be placed across or near any fault trace without an adequate construction setback.

City of Vallejo Municipal Code. Chapter 12.40 (“Excavation, Grading and Filling”) of Title 12 of the City of Vallejo Municipal Code sets specific standards for excavation and construction of structural fills. The standards address control of construction activities, design requirements for cut and fill slopes, and maintenance guidelines. 4.5.2 Environmental Setting

Regional Geology and Physiography

The Project Site is located within the Coast Range Province of California. This province is characterized by northwest trending mountain ranges and intervening valleys, which are a reflection of the dominant northwest structural trend in bedrock of the region. The basement rock in the northwest portion of this province is dominantly highly deformed sedimentary, metamorphic and volcanic rock of the Franciscan Complex of Upper Jurassic to Cretaceous Age. The Project Site is underlain by Artificial Fill (Historic) and Great Valley Sequence. Artificial Fill consists of a variable thickness of loose to very well consolidated gravel, silt, sand, clay, i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.74 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 organic matter, rock fragments, and man-made debris in various conditions. Great Valley Sequence consists of early and late Cretaceous undivided sandstone and shale. Elevation of the site is approximately 24 feet above mean sea level and the topography is relatively flat.

Recent Geologic History San Francisco Bay is California’s largest estuarine environment. Its configuration and the surrounding landscape have been shaped by a combination of tectonic activity, recent sea level changes, and human activities since 1850 (WTA 2003).

Since the formation of the Sacramento-San Joaquin drainage outlet through the Bay approximately 400,000 years ago, the environment of deposition has fluctuated between estuarine (periods of high sea level resulting from a warm global climate) and alluvial (periods of low sea level during periods of cold global climate) (Sloan 1992 as cited in WTA 2003).

The present Bay estuary formed less than 10,000 years ago as the global climate warmed and sea levels rose (WTA 2003). Marine water re-entered the Bay approximately 10,000 years ago and by about 4,000 years ago had reached its present level (WTA 2003). With the establishment of estuarine conditions, sedimentation in the Bay changed from alluvial sands and silts to dark colored estuarine clays and silts, commonly called Bay Mud. Deposition of sandier sediment was confined to channels (WTA 2003).

Since about 1850, human activities have made enormous modifications to the Bay, causing changes in the patterns of circulation and sedimentation. Between 1856 and about 1900, hydraulic mining in the Sierra foothills deposited several feet of sediment throughout the Bay (WTA 2003). Starting in the 1800s, the construction of levees and dykes altered the patterns of drainage and annual flooding in the Delta (WTA 2003). Also, the placement of fill at numerous localities around the Bay margins has dramatically altered the shoreline profile during historic time (WTA 2003).

Site Geology The project site is located about a mile from the shoreline of the San Francisco Bay, near the mouth of the Napa River. The 2010 Geologic Map of California (CGS 2010) indicates the geologic unit of the Project site is primarily older alluvium (see Figure 4.5-1). Nearby units include Alluvium and Upper Cretaceous sandstone.

Soils Soil is defined as the top layer of the earth’s surface, consisting of rock and mineral particles mixed with organic matter. The characteristics of soil are defined by five influences on their development: topography, climate, biological activity, source material, and time. The Soil Survey of Solano County, prepared by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) indicates that the site is underlain by soils of Dibble-Los Osos Association: consisting of 85% clear lake clays (see Figure 4.5-2). The Clear Lake series consists of very deep poorly drained soils that formed in fine textured alluvium derived from sandstone and shale. Clear Lake soils are in basins and in swales of drainageways. Slopes are 0 to 2 percent.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.75 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.5-1: Regional Geology

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.76 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.5-2: Soil Survey

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.77 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Soil Erosion and Expansive Soils

Erosion is the weathering and transportation of soil and rock by mass wasting, and the action of streams, glaciers, waves, wind, and groundwater. The rate of erosion depends on many factors, including soil type and geologic parent rock, slope and placement of soils, and especially human activities. The potential for erosion increases in silty soils than for sandy soils. The slope and presence of vegetation in an area can increase natural rates of erosion. Erosion potential increase in step, unvegetated areas, especially those disturbed by grading or other construction activities. Human disturbances on the Earth’s surface can increase the rate of erosion above the natural rate, causing destabilization of soil in an area.

A soils’ susceptibility to erosion varies and is a function of its characteristics such as soil texture, soil structure, topography (steepness of slope), roughness, amount of vegetative cover, and regional and local climate. The potential for erosion increases the longer soils are left bare. Erosion from water mainly occurs in loose soils on moderate to steep slopes, particularly during high-intensity storm events.

Seismicity and Faults

The entire San Francisco Bay Area is located in a region of active seismicity. This is primarily related to the San Andreas Fault Zone, a complex of active faults forming the boundary between the North American and the Pacific lithospheric plates. Historically, numerous moderate to strong earthquakes have been generated by several major faults and fault zones in the San Andreas Fault Zone system. The level of activity in this region results in the classification of seismic risk Zone 4 (highest risk category) in the California Building Code.

The San Andreas Fault Zone includes numerous faults found by the California Division of Mines and Geology under the Alquist-Priolo earthquake Fault zoning Act to be “active.” Active faults in the region include Concord, Green Valley, Hayward, San Andreas, Los Positas, Calaveras, and Rodgers Creek. Surface rupture occurs when the ground surface is broken due to fault movement during an earthquake. The location of surface rupture generally occurs along an active or potentially active major fault trace. Potential for fault rupture at the site is relatively low; however the site’s proximity to several major fault zones subjects the site to ground-shaking. The closest active fault to the Project site is the Concord-Green Valley, approximately 7 miles east of the site. The Hayward-Rodgers Creek fault zone is the next closest, approximately 8 miles west of the site. Figure 4.5-3 illustrates the relationship of the project site to known active faults.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.78 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.5-3: Active Fault Zones

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.79 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

San Andreas Fault

The San Andreas Fault is the largest active fault in California, and extends from the Gulf of California on the south approximately 750 miles to Cape Mendocino on the north. It was the source of the 1906 magnitude 7.9 San Francisco earthquake, which ruptured approximately 280 miles of the fault from San Juan Bautista to Shelter Cove. The fault is about 26 miles west of the Project site at its closest approach.

The San Andreas Fault can be divided into a number of segments, based on differences in geomorphology, geometry, paleoseismic chronology, seismicity, and historic displacements. In the Bay Area, these segments include the southern Santa Cruz Mountains, possible source of the 1989 magnitude 7.0 Loma Prieta earthquake; the Peninsula segment; and the North Coast segment. These segments have been assigned maximum earthquakes of magnitude 7, 7.1, and 7.9 respectively, by the Working Group on Northern California Earthquake Potential (WGNECP 1996).

Hayward Fault

The Hayward Fault is about 62 miles long and has been divided into two fault segments: a longer southern segment and a shorter northern segment. The fault demonstrates systematic right-lateral creep offset of cultural features along its entire length (Lienkaemper et al. 1991 as cited in California Energy Commission 2008). This fault is considered to be the most likely source of the next major earthquake in the Bay Area (WGNCEP 1996) and is located approximately eight miles southwest of the Project site.

The Local Magnitude 6.8 event in October 1868 was the last major earthquake on the Hayward Fault and occurred along the southern segment near Fremont. (Local Magnitude is based on the measurement of the earthquake from a distance of 100 kilometers from the epicenter.) WGNCEP (1996) has assigned maximum earthquake potential of 6.9 for both the northern and southern segments of the Hayward Fault.

Rogers Creek

The Rodgers Creek Fault is a 38-mile-long northwest striking, right-lateral strike-slip fault that extends northward from the projection of the Hayward Fault on the south side of San Pablo Bay. The Roders Creek Fault has long-term geological slip rate similar to the Hayward Fault, and produced a large-magnitude historical earthquake in the late 1800s. Paleoseismic investigations by Schwarts et al. (1992 as cited in California Energy Commission 2008) identified evidence for three earthquakes in the last 925 to 1,000 years yielding a preferred earthquake recurrence interval of 230 years for an earthquake of magnitude 7.0. The fault is about eight miles west of the project site at its closest approach.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.80 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Concord-Green Valley Fault Zone

The Concord-Green Valley Fault is a northwest-striking, right-lateral strike-slip fault zone that extends from the Walnut Creek area across Suisun Bay and continues to the north. The Concord Fault extends for approximately 12 miles, from the northern slopes of Mount Diablo to Suisun Bay. North of Suisun Bay, the Green Valley Fault continues to the north for about 28 miles. The Concord Fault is an actively creeping structure that has a long-term creep rate of approximately five millimeters per year (California Energy Commission 2008).

It is estimated that rupture of both faults would produce a maximum earthquake of about magnitude 6.9, with a recurrence interval of approximately 180 years (WGNCEP 1996). At its closest point the Concord/Green Valley Fault is approximately 7 miles east of the project site.

Geologic evidence indicates that the City of Vallejo is near a number of faults – fractures or fracture zones in the earth’s crust along which there has been displacement of the two sides relative to one another parallel to the fracture. The displacement may be a few inches to several feet. Cumulative displacement through geologic time may reach miles.

Seismic Hazards

Potential seismic hazards resulting from a nearby moderate to major earthquake can generally be classified as primary and secondary. The primary effect is ground rupture, also called surface faulting. Common secondary seismic hazards include ground shaking, ground lurching, soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, landslides, tsunamis, and seiches. The following seismic hazard descriptions and references therein come from ENGEO (2009) and City of Hercules (2009c) as cited in Hercules ITC 2010.

Ground Shaking

Ground-shaking is a general term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth’s surface resulting from an earthquake, and is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. The extent of ground shaking is controlled by the magnitude and intensity of the earthquake, the distance from the epicenter, and the local geologic conditions. Moment magnitude (MW) is used to characterize seismic events now instead of the Richter Scale. Moment magnitude is determined on the basis of the area of the rupture of the fault plane, the average displacement along the fault plane, and the resistance of the faulted rock to faulting. The intensity is a more subjective measure of the perceptible effects of seismic energy at a given point and varies with distance from the epicenter and local geologic conditions. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale (MMI) is the most commonly used scale for measurement of the subjective effects of earthquake intensity.

An earthquake of moderate to high magnitude generated within the San Francisco Bay Region could cause considerable ground shaking at the project site. The degree of shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the evemt, distance to its epicenter, local geologic conditions, and how the earthquake waves decrease or attenuate as they travel from their sources to the site in question. The Bay Area has experienced a number of large, damaging earthquakes

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.81 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 during historical time (WTA 2003). Future strong ground shaking from nearby large-magnitude earthquakes is a virtual certainty.

Liquefaction

Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, cohesionless soils and sands and silts temporarily lose their cohesive strength and act like a liquid when subjected to dynamic forces such as intense and prolonged ground shaking. Liquefaction typically occurs when groundwater is shallow (generally less than 50 feet below ground surface), and soils are predominantly granular and unconsolidated. The potential for liquefaction increases as groundwater approaches the surface. Lateral spreading is a direct consequence of liquefaction and results in lateral movement of liquefied soil on gently sloping ground.

Lateral Spreading

Lateral spreading is a failure within weak soils, typically due to liquefaction, which causes the soil mass to move toward an open channel, or down a gentle slope. Due to the low potential for liquefaction and the clay soils at the project site, lateral spreading is not anticipated.

Landslides

A landslide is defined as a general term for a wide variety of processes and landforms involving the downslope movements, under gravity, of masses of soil and rock material. There is a broad range of landslide where alluvial is susceptible to sliding. In addition, soil creep is an indication of a larger landslide event. The potential for landslides is greatest in areas underlain by adjacent or previous landslides. The gradient across the Project Site is low and landslide potential at the Project Site is considered low.

Fault Rupture

No known active faults have been mapped within the project area, and the Project site does not lie within a delineated State of California Earthquake Fault Zone; therefore, the potential for ground rupture is considered low.

4.5.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.5.3.1 Methodology

This section describes the potential geology and soils impacts associated with development of the proposed project. This analysis first established baseline conditions for the affected environment relevant to geology and soils as presented above in Section 4.5.2 (Environmental Setting). These baseline conditions were evaluated based on their potential to be affected by construction activities as well as operation and maintenance activities for the proposed project. The predicted interactions between the affected environment and project activities are evaluated based on the significance criteria identified below.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.82 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.5.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The City of Vallejo CEQA Implementation Document and the Environmental Checklist state that a project would have a significant impact on geology and soils if it would:

 Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death, involving:

o 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

o Strong seismic ground shaking

o Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction

o Landslides

 Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil

 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

 Be located on expansive soils, as defined in section 1802.3.2 of the International Building Code (IBC) (2006) creating substantial risk to life or property

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

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the findings made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed Project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

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

4.5.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.83 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT GEO-1: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving the rupture of a known Earthquake Fault

The proposed Project Site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake fault zone. The proposed Project Site is located in a designated Seismic Hazard Zone. The site’s proximity to active faults in the region that could generate significant earthquakes could subject the proposed Project Site to a potential ground shaking hazard. There is a potential for strong seismic ground shaking to affect the proposed Project Site in the event of a large magnitude earthquake occurring on fault segments associated with the Concord, Green Valley, Hayward, Rodgers Creek, Los Positas, Calaveras, and San Andreas fault zones. However, the proposed Project does not include the construction of any residential structures that would expose residents to substantial adverse effects involving the rupture of a known earthquake fault. It is possible that a large magnitude earthquake occurring on fault segments associated with the Concord, Green Valley, Hayward, Rodgers Creek, Los Positas, Calaveras, and/or San Andreas faults could impact the Project structures. New construction requires adherence to the earthquake design requirements of the 2007 California Building Code and is addressed during the building permitting phase of projects. In addition, the City of Vallejo Zoning Ordinance requires that all construction projects conform to the regulations of the applicable seismic zone of the Uniform Building Code. These structures will be constructed in accordance with all applicable codes. Project Site personnel present during the construction and operation phases of the Project will not be exposed to substantially increased fault rupture hazards as a result of Project implementation beyond those that generally exist in the entire project region. Mitigation has been proposed to require a geotechnical study to be prepared prior to issuance of grading permits. This study will ensure any impacts related to faults are less than significant. Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits, the applicant shall conduct a geotechnical study to evaluate soil conditions and geologic hazards on the Project Site and submit it to the City of Vallejo Engineer and an independent Certified Engineering Geologist (retained by the City) for review and approval. The geotechnical study must be signed by a California-registered professional engineer and must identify the following:  Location of fault traces and potential for surface rupture;  Potential for seismically induced ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, differential settlement, and mudflows;  Stability of existing cut-and-fill slopes;  Collapsible or expansive soils;  Foundation material type;  Potential for wind erosion, water erosion, sedimentation, and flooding;  Location and description of unprotected drainage that could be impacted by the proposed development; and  Recommendations for placement and design of facilities, foundations, and remediation of unstable ground. i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.84 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact GEO-2: Expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects involving strong seismic Ground Shaking Because of the seismic hazards near the Project Site, a major earthquake event could occur resulting in ground shaking and liquefaction. This has the potential to adversely affect proposed Project structures.

The above potential impacts could be significant. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 shown above requires a geotechnical study to be prepared and would reduce the significance of impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking.

Mitigation Measures

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT GEO-3: Expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction

The proposed project would not include residences, but it would include two parking structures that would have vehicular use on a daily basis. Seismic event(s) also have the potential to result in liquefaction, which occurs when saturated granular sediments temporarily lose their shear strength. However, due to subsurface lithology and depth to groundwater at the proposed project site, the potential for liquefaction to occur is considered low. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 shown above requires a geotechnical study to be prepared and would reduce the significance of impacts related to liquefaction.

Mitigation Measures

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT GEO-4: Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil Clearing and grading, cut-and-fill activities, and potential soil compaction during construction of the parking structures could increase the potential for erosion. The temporary use of an off-site area to provide approximately 205 parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure also could increase the potential for erosion. Erosion can cause a number of problems, including loss of topsoil; degraded water quality due to increased sediment loads; and damage to foundations, roadways, and other structures. Potential soil erosion impacts are therefore

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.85 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 considered to be significant; however, the mitigation measures presented below would reduce the significance of soil erosion impacts. Mitigation Measures

See Mitigation Measure HYD-1 in Section 4.7.

IMPACT GEO-5: Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse

The General Soil Map of Solano County indicates that the Project site is underlain by soils of Dibble-Los Osos association. They are defined as gently sloping to steep, well-drained loams and clay loams formed from sandstone, on mountainous uplands. As stated in mitigation measure GEO- 1, further geotechnical evaluation will be necessary to determine appropriate structure requirements; however, based on the General Soil Map of Solano County and the flat nature of the site the soil in the Project area is expected to be stable and is not expected to result in on-or-off site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Therefore, the impact is less than significant with incorporation of the following mitigation measure.

Mitigation Measures

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT GEO-6: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property

The General Soil Map of Solano County indicates that the Project site is underlain by soils of Dibble-Los Osos association. They are defined as gently sloping to steep, well-drained loams and clay loams formed from sandstone, on mountainous uplands. Dibble-Los Osos soils are classified as high shrink-swell (expansive) soils and typically contain a high percentage of expansive phyllosilicate clay minerals. Expansive soils swell when wet and shrink when dry. During this process, they can cause substantial damage to structures and roadways. Building damage due to volume changes associated with expansive soils can be reduced through proper grading and foundation design, which will be defined in the geotechnical evaluation. Implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1 requires a geotechnical evaluation to be incorporated before building permits will be issued.

Mitigation Measures

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

Level of Significance Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.86 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

This section describes the affected environment and regulatory setting for greenhouse gases. It also describes the impacts associated with greenhouse gases that would result from implementation of the Project.

4.6.1 Regulatory Setting

In 1988, the United Nations and the World Meteorological Organization established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to evaluate the impacts of global warming and to develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change established an agreement with the goal of controlling GHG emissions, including methane. As a result, the Climate Change Action Plan was developed to address the reduction of CHGs in the United States. The plan consists of more than 50 voluntary programs. In October 1993, President Bill Clinton announced his Climate Change Action Plan, which had a goal to return GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This was to be accomplished through 50 initiatives that relied on innovative voluntary partnerships between the private sector and government aimed at producing cost-effective reductions in GHG emissions (CAPCOA 2008).

On March 21, 1994, the United States joined a number of countries around the world in signing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Under the Convention, governments do the following: gather and share information on CHG emissions, national policies, and best practices; launch national strategies for addressing GHG emissions and adapting to expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to developing countries; and cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change (UNFCCC 2007).

A particularly notable result of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change efforts was a treaty known as the Kyoto Protocol which was negotiated in December 1997. The agreement came into force on February 16, 2005 following ratification by Russia on November 18, 2004. When countries sign the treaty, they demonstrate their commitment to reduce their emissions of GHGs or engage in emissions trading. As of December 2006, a total of 169 countries and other governmental entities have ratified the agreement. Notable exceptions include Australia and the United States. Although United States Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the Protocol in 1998, in order for the Protocol to be ratified, it must be ratified by the United States Congress and this has not occurred to date. Other countries, like India and China, which have ratified the protocol, are not required to reduce carbon emissions under the present agreement despite their relatively large populations.

On September 27, 2006, Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act, of 2006 was enacted by the State of California. The legislature stated that “global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources, and the environment.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.87 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.6.1.1 Federal

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

On April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 E.S. 497 (2007), the Supreme Court found that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act. The Court held that the EPA must determine whether or not emissions of GHGs from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. In making these decisions, the EPA is required to follow the language of section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court decision resulted from a petition for rulemaking under section 202(a) filed by more than a dozen environmental, renewable energy, and other organizations.

On April 17, 2009, the Administrator signed proposed endangerment and cause or contribute findings for GHGs under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. The EPA held a 60-day public comment period, which ended June 23, 2009, and received over 380,000 public comments. These included both written comments as well as testimony at two public hearings in Arlington, Virginia and Seattle, Washington. The EPA carefully reviewed, considered, and incorporated public comments and has now issued these final Findings.

The EPA found that six GHGs taken in combination endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations. The EPA also found that the combined emissions of these GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse as air pollution that endangers public health and welfare under CAA section 202(a). These findings were based on careful consideration of the full weight of scientific evidence and a thorough review of numerous public comments received on the Proposed Findings published April 24, 2009. These findings were effective on January 14, 2010.

Specific GHG Regulations that the EPA has adopted to date are as follows:

40 CFR Part 98. Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule. This rule requires mandatory reporting of GHG emissions for facilities that emit more than 25,000 metric tons of

CO2 emissions per year. Additionally, reporting of emissions is required for owners of SF6- and PFC-insulated equipment when the total nameplate capacity of these insulating gases is above 17,280 pounds (lbs). The proposed Project does not include any stationary emissions sources and is not subject to the GHG reporting requirements.

40 CFR Part 52. Proposed Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently mandated to apply Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements to facilities whose stationary source

CO2 emissions exceed 75,000 tons per year. The proposed Project does not include any stationary emissions sources and is not subject to PSD requirements.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.88 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.6.1.2 State

There are a variety of statewide rules and regulations which have been implemented or are in development in California which mandate the quantification or reduction of GHGs. Under CEQA, an analysis and mitigation of emissions of GHGs and climate change in relation to a proposed project is required where it has been determined that a project will result in a significant addition of GHGs. Certain Air Pollution Control Districts (APCDs) have proposed their own levels of significance.

Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006

In September 2006, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) was signed into law by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. AB 32 requires that statewide greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020, which results in a roughly 25 percent reduction under BAU estimates. The law requires this reduction to be accomplished through a variety of measures, including an enforceable statewide cap on greenhouse gas emissions that will be phased-in starting in 2012. AB 32 directs CARB to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources.

The AB 32 Scoping Plan

CARB adopted the AB 32 Scoping Plan on December 12, 2008. The Scoping Plan provides the outline for future actions to reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions and establishes a schedule for CARB and other state agencies to adopt implementing regulations and other initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

CARB has adopted a number of measures required by the Scoping Plan and the Scoping Plan calls for the remaining measures to be adopted by the start of 2011 and in effect on or before 2012. One of the most significant measures called for in the Scoping Plan is the statewide cap on emissions from the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions. The cap-and-trade regulation was approved by CARB on December 16, 2010 following public review and comment. It calls for a phased program starting in 2012 that includes electricity producers, including electricity imports, and large industrial facilities (those with greater than 25,000 tonnes carbon dioxide per year). Starting in 2015, distributors of transportation fuels, natural gas, and other fuels will be included in the cap-and-trade program.

Facilities covered in the cap-and-trade program are not given a specific limit on their greenhouse gas emissions but must supply a sufficient number of allowances (each covering the equivalent of one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent) to cover their annual emissions. Each year, the total number of allowances issued in the state drops, requiring covered facilities to find the most cost-effective and efficient approaches to reducing their emissions. Facilities without sufficient allowances to cover their annual emissions must acquire additional allowances or offsets. By the end of the program in 2020 there will be a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions sufficient to reach the same level of emissions as the state experienced in 1990, as required under AB 32.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.89 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley)

Assembly Bill 1493, enacted in 2002, requires the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop and adopt regulations that achieve maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from passenger cars and light- and medium-duty trucks sold in California for 2009 and subsequent model years. Under ARB regulations adopted in 2004, automakers must meet increasingly stringent GHG emission standards that phase in between 2009 and 2016. California has committed to implement revised, more-stringent GHG emission limits by 2020 (the Pavley Phase 2 rules).

Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg)

Senate Bill 375, signed into law in 2008, establishes a process for the ARB to implement AB 32 by requiring the Board to adopt by September 30, 2010, regional GHG targets for emissions associated with the automobile and light truck sector. Metropolitan planning organizations such as MTC are required to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) element in their long-range plans to strive to reach the GHG reduction targets. The SCS adds three new elements to the plan: 1) a land-use component; 2) a resource and farmland protection component; and 3) a demonstration of how the development pattern and the transportation network can work together to reduce GHG emissions.

In the Bay Area, the provisions of Senate Bill 375 will apply to the successor plan to Transportation 2035, scheduled for adoption in 2013.

4.6.1.3 Regional/Local

BAAQMD

On June 1, 2005 the BAAQMD adopted a resolution establishing a Climate Protection Program and acknowledging the link between climate protection and programs to reduce air pollution in the Bay Area. The Board of Directors also formed a standing Committee on Climate Protection to provide direction on BAAQMD climate protection activities.

A central element of the BAAQMD’s climate protection program is the integration of climate protection activities into existing BAAQMD programs. The BAAQMD is continually seeking ways to integrate climate protection into current BAAQMD functions, including grant programs, CEQA commenting, regulations, inventory development, and outreach. In addition, the BAAQMD 's climate protection program emphasizes collaboration with ongoing climate protection efforts at the local and State level, public education and outreach and technical assistance to cities and counties.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.90 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Solana Transportation Authority

The Solano Transportation Authority (STA) adopted a Climate Change Strategy for transportation on February 10, 2010. The strategy begins with current activities being undertaken by STA and its member agencies that reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses. The strategy also includes planning activities to develop further information to guide improved climate strategies, as well as planned but not yet implemented strategies to further reduce Solano’s emissions of greenhouse gasses. The STA is currently working with the County of Solano to develop emissions inventories for all Solano County local agencies.

City of Vallejo

The City of Vallejo is developing a GHG emission inventory and CAP on its own, but is coordinating its work with the other cities and the County to make sure that the emission measures and action plan steps are compatible.

4.6.2 Environmental Setting

GHGs and climate change are a cumulative global issue. CARB and EPA regulate GHG emission within the State of California and the United States, respectively. While the CARB has the primary regulatory responsibility within California for GHG emissions, local agencies can also adopt policies for GHG emission reduction.

Climate Change

In the early 1960’s scientists recognized that carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were rising every year. It was also noted that several other gases, including methane and nitrous oxides were also increasing. Levels of these gases have increased by about 25% since large- scale industrialization began around 150 years ago, according to the EPA. After numerous computer-simulated model runs on the effects of these increases in the atmosphere, it was concluded that the rising concentrations almost always resulted in an increase of average global temperature. Rising temperatures may, in turn, produce changes in weather, sea levels and land use patterns, commonly referred to as “climate change” (EIA 2010). There is general scientific consensus that climate change is occurring and that human activity contributes in some measure (perhaps substantially) to that change. Man-made emissions of GHGs, if not sufficiently curtailed, are likely to contribute further to continued increases in global temperatures. Increases in global temperature will cause a reduction in the polar ice caps and increase sea level, which will flood low lying areas of the world. Additionally, climate change will shift rainfall patterns that will cause significant impacts to agriculture and fresh water availability worldwide.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.91 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Greenhouse Gases (GHGs)

Many chemical compounds found in the Earth’s atmosphere act as GHGs, which allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere freely. When sunlight strikes the Earth’s surface, some of it is reflected back towards space as infrared radiation (heat). GHGs absorb this infrared radiation and trap the heat in the atmosphere. Over time, the amount of energy sent from the sun to the Earth’s surface should be about the same as the amount of energy radiated back into space, leaving the temperature of the Earth’s surface roughly constant. Many gases exhibit these “greenhouse” properties. Some of them occur in nature (water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide), while others are exclusively human-made (like gases used for aerosols). The most relevant GHGs are water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide

(N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These gases prevent heat from escaping to space.

The principal climate-change gases resulting from human activity that enter and accumulate in the atmosphere are listed below.

 Carbon Dioxide (CO2): CO2 enters the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), solid waste, trees and wood products, and chemical

reactions (e.g., the manufacture of cement). CO2 is also removed from the atmosphere (or “sequestered”) when it is absorbed by plants as part of the biological carbon cycle.

 Methane (CH4): CH4 is emitted during the production and transport of coal, natural gas,

and oil. CH4 emissions also result from livestock and agricultural practices and the decay of organic waste in municipal solid waste landfills.

 Nitrous Oxide (N2O): N2O is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities as well as during combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste.

 Fluorinated Gases: HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are synthetic powerful climate-change gases that are emitted from a variety of industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are often used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances (i.e., chlorofluorocarbons, hydrochloro- fluorocarbons, and halons). These gases are typically emitted in smaller quantities, but because they are potent climate-change gases, they are sometimes referred to as high Global Warning Potential (GWP) gases.

Global warming potential is a relative measure, compared to carbon dioxide, of a compound’s residence time in the atmosphere and ability to warm the planet. Mass emissions of GHGs are converted into carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2) emissions for east of comparison.

GHGs, in most cases, have both natural and anthropogenic sources. Natural mechanisms already exist as part of the ‘carbon cycle’ for removing GHGs from the atmosphere (often called land or ocean sinks). Levels of GHGs, due to the increase in anthropogenic sources, have exceeded the normal rates of natural absorption. This has resulted in increased atmospheric concentrations of GHGs and potentially human-induced global warming.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.92 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

GHG emissions in the United States come mostly from energy use. These are driven largely by economic growth, fuel used for electricity generation, and weather patterns affecting heating and cooling needs. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, resulting from fossil fuel exploration and use account for approximately three-quarters of the human-generated GHG emissions in the United States, primarily in the form of carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels. More than half the energy-related emissions come from large stationary sources such as power plants; approximately one third comes from transportation; while industrial processes, agriculture, forestry, other land uses, and waste management make up a majority of the remainder of sources (EPA, 2010).

Global carbon dioxide emissions are expected to increase by 1.9 percent annually between 2001 and 2025 (EIA 2010). Much of the increase in these emissions is expected to occur in the developing world where emerging economies are fueled with fossil energy, such as China and India. Around 2018 developing countries’ emissions are expected to surpass the emissions of industrialized countries; increasing by 2.7 percent annually between 2001 and 2025, faster than the world average.

Climate models predict that the average temperature at the Earth’s surface could increase from 2.5 to 10.4 degrees F above 1990 levels by the end of this century if GHGs continue to increase. Other aspects of the climate are also changing such as rainfall patterns, snow and ice cover, and sea level.

Climate change affects people, plants and animals. Scientists are certain that increasing the concentration of GHGs will change the planet’s climate; however, they are not sure by how much it will change, at what rate it will change, or what the exact effects will be globally or locally. They are working to better understand the future climate change and how the effects will vary by region and over time.

Some changes to global climate are already occurring. These include: rise of sea level, shrinking glaciers, changes in the range and distribution of plants and animals, lengthening of growing seasons, trees blooming earlier, ice on rivers and lakes freezing later and breaking up earlier, and thawing of permafrost.

Scientists believe that most areas in the United States will continue to warm, although some will likely warm more than others. Predicting which parts of the country will become wetter or drier is extremely difficult, but scientists generally expect increased precipitation and evaporation, and drier soil in the middle parts of the country. The northern regions such as Alaska are expected to experience the most warming. In order to address climate change concerns the United States government has established a comprehensive policy to deal with global warming. This policy has three basic components:

 Slowing the growth of emissions

 Strengthening science, technology and institutions

 Enhancing international cooperation

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.93 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Currently, the federal government is using voluntary and incentive-based programs to reduce emissions and has established a variety of programs promoting climate technology and science. The United States prepared a comprehensive strategy in February 2202 to reduce the GHG intensity by 18% over the 10-year period from 2002 to 2012. GHG intensity is a measurement of GHG emissions per unit of economic activity. By meeting this commitment the United States will prevent the release of more than 500 million metric tons cumulatively between 2002 and 2012 (Climate Vision 2007).

4.6.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.6.3.1 Methodology

The primary source of Project-related GHG emissions during construction is the combustion of fossil fuels from the operation of internal combustion engines (portable equipment, off-road equipment, and vehicles). GHG emissions during Project operation will primarily result from vehicles using the transit center, facility maintenance activities, and indirect electricity consumption.

Greenhouse gas emissions associated with the proposed Project were estimated using CO2 emissions as a proxy for all greenhouse gas emissions. This is consistent with the current reporting protocol of the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR). Calculations of greenhouse gas emissions typically focus on CO2 because it is the most commonly produced greenhouse gas in terms of both number of sources and volume generated, and because it is among the easiest greenhouse gases to measure. However, it is important to note that other greenhouse gases have a higher global warming potential than CO2. Construction and operation CO2 emissions were estimated using URBEMIS 2007 9.2.4. The URBEMIS model results for Project operation were imported into the BAAQMD’s Greenhouse Gas Model (BGM) to estimate operational GHG emissions in CO2e. The BGM also estimates CO2e emissions from indirect electricity consumption.

4.6.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The City of Vallejo CEQA Implementation Document and Environmental Checklist state that a project would have a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions and climate change if it would:  Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment  Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases

BAAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction-related GHG emissions. However, the BAAQMD recommends lead agencies quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction, and make a determination on the significance of these construction-generated GHG emission impacts in relation to meeting AB 32 GHG reduction goals, as required by the Public Resources Code, Section 21082.2.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.94 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The BAAQMD has established GHG emissions thresholds of significance in the 2011 BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. For land use development projects, the threshold is:

 Compliance with a qualified GHG Reduction Strategy  Annual emissions less than 1,100 metric tons per year of CO2e  4.6 metric tons CO2e/service population/year 4.6.3.3 Project Impacts

Project impacts are discussed below for Phase 1 and future phases. Phase 1 impacts, mitigation measures, and level of significance are discussed in detail below. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

IMPACT GHG-1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment

Construction

Project construction will generate GHG emissions from the operation of conventional construction equipment and vehicles. Construction activities are projected to occur in three phases. Construction CO2 emissions were estimated using URBEMIS and are summarized below in Table 4.6-1.

Table 4.6-1: Estimated Construction GHG Emissions CO CO Construction Component 2 2 (U.S. Tons) (Metric. Tons) Phase 1 (2013) 301.44 337.61 Phase 1 (2014) 280.18 313.80 Phase 2 (2025) 202.39 226.67 Phase 3 (2035) 203.05 227.41 Construction Total 987.06 1,105.49

As shown in Table 4.6-1, all three phases of Project construction will result in an estimated

1,105 metric tons of CO2 emissions. GHG emissions from Project construction will be reduced by implementing Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-22. Considering that construction- related emissions have been mitigated to the degree feasible and that the BAAQMD does not have a threshold of significance for the construction phase of projects, the Project will not generate greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. This is a less than significant impact.

Operation

Project operation will generate GHG emissions from the operation of vehicles using the transit center, facility maintenance activities, and indirectly from electricity consumption. CO2 emissions from Project operation were estimated using URBEMIS then imported into the

BAAQMD’s BGM to estimate CO2e. Operational GHG emissions estimates assume 4,804

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.95 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 vehicle trips per day at Project build out, area sources, and indirect emissions from consuming

165 megawatts of electricity per year. Operation CO2 emissions are summarized below in Table 4.6-2.

Table 4.6-2: Estimated Operation GHG Emissions CO e Emissions Operation Component 2 (Metric Tons/Year) Transportation 3,984.64 Area Source 0.23 Electricity 60.33 Operation Total 4,045.2

The transportation emissions shown in Table 4.6-2 are based upon a total of 4,804 vehicle trips per day at Project build out (AECOM, 2011). The transit center at build out will have a total of 1,364 parking spaces. The park-and-ride facility currently occupying the Project site has 485 existing parking spaces and an estimated 130 users utilizing nearby roadway parking. As such, the transportation emissions shown in Table 4.6-2 do not consider baseline conditions and are therefore substantially overestimated. However, the operation emissions are still expected to exceed the BAAQMD significance threshold of 1,100 metric tons per year. Based on the BAAQMD project-specific significance criteria, this would be a cumulative contribution to climate change and a significant impact.

A reported 40 per cent of GHG emissions in the Bay Area originate from the transportation sector, mostly from cars, trucks, buses, trains and ferries (MTC, 2011). As regional growth continues, there is generally an increase in vehicles and congestion that lead to an increase in GHG emissions. A primary goal of GHG reduction programs is to reduce vehicle emissions. The proposed Project has been designed to accomplish the following objectives:

 Meet existing and 2035 future demand for use of the park-and-ride facility by expanding parking capacity  Promote carpooling and ride-sharing  Promote access to intermodal transportation methods  Improve circulation and reduce congestion on adjacent roadways

The Project has been designed to accommodate existing and planned future demand of the existing park-and-ride facility. Research indicates that a number of interested facility users do not attempt to do so due to the lack of parking capacity. It is reasonable to assume that those who use the transit center would otherwise travel longer distances, presumably in a high proportion of personal vehicles. Although not quantified as part of this analysis, it is likely that operation of the transit center would reduce future regional vehicle miles traveled and thus GHG emissions compared to the continuation of existing Project site conditions.

In 2009, the EPA found that six GHGs taken in combination endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations. The EPA also found that the combined emissions of these GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.96 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 the greenhouse as air pollution that endangers public health and welfare under CAA section 202(a).

Considering that the Project will reduce long-term GHG emissions by promoting ridesharing, access to intermodal transport, and reducing congestion, the Project is anticipated to have a less than significant impact on climate change.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are necessary.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT GHG-2: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gasses

The proposed Project is designed to promote ridesharing, car-pooling, and access to intermodal transport options to reduce GHG emissions from the increasing burden of regional vehicle use. The proposed transit-oriented land use at the site is consistent with regional and county based transportation plan goals to reduce GHG emissions. GHG emissions associated with Project operation are primarily from motor vehicle emissions which are regulated by the U.S. EPA and CARB. Implementation of the proposed Project will not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions. This is a less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are necessary.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.97 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Hazardous substances are substances which, by their nature and reactivity, have the capacity of causing harm or a health hazard during normal exposure or an accidental release or mishap, and are characterized as being toxic, corrosive, flammable, reactive, an irritant or strong sensitizer. The term “hazardous substances” encompasses chemicals regulated by both the US Department of Transportation’s (DOT) “hazardous materials” regulations and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “hazardous waste” regulations, including emergency response. Hazardous wastes require special handling and disposal because of their potential to damage public health and the environment. A designation of “acutely” or “extremely” hazardous refers to specific listed chemicals and quantities.

Activities and operations that use or manage hazardous or potentially hazardous substances could create a hazardous situation if release of these substances occurred. Individual circumstances, including the type of substance, quantity used or managed, and the nature of the activities and operations, affect the probably frequency and severity of consequences from a hazardous situation. Federal, state and local laws regulate the use and management of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances. Creation of human health hazards or exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards is considered in this section.

4.7.1 Regulatory Setting

4.7.1.1 Federal

Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act)

The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 ans was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. “Clean Water Act” became the Act’s common name with amendments in 1977.

Under the CWA, EPA has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry and setting water quality standards for all contaminants in surface water. The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges. Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or man-made ditches. Individual, municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters.

Occupational Safety and Health Act

Congress passed the Occupational and Safety Health Act to ensure worker and workplace safety. Their goal was to make sure employers provide their workers a place of employment free from recognized hazards to safety and health, such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress, or unsanitary conditions. i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.98 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

In order to establish standards for workplace health and safety, the Act also created the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health as the research institution for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA is a division of the U.S. Department of Labor that oversees the administration of the Act and enforces standards in all 50 states.

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (Superfund)

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, otherwise known as CERCLA or Superfund, provides a Federal “Superfund” to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous-waste sites as well as accidents, spills, and other emergency releases of pollutants and contaminants into the environment. Through CERCLA, EPA was given power to seek out those parties responsible for any release and assure their cooperation in the cleanup.

EPA cleans up orphan sites when potentially responsible parties cannot be identified or lacated, or when they fail to act. Through various enforcement tools, EPA obtains private party cleanup through orders, consent decrees, and other small party settlements. EPA also recovers costs from financially viable individuals and companies once a response action has been completed.

EPA is authorized to implement the Act in all 50 states and U.S. territories. Superfund site identification, monitoring, and response activities in states are coordinated through the state environmental protection or waste management agencies.

The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986 reauthorized CERCLA to continue cleanup activities around the country. Several site-specific amendments, definitions clarifications, and technical requirements were added to the legislation, including additional enforcement authorities. Also, Title III of SARA authorized the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) gives EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from the “cradle-to-grave.” This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA also set forth a framework for the management of non-hazardous solid wastes. The 1986 amendments to RCRA enabled EPA to address environmental problems that could result from underground tanks storing petroleum and other hazardous substances. The Federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) are the 1984 amendments to RCRA that focused on waste minimization and phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste as well as corrective action for releases. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased enforcement authority for EPA, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.99 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Safe Drinking Water Act

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was established to protect the quality of drinking water in the U.S. This law focuses on all waters actually or potentially designed for drinking use, whether from above ground or underground sources.

The Act authorizes EPA to establish minimum standards to protect tap water and requires all owners or operators of public water systems to comply with these primary (health-related) standards. The 1996 amendments to SDWA require that EPA consider a detailed risk and cost assessment, and best available peer-reviewed science, when developing these standards. State governments, which can be approved to implement these rules for EPA, also encourage attainment of secondary standards (nuisance-related). Under the Act, EPA also establishes minimum standards for state programs to protect underground sources of drinking water from endangerment by underground injection of fluids.

Toxic Substances Control Act

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

4.7.1.2 State

The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA) and the Office of Emergency Services (OES) of the State of California establish rules governing the use of hazardous materials. State laws include the following:

 Public Safety/Fire Regulations/Building Codes

 Hazardous Waste Control Law

 The Hazardous Waste control Act established the California Hazardous Waste Control Program

 Hazardous Substances Information and Training Act

 Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act

 Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances Act

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.100 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.7.1.3 Regional/Local

City of Vallejo Ordinances. As described above, most of the regulatory authority for hazardous materials is vested in the State and County. The City of Vallejo Municipal Code, Title 7, contains a Hazardous Materials Disclosure Ordinance (Chapter 7.66) which requires that businesses that use, store, and/or dispose of hazardous materials file a hazardous materials disclosure form with the Vallejo Fire Department (VFD). The disclosure ordinance is not intended to regulate hazardous materials, but to provide sufficient information so that firefighters who respond to fires or other emergencies in structures which house hazardous material can respond appropriately.

City of Vallejo Policies and Ordinances. The City of Vallejo General Plan, Chapter VIII (Safety), contains three policies intended to address wildfire hazards:

 Policy 8.F.I: Use the Vallejo Fire Department Master Plan in evaluating all planning proposals.  Policy 8.F.2: Actively enforce provisions relating to code violations and insufficient maintenance which may contribute to arson or accidental fires.  Policy 8.F.3: Continue irrigated, fire resistant landscape policy in new development.

The City of Vallejo Municipal Code, Title 7, also contains a Weed and Rubbish Abatement Ordinance (Chapter 7.56) which empowers the City to order property owners to clear vegetation, establish firebreaks, and remove rubbish which may potentially pose a fire hazard.

4.7.2 Environmental Setting

A Phase 1 and 2 ESA of the project site identified two issues of concern. First, a commercial/industrial warehouse existed at the site on the northwest corner of Lemon and Carlson Street from approximately the 1940s to the 1960s. The warehouse was occupied by a neon sign manufacturing company in 1950 and a furniture warehouse in 1956. It is possible that chemicals or metal waste may have been discarded down drains within this warehouse or elsewhere on the project site. The second concern is due to the sixteen to eighteen single- family residential homes that were located on the project site from 1944 to the late 1960s. It is possible that these houses had septic tanks and/or underground heating oil tanks that may still be located underground.

Soil sampling and geophysical surveys were conducted on the proposed Project site in locations owned by the city of Vallejo, but not in areas owned by Caltrans or the Greyhound bus station. Seven soil borings were taken in the vicinity of the Greyhound bus station. TPH-d and TPH-mo was detected within three samples at concentrations below their respective Environmental Screening Level (ESL) defined by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Board in shallow commercial/industrial soils where groundwater is a potential source for drinking water. Sample B-1 @ 0.5-1.0 ft had Vanadium @ 230 mg/kg, slightly above the ESL of 200 mg/kg. None of the sample contained metals above the Total Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLC). Total metal concentrations within Sample B-1 @ 0.5-1.0 ft were almost ten times the California

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.101 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) for analysis of the following metals: Cadmium (4.6 mg/kg detected, 5.0 mg/kg is 10 times STLC); Mercury (1.6 mg/kg detected, 2.0 mg/kg is ten times STLC); Vanadium (230 mg/kg detected, 240 mg/kg is ten times STLC).

In summary, metal concentrations with B-1 @ 0.5-1.0 ft were above the ESL for Vanadium and nearly ten times the STLC for Cadmium, Mercury, and Vanadium. If soil is to be excavated and disposed of during construction, solubility of these metals should be analyzed prior to disposal.

A complete summary of the findings can be found in Phase 2 ESA in Appendix E of this EIR. No underground tanks or contaminated soil that would affect worker safety during future construction were identified at the proposed Project site.

4.7.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.7.3.1 Methodology

Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessments were conducted at the project site in the areas of the project site owned by the City of Vallejo. In the event of a hazardous materials release, the Vallejo Fire Department will isolate and control the release of hazardous materials according to the City of Vallejo Emergency Plan.

4.7.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The City of Vallejo CEQA Implementation Document and Environmental Checklist state that a project would have a significant impact on hazards and hazardous materials if it would:  Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials

 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

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

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

 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 for people residing or working the project area

 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working the project area

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.102 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan

 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fire, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the findings made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

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

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

 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 for people residing or working in the project area

 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area

 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fire, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands

4.7.3.3 Project Impacts

Project impacts are discussed below for Phase 1 and future phases. Phase 1 impacts, mitigation measures, and level of significance are discussed in detail below. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

IMPACT HAZ-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials

Phase 1

During the Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessments, no underground tanks or contaminated soil that would affect worker safety during construction activities were identified at the site. However, sites that are currently owned by Caltrans and the Greyhound Bus Station were not able to be accessed. These areas include the parking lot north and west of the Greyhound bus station, and the entire park-and-ride lot east of Lemon Street. It is possible that subsurface conditions are different within the areas that were not accessed. If any septic tanks, underground heating oil tanks, or other subsurface structures are located during construction i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.103 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 activities, they should be removed per local, state, and federal regulations. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 will be implemented in the event that chemically impacted soils are encountered and require off-site disposal. The temporary use of an off-site area to provide approximately 205 parking spaces during the construction of the Phase 1 parking structure is not anticipated to include substantial soil disturbing activities that could result in encountering chemically impacted soils.

During project construction, diesel fuel and minor amounts of hazardous materials such as paints, fuels, solvents, and other materials could be transported to and from and used at the project site. The transport and use of these materials would be temporary, occurring only during construction of the proposed project. The transport, use and disposal of these materials could pose a significant risk to the public and/or the environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

Operation of the Transit Center does not include the use, storage, or generation of hazardous materials requiring a hazardous materials use permit, and the proposed project would not require the use, storage, or generation of hazardous wastes.

Future Phases

A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment will need to be conducted of the areas that were not initially surveyed (Caltrans and Greyhound Bus Station).

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: If soil export during construction is necessary, the soil will be characterized and handled in accordance with all applicable state and federal waste regulations.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Prior to construction, the City shall require the selected contractor(s) to prepare a hazardous materials management plan that will be implemented to ensure that all contractors transport, store, handle and dispose of construction-related hazardous materials in a manner consistent with the relevant regulations and guidelines. At minimum, these include those measures recommended and enforced by Caltrans, Regional Water Quality Control Board, the local Fire Department, and the Solano County Department of Environmental Health. The City shall ensure, through the enforcement of contractual obligations, that all contractors immediately control the source of any leak and immediately contain any spill utilizing appropriate spill containment and countermeasures identified within the plan. If required by the City or local fire department, Solano County Department of Environmental Health, or any other regulatory agency, containment media shall be collected and disposed of at an off-site facility approved to accept such media.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment of the areas on the project site owned by Caltrans and Greyhound Bus Station will need to be conducted and included in a supplemental environmental document. If any septic tanks, underground heating oil tanks, or other subsurface structures are located during construction activities, they should be removed per local, state and federal regulations.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.104 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT HAZ-2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through an accident involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Initial and Future Phases

As with all construction activities, the potential exists for accidents to occur, which could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, identified above, potential impacts are considered to be less-than-significant.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT HAZ-3: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Initial and Future Phases

The proposed project will add new parking structures to the current site, which is presently a park-and-ride lot. The City of Vallejo Fire Department is equipped to address and handle emergencies of differing types. The project will not impact the ability of the fire department to follow the emergency response plan.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.105 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

This section addresses potential impacts of the proposed project on hydrology and water quality, describes the environmental and regulatory setting, and discusses mitigation measures to reduce impacts where applicable.

4.8.1 Regulatory Setting

4.8.1.1 Federal

Clean Water Act (CWA)

The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq.), formerly the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, was enacted with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality through the regulation of point source and certain non-point source discharges to surface water. Those discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process (CWA Section 402). In California, NPDES permitting authority is delegated to, and administered by, the nine RWQCBs.

Section 404, Discharge of Dredged or Fill Materials

Section 404 of the CWA authorizes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to regulate the discharge of dredge or fill material to the waters of the U.S. and adjacent wetlands. The limits of non-tidal waters extend to the Ordinary High Water (OHW) line, defined as the line on the shore established by the fluctuation of water and indicated by physical characteristics, such as the natural line impressed on the bank, changes in the character of soil, and presence of debris. The USACE may issue either individual, site-specific permits or general, nationwide permits for discharge into US waters.

National Flood Insurance Policy Act

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for managing the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which makes federally backed flood insurance available for communities that agree to adopt and enforce floodplain management ordinances to reduce future flood damage.

The NFIP, established in 1968 under the National Flood Insurance Act, requires that participating communities adopt certain minimum floodplain management standards, including restrictions on new development in designated floodways, a requirement that new structures in the 100-year flood zone be elevated to or above the 100-year flood level (known as base flood elevation). To facilitate identifying areas with flood potential, FEMA has developed Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that can be used for planning purposes, including floodplain management, flood insurance, and enforcement of mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.106 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.8.1.2 State

Department of Water Resources

The California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) major responsibilities include preparing and updating the California Water Plan to guide development and management of the State’s water resources; planning, designing constructing, operating, and maintaining the State Water Resources Development System; regulating dams; providing flood protection; assisting in emergency management to safeguard life and property; educating the public; and serving local water needs by providing technical assistance. In addition, DWR cooperates with local agencies on water resources investigations; supports watershed and river restoration programs; encourages water conservation; explores conjunctive use of ground and surface water; facilitates voluntary water transfers; and, when needed, operates a State drought water bank.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act

The Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1967, Water Code Section 13000 et seq., governs the coordination and control of water quality in the state, and includes provisions relating to non-point source pollution. This law requires that the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), along with nine regional boards (RWQCBs), and other appropriate State agencies and advisory groups, prepare a detailed program to implement the State’s non-point source management plan. The law also requires that the State board, in consultation with the Commission and other agencies, submit copies of prescribed State and regional board reports containing information related to nonpoint source pollution, on or before August 1 of each year.

Water quality standards for waters of the State within the project area are defined by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB.

NPDES General Construction Permit

A Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order 2009-0009-DWQ (CGP) has been adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for construction projects that disturb greater than one acre or have the potential to impair water quality. The current CGP was adopted on September 2, 2009 by the State Water Resources Control Board as Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. An order amending the CGP was adopted on November 16, 2010 as Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ with respect to the Legally Responsible Person.

The proposed project will disturb more than 1 acre during construction, therefore it will be subject to the CGP. The CGP requires that Permit Registration Documents (PRDs) be submitted at least 14 days prior to the start of construction. The PRDs include a Notice of Intent, Site Map, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, Risk Assessment, annual fee, and certification. The PRDs must be certified by the LRP. The risk assessment is based on the sediment risk and receiving water risk and the requirements for the SWPPP are based upon the project’s risk level. The SWPPP must be prepared by a Qualified SWPPP Developer and

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.107 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 contain best management practices (BMPs) and other measures to minimize pollutants from discharging from the site. The SWPPP includes good housekeeping measures; non-stormwater management; erosion and sediment control; run-on and runoff controls; and inspection, maintenance, and repair. In addition, Risk Level 2 and 3 sites are required to implement Rain Event Action Plans and a Construction Site Monitoring Program.

California Water Code 13260

California Water Code 13260 requires that any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the quality of the waters of the State, other than into a community sewer system, must submit a report of waste discharge to the applicable RWQCB. Any actions related to the proposed project that would be applicable to California Water Code 13260 will be reported to San Francisco Bay Area RWQCB.

4.8.1.3 Regional/Local

Vallejo General Plan Policies

Five key General Plan policies that specifically address hydrologic resources are applicable to the proposed project.

 Policy 7.B.6.a: The number of new catch basins with debris traps should be minimized; drainage into wetlands or other sensitive areas should be first channeled through a sedimentation basin.  Policy 7.B.6.b: Subdivision designs should be reviewed to minimize the amount of impermeable surface  Policy 6.E.I: Require strict compliance with the Flood Damage Protection Ordinance of the City of Vallejo.  Policy 8.E.3: Evaluate all new developments to determine how peak runoff can be delayed using such measures as detention or retention basins, permanent greenbelt areas, temporary underground storage, permeable paving and rooftop ponding.  Policy 9.A.I: Retain major drainage swales, particularly those indicated as blue line streams on U.S. Geological Survey Maps.

Municipal Stormwater Management Requirements

Pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, municipal stormwater discharges in the City of Vallejo are regulated under the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, Order No. R2-2009-0074, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008, adopted October 14, 2009 (“MRP”). The most important requirements that pertain to the project are Provision C.3. (New Development and Redevelopment) and Provision C.13. (Copper Controls).

MRP Provision C.3. addresses post-construction stormwater management requirements for new development and redevelopment projects. Currently, the City of Vallejo requires project applicants to install hydrodynamic devices, or other best management practices to remove pollutants from stormwater runoff such as floating liquids and solids, trash and debris, and

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.108 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 coarse sediment, and to show the locations of such controls on plans submitted with the grading permit application. However effective December 1, 2010, the City must begin implementing the requirements stipulated in the MRP (with various phased subsequent compliance deadlines). This requirement affects certain types of projects including commercial redevelopment projects that add and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious area. Provision C.3. requires the City to require incorporation of site design, source control and stormwater treatment measures in development projects, to minimize the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff and non-stormwater discharge, and to prevent increases in runoff flows. The MRP requires that Low Impact Development (“LID”) methods shall be the primary mechanism for implementing such controls. Because the project would replace more than 50 percent of the impervious surface of a previously existing development that was not subject to Provision C.3., all replaced impervious surfaces must be included in the stormwater treatment system design.

By December 1, 2010, the City must require incorporation of stormwater treatment systems designed per the following hydraulic sizing criteria:

 Volume Hydraulic Design Basis – Treatment systems whose primary mode of action depends on volume capacity shall be designed to treat stormwater runoff equal to: (a) The maximized stormwater capture volume for the area, on the basis of historical rainfall records, determined using the formula and volume capture coefficients set forth in Urban Runoff Quality Management, Water Environment Federation Manual of Practice No. 23/American Society of Civil Engineers Manual of Practice No. 87, (1998), pages 175– 178 (e.g., approximately the 85th percentile 24-hour storm runoff event); or (b) The volume of annual runoff required to achieve 80 percent or more capture, determined in accordance with the methodology set forth in Section 5 of the California Stormwater Quality Association’s Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook, New Development and Redevelopment (2003), using local rainfall data  Flow Hydraulic Design Basis – Treatment systems whose primary mode of action depends on flow capacity shall be sized to treat: (a) 10 percent of the 50-year peak flow rate; (b) The flow of runoff produced by a rain event equal to at least two times the 85th percentile hourly rainfall intensity for the applicable area, based on historical records of hourly rainfall depths; or (c) The flow of runoff resulting from a rain event equal to at least 0.2 inches per hour intensity  Combination Flow and Volume Design Basis – Treatment systems that use a combination of flow and volume capacity shall be sized to treat at least 80 percent of the total runoff over the life of the project, using local rainfall data.

Effective December 1, 2011, projects must treat 100 percent of runoff (based on the selected calculation described above) with LID treatment measures that include harvesting and reuse, infiltration, evapotranspiration, or biotreatment (biotreatment may only be used if the other options are infeasible; by May 1, 2011, the MRP permittees, working collaboratively or individually, shall submit a report to the Water Board on the criteria and procedures that will be used to determine when certain LID measures are infeasible). Biotreatment areas shall be designed to have a long-term infiltration rate of 5 to 10 inches per hour. Prior to the December 1, 2011 deadline (by December 1, 2010), the MRP permittees, working collaboratively or

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.109 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 individually, shall submit for Water Board approval, a proposed set of model biotreatment soil media specifications and soil infiltration testing methods.

By December 1, 2011 the City must require development projects to incorporate the following source control and site design measures:

 Minimize stormwater pollutants of concern through measures that may include plumbing dumpster drips from covered trash, food waste and compactor enclosures to the sanitary sewer  Properly design covers, drains, and storage precautions for outdoor material storage areas and loading docks  Properly design trash storage areas  Minimize stormwater runoff by implementing one or more site design measures, which include directing roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse, or directing roof runoff to vegetated areas

MRP Provision C.13. addresses copper controls for stormwater and non-stormwater discharges. Provision C.13.a requires permittees to ensure that local ordinance authority is established to prohibit the discharge of wastewater to storm drains generated from the installation, cleaning, treating, and washing of the surface of copper architectural features. The permittees shall develop best management practices (BMPs) for managing copper waste during construction and post-construction, require the use of appropriate BMPs when issuing building permits that include copper architectural components, educate installers and operators on appropriate BMPs, and enforce against noncompliance.

Section 16.71.055 of the Vallejo Municipal Code (Title 16, Zoning; 16.71, Water Efficient Landscaping Requirements; 16.71.055 Stormwater Management) encourages implementation of stormwater BMP practices into the landscape and grading design plans to minimize runoff and to increase on-site retention and infiltration.

4.8.2 Environmental Setting

This section discusses the existing conditions related to surface and ground water hydrology and water quality in the project area. Federal, State, and local regulations related to hydrology and water quality that are applicable to the project are discussed in Section 4.9.2 (Regulatory Setting).

Watershed Description

The State of California uses a hierarchical naming and numbering convention to define watershed areas for management purposes. Watershed boundaries are defined according to size and topography. Multiple sub-watersheds can be nested within larger watersheds. The Natural Resources Conservation Service, which is part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is responsible for maintaining the California Interagency Watershed Mapping Committee (IWMC), formerly known as the CalWater Committee. The IWMC defined a set of naming and numbering

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.110 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 conventions applicable to all watershed areas in the State, for purposes of interagency cooperation and management. Table 4.8-1 presents the primary watershed classification used by the State of California, as defined by the IWMC.

Table 4.8-1: State of California Watershed Hierarchy Classifications Approximate Watershed Level Description Square Miles Defined by large-scale topographic and geologic Hydrologic Region 12,735 considerations. The State of California is divided into ten (HR) HRs. Hydrologic Unit Defined by surface drainage; may include a major river 672 (HU) watershed, groundwater basin, or closed drainage. Hydrologic Area Major subdivisions of hydrologic units, such as by major 244 (HA) tributaries, groundwater attributes, or stream components. Hydrologic Sub- A major segment of an HA with significant geographical 195 area (HSA) characteristics or hydrological homogeneity. Source: CalWater, 2007

The climate of the Vallejo area is characterized as Mediterranean (dry-summer subtropical), with cool wet winters and relatively warmer, dry summers. The average annual precipitation in Vallejo is 19.5 inches, with most of precipitation falling between October and April. The wettest month of the year is January with an average rainfall of 4.25 inches. The warmest month of the year is July with an average maximum temperature of 87 degrees Fahrenheit, while the coldest moth of the year is December with an average minimum temperature of 38.5 degrees Fahrenheit.

In an urbanized setting such as the project site, runoff from precipitation flows into the stormwater drainage system, and eventually out into the Carquinez Strait and then San Pablo Bay.

The Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan) identifies the following beneficial uses for San Pablo Bay: municipal and domestic supply; agricultural supply, industrial service supply; water contact recreation; non-contact water recreation; commercial and sport fishing; shellfish harvesting; estuarine habitat; fish migration; preservation of rare and endangered species; fish spawning; wildlife habitat; and navigation.

Stormwater Runoff and Drainage

Stormwater runoff from the existing parking lot currently drains via sheet flow in a westerly direction and discharges via an existing 36” storm drain pipe into Lake Dalwigk.

Flooding

The Federal Emergency Management Agency maintains Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that note the Special Flood Hazard Areas that are subject to a one percent annual flood event (100-year flood). FIRM panel 06095C 0630E, effective May 4, 2009 shows that the western approximately 1 acre of the project is located within the 100-year floodplain of Lake Dalwigk (see Figure 4.8-1). Lake Dalwigk receives runoff form the Magazine Street Canal via a culvert i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.111 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 under Interstate 80. The floodplain is a result of backwater from Lake Dalwigk. No floodway has been noted on the FIRM.

Lake Dalwigk is operated by the Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District (VSFCD) for flood control purposes. Correspondence with Rudolf Ohlemutz at VSFCD indicates that Lake Dalwigk regularly floods and the water is pumped out of the lake and downstream toward Mare Island Strait. The VSFCD is currently implementing the Lake Dalwigk Restoration Project that will increase the capacity of Lake Dalwigk to alleviate the flooding.

Groundwater Basin and Groundwater Quality

The Project is located within the Napa-Sonoma Volcanic Highlands groundwater source area. The current Basin Plan does not include beneficial uses of groundwater. Local groundwater is not used for water supply by the City of Vallejo (Vallejo Urban Water Management Plan 2005). Groundwater quality in the area has not been characterized. Groundwater has been encountered at the project site at depths ranging from 8 to 14 feet below the ground surface, but the groundwater depths will very several feet as a result of seasonal fluctuations.

Surface Water Quality

Water quality in the vicinity of the sits is influenced by present and past land uses in the overall watershed area. San Pablo Bay is listed on the State of California 2006 303(d) list of impaired water bodies for legacy pesticides (chlordane, DDT, dieldrin), dioxin and furan compounds, mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, selenium, and nickel. A Total Maximum Daily Load has not yet been established.

4.8.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.8.3.1 Methodology

This section analyzes impacts on hydrology and water quality from the implementation of the proposed Project based on changes to the environmental setting described above. This analysis first established baseline conditions for the affected environment relative to hydrology and water quality. These baseline conditions were evaluated based on their potential to be affected by the construction activities as well as operation activities for the proposed Project.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.112 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.8-1: FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.113 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.8.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The City of Vallejo CEQA Implementation Document and Environmental Checklist state that a project would have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality if it would:

 Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements

 Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)

 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-site or off-site

 Substantially alter the existing drainage patter of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on-site or off-site

 Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff

 Otherwise substantially degrade water quality

 Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map

 Place within a 100-year hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows

 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam

 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death due to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the finding made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

 Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted) i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.114 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map

 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam

 Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow

4.8.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

IMPACT HYD-1: Violate Any Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements

Constructions activities would disturb soils in the proposed Project Site, making them more susceptible to erosion and more likely to be transported by stormwater runoff into nearby drainages, potentially affecting local and downstream water quality. Sedimentation in surface waters and wetlands can reduce water-carrying capacity, potentially leading to flooding; degrade water quality; increase turbidity (concentration of suspended particles), thereby reducing light penetration and inhibiting photosynthesis; and introduce fertilizers and other nutrients, which can lead to eutrophication. Hazardous materials such as gas, hydraulic fluid, and paint are also potential pollutants during construction. Construction impacts will be temporary and the applicant would implement measures to minimize and contain erosion and sedimentation as well as other pollutants in accordance with the City of Vallejo Grading Ordinance and project National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.

The proposed Project will disturb more than 1 acre, therefore the applicant will be required to obtain and comply with the NPDES regulations for surface discharge by acquiring a general construction stormwater discharge permit. As required by this permit, the applicant will have to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and comply with any regional requirements to meet state water quality objectives. The applicant will also be required to develop and implement a Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, which would identify measures such as silt fences and straw bale sediment barriers to prevent runoff of soils and other pollutants. (This plan could also be used for the SWPPP if it meets the requirements of the NPDES General Permit). Implementation of a project-specific Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan would reduce the proposed Project’s potential to violate water quality standards or waste discharge to a less than significant level.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.115 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure HYD-1: The Project will be required to obtain coverage under the State’s Construction General Permit (2009-0009-DWQ). The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be employed to minimize effects on water quality.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT HYD-2: Alter the existing drainage pattern in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation

Construction of the proposed Project would result in an impact to hydrology and water quality if associated construction, maintenance, or decommissioning activities would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on site or off site.

There are no creeks on the Project site and no waterways will be affected. Since the site already consists of mostly impervious surface area, there will not be a substantial amount of erosion or siltation on or off-site.

Mitigation Measures

Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT HYD-3: Alter existing drainage patterns or the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in substantial flooding

The proposed Project would result in an impact to hydrology and water quality if associated construction, operation, and maintenance, activities would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on site or off site. The proposed Project involves increasing the parking capacity at the park-and-ride lot by means of parking structures and improvements to the existing roadway. The existing drainage patterns of water from the roadway will remain unchanged.

The rate and amount of surface runoff is determined by multiple factors, including the following: topography; amount and intensity of precipitation; amount of evaporation that occurs in the watershed; and amount of precipitation and imported water that infiltrates to the groundwater. The proposed project would not alter any precipitation amounts or intensities. No new imperious i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.116 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 areas will be added to the project site, and therefore will not interfere with groundwater infiltration. The rate or amount of surface runoff resulting from the proposed Project will not change relative to existing conditions.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT HYD-4: Result in Impacts on Runoff Water and Drainage Capacity

Construction of the proposed Project will not create any new impervious surfaces, and therefore will not increase the amount of stormwater runoff. The proposed project will not overwhelm stormwater drainage systems, but during the construction phase may create additional sources of polluted runoff on a temporary basis.

Mitigation Measures

Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT HYD-5: Otherwise substantially degrade water quality

The Project would otherwise substantially degrade water quality if the Project would result in cumulatively considerable water quality impacts. Impacts of the proposed project would be cumulatively considerable if they would have the potential to combine with similar impacts of other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects. Cumulative projects within the cumulative analysis area include residential construction projects, industrial development projects and commercial development projects. These types of project would have the potential to degrade water quality through erosion and sedimentation, accidental release of hazardous materials, diversion of flood flows, and depletion of groundwater. All projects within the cumulative analysis area would be subject to the same federal and State regulations as the proposed Project. Best management practices would be implemented to reduce any potential impacts to the greatest extent possible.

Project construction activities could degrade water quality through erosion and subsequent sedimentation of streams. Additionally, accidental release of potentially harmful materials, such as engine oil, diesel fuel, turbine lubricant, and cement slurry could degrade the water quality of nearby Lake Dalwigk and streams feeding into it. These potential water quality impacts would be minimized through implementation of design specifications, Best Management Practices, and discharge prohibitions, as required by applicable water quality related permits. The impact can i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.117 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of the below mitigation measure.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure HYD-2: In accordance with the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP), the project shall implement the following requirements to control pollutants in post-construction stormwater runoff and non-stormwater discharges, which shall be submitted for review with the grading permit application to the VSFCD and the City of Vallejo Public Works Department.

• Locations of all stormwater treatment BMPs, sized in accordance with the MRP Provision C.3. shall be shown on a site plan • Roof runoff shall be directed to vegetated areas, as shown on a site plan • Site runoff shall be treated with oil water separator treatment system and vortex system to remove suspended particles prior to discharging into the storm drainage system. • The project applicant shall submit an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan that details the O&M responsibility mechanism and maintenance requirements for all stormwater treatment systems, for the life of the project. Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT HYD-6: Place structures within a 100-year hazard area which would impede or redirect flood flows

According to the FEMA flood insurance rate map # 06095C 0630E effective May 4, 2009, the westernmost portion of the project is designated as Zone AE, or within the 100-year flood plain. The 100-year water surface elevation is 11 feet NGVD 29. This area is adjacent to Lake Dalwigk, which receives runoff from Magazine Street Canal via a culvert under I-80. Lake Dalwigk is maintained by Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District for flood control purposes. The portion of the site located within the 100-year floodplain is proposed to be a four-story parking structure with internal ramping system that accommodates approximately 420 parking stalls. Entrance to the parking structure will be via Carlson Street. As part of Stantec’s design services, a field survey was completed, which shows a minimum elevation of 8.85 ft (NAVD 88) in this area of the project site (see Figure 4.8-2). Table 4.8-2 summarizes the area of the site located within varying flood depths:

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.118 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Table 4.8-2: Summary of Floodplain Volume Impacts Area ID Average Flood Flood Storage (map) Elevation (ft) Area (sf) Depth (ft) Volume (cu.ft.) 1 10 ft to 11 ft 14,815 0.5 7,908 2 9 ft to 10 ft 20,967 1.5 31,451 3 9 ft 1,003 2.0 2,006 4 10 ft min 5,880 0.5 2,940 Total 42,665 44,305

Based on topographic data available on the USGS Quad maps, the estimated total volume of the floodplain is approximately 670 ac-ft. Therefore, the proposed project will remove less than 0.2% of the total flood storage volume. The portion of the proposed site that is proposed to be removed from the total flood storage area (approximately 122 acres) is 2.45 acres. The approximate increase in flood depth as a result of removing this site area from the overall floodplain is 1.3 inches.

The National Flood Insurance Program regulations for development within a Zone AE floodplain that does not have a floodway defined are in 44 CFR Part 60.3 (c) and are summarized below:

1. Require that all new construction have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated or floodproofed to an elevation equal to or above the base flood elevation.

2. Require that until a regulatory floodway is designated, no new construction (including fill) is permitted within the Zone AE unless it is demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development will not increase the water surface elevation of the 100-year flood more than one foot at any point within the community.

In addition to the federal regulations listed above, the City of Vallejo has the following references with respect to building in an existing floodplain:

1. General Plan Section VIII (Safety) includes a section on floodplain hazards, which requires prospective developers to ensure that new construction in the designated floodplain will not increase the depth and velocity of flooding on the upstream and downstream floodplain.

2. Code of Ordinances, Chapter 7.98 (Flood Management Regulations) includes paragraph 7.98.160 C.2 that states the ground floor shall be set 6 inches above the 100-year flood elevation.

Based upon the above regulations, the amount of fill proposed to be placed within the 100-year floodplain will not result in an increase of one foot in the 100-year flood elevation of the surrounding areas.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.119 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.8-2: Topographic Map Showing Floodplain Impacts

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.120 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure HYD-3: The finished floor elevation of the proposed parking structure will be at or above 11.5 feet NAVD. The finished floor elevation shall be approved by the City of Vallejo Public Works Department prior to issuance of the grading permit.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.121 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.9 NOISE IMPACTS

This setting section begins with an introduction to several key concepts and terms that are used in evaluating noise. It then explains the various agencies that regulate the noise environment in the City of Vallejo and summarizes key standards that are applied to proposed development. This setting section concludes with a description of current noise sources that affect the project site and the noise conditions that are experienced in the project site vicinity.

Characteristics of Sound. Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep.

To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations or cycles per second of a wave that results in the range of tone from high to low. Loudness is the strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment, and it is measured by the amplitude of the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity refers to how hard the sound wave strikes an object, which in turn produces the sound’s effect. This characteristic of sound can be precisely measured with instruments. The analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area in terms of sound intensity and its effects on adjacent sensitive land uses.

Measurement of Sound. Sound is characterized by various parameters that describe the rate of oscillation (frequency) of sound waves, the distance between successive troughs or crests in the wave, the speed that it travels, and the pressure level or energy content of a given sound. The sound pressure level has become the most common descriptor used to characterize the loudness (or amplitude) of an ambient sound, and the decibel (dB) scale is used to quantify sound intensity. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which indicates the relative intensity of a sound. The 0 point on the dB scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Because sound can vary in intensity by over one million times within the range of human hearing, a logarithmic loudness scale1 is used to keep sound intensity numbers at a convenient and manageable level. Thus, a 10 dBA increase in the level of a continuous noise represents a perceived doubling of loudness, while a 20 dBA increase is 100 times more intense, and a 30 dBA increase is 1,000 times more intense. As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy so that the farther away the noise receiver is from the noise source, the lower the perceived noise level. Noise levels diminish or attenuate as distance from the source increases based on an inverse square rule, depending on how the noise source is physically configured. Noise level from a single-point source, such as a single piece of construction equipment at ground level, attenuates at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance (between the single-point source of noise and the noise-sensitive receptor of concern). Heavily traveled roads with few gaps in traffic behave as continuous line sources and attenuate roughly at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.122 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to all pitches (sound frequencies) within the entire spectrum, a special frequency-dependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity in a process called “A-weighting,” expressed as “dBA.” The dBA or A- weighted decibel refers to a scale of noise measurement that approximates the range of sensitivity of the human ear to sounds of different frequencies. Table 4.9-1 contains a list of typical acoustical terms and definitions. Table 4.9-2 shows some representative noise sources and their corresponding noise levels in dBA.

There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. Equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq, the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), and the day-night average level (Ldn) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). CNEL is the time varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and a 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale, but without the adjustment for events occurring during the evening relaxation hours. CNEL and Ldn are within one dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. The noise adjustments are added to the noise events occurring during the more sensitive hours. Typical A- weighted sound levels from various sources are described in Table 4.9-2.

Other noise rating scales of importance, when assessing the annoyance factor, include the maximum noise level (Lmax), which is the highest exponential time averaged sound level that occurs during a stated time period. The noise environments discussed in this analysis are specified in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax for short-term noise impacts. Lmax reflects peak operating conditions, and addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise.

Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first is audible impacts that refer to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3.0 dBA or greater, since, as described earlier, this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1.0 and 3.0 dBA. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category is changes in noise level of less than 1.0 dBA that are inaudible to the human ear. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant.

Terminology

The assessment of noise impacts uses specific terminology and fundamental descriptors and, in order to assist in a thorough understanding of the subsequent analysis, these terms are discussed in this subsection. Acoustics is the study of sound, and noise is defined as unwanted sound. Airborne sound is a rapid fluctuation or oscillation of air pressure above and below atmospheric pressure creating a sound wave. The pitch or loudness of sound can determine whether a sound is of a pleasant or objectionable nature. Pitch, which is the height or depth of a tone or sound, is louder to humans when it is high pitched versus low pitched. The loudness of a i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.123 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 sound is determined by a combination of the intensity of the sound waves with the reception characteristics of the ear.

Measurement scales are used to describe sounds. A decibel (dB) is a unit used to describe the amplitude of sound, and sound levels are calculated on a logarithmic, not linear, basis. The lowest sound level than an unimpaired human ear can hear is described as zero on the decibel scale. Due to the logarithmic nature of measuring sound levels on the decibel scale, a 10-dB increase represents a tenfold increase in acoustic energy; whereas, a 20-dB increase represents a hundredfold increase in acoustic energy. Because a relationship exists between acoustic energy and intensity, each 10-dB increase in sound level can have an approximate doubling effect on loudness as perceived by the human ear.

Acoustical terms used in this subsection are summarized in Table 4.9-1. The most common metric is the overall A-weighted sound level measurement (dBA) that has been adopted by regulatory bodies worldwide. The A-weighting network measures sound in a fashion similar to the way a person perceives or hears sound, thus achieving very good correlation in terms of evaluating acceptable and unacceptable sound levels.

Table 4.9-1: Definition of Acoustical Terms Term Definition The composite noise from all sources resulting in the normal, existing level of environmental noise Ambient Noise Level at a given location. The ambient level is typically defined by the Leq level. The underlying ever-present lower level noise that remains in the absence of intrusive or intermittent sounds. Distant sources, such as Background Noise Level traffic, typically makeup the background. The background level is generally defined by the L90 percentile noise level. Noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, time of Intrusive occurrence, tonal content, the prevailing ambient noise level, and the sensitivity of the receiver. The intrusive level is generally defined by the L10 percentile noise level. A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio Decibel (dB) of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter). The sound level in decibels as measured on a A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA) sound level meter using the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighted filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.124 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Term Definition the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. The average A-weighted noise level, on an equal Equivalent Noise Level (L eq) energy basis, during the measurement period. The noise level exceeded during 'n' percent of the Percentile Noise Level (Ln) measurement period, where 'n' is a number between 0 and 100 (e.g., L90) The energy average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after the addition Day-Night Average Level (L ) dn of 10 decibels between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Of a function periodic in time, the number of Frequency (Hz) times that the quantity repeats itself in one second (i.e., number of cycles per second). The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition of five decibels to sound levels occurring Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after the addition of 10 decibels to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a L , L max min designated time interval, using fast time averaging.

One way to describe noise is to measure the maximum sound level (Lmax). The Lmax measurement does not account for the duration of the sound. Studies have shown that human response to noise involves the maximum level and its duration. For example, the aircraft in this case is not as loud as the sports car, but the aircraft sound lasts longer. For most people, the aircraft overflight would be more annoying than the shorter duration sports car event. Thus, the maximum sound level alone is not sufficient to predict reaction to environmental noise.

A-weighted sound levels can be measured or presented as equivalent sound pressure level

(Leq). this is defined as the average noise level, on an equal-energy basis for a stated period of time and is commonly used to measure steady-state sound or noise that is usually dominant.

Statistical measurements are typically denoted by Ln, where ‘n’ represents the percentile of time the sound level is exceeded. The measurement of L90 represents the noise level that is exceeded during 90 percent of the measurement period. Similarly, the L10 represents the noise level exceeded for 10 percent of the measurement period.

Human response to daytime and nighttime noise has been observed to vary. During the evening and nighttime, exterior background noises are generally lower than daytime levels. However,

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.125 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 most household noise also decreases at night, and exterior noise becomes more noticeable. Furthermore, most people sleep at night and are sensitive to intrusive noises. To account for human sensitivity to evening and nighttime noise levels, the Day-Night Level (Ldn) was developed. The Ldn is a noise index that accounts for the greater annoyance attributed to noise during the evening and nighttime hours.

Ldn values are calculated by averaging hourly Leq sound levels for a 24-hour period and apply weighting factors to evening and nighttime Leq values. The weighting factor, which reflects the increased sensitivity to noise during nighttime hours, is added to each hourly Leq sound level before the 24-hour Ldn is calculated. For the purposes of assessing noise, the 24-hour day is divided into two time periods, with the following weightings:

 Daytime: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (15 hours), weighting factor of 0 dB

 Nightime: 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (9 hours), weighting factor of 10 dB

The time periods are then averaged (on an energy basis) to compute the overall Ldn value. For a continuous noise source, the Ldn value can be computed by adding 6.4 dB to the overall 24-hour noise level (Leq). For example, if the expected continuous noise level from a power plan were

60.0 dBA Leq for every hour, the resulting Ldn from the plant would be 66.4 dBA Ldn.

The community noise equivalent level (CNEL) metric is similar to the Ldn but with an additional 5-dB weighting factor between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m. CNEL and Ldn measures are frequently used interchangeably. For a continuous noise source, the CNEL value can be computed by adding

6.7 dB to the overall 24-hour noise level (Leq), meaning that the plant in the previous example would be 66.7 dBA CNEL.

The effects of noise on people can be grouped into three general categories:

 Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, dissatisfaction

 Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, learning

 Physiological effects such as startling and hearing loss

In most cases, environmental noise produces effect in the first two categories of subjective effects and interference with activities only. However, workers in industrial plants might experience physiological effects of noise. No satisfactory way exists to measure the subjective effects of noise, or to measure the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. The lack of a common standard is due primarily to the wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and habituation to noise. Table 4.9-2 illustrates typical noise levels in the environment. Thus, an important way of determining a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is by comparison with the existing or “ambient” environment to which that person has adapted. In general, the more the level or the tonal (frequency) variations of a noise exceed the existing ambient noise level or tonal quality, the less acceptable the new noise will be, as judged by the exposed individual. When comparing sound levels from similar sources (for example,

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.126 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 changes in traffic noise levels), a 3-dBA change is considered to be a just-perceivable difference; 5 dBA is clearly perceivable, and 10 dBA is considered a doubling in loudness.

Table 4.9-2: Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels

A-Weighted Sound Level in Noise Source Decibels Noise Environments Near Jet Engine 140 Deafening Civil Defense Siren 130 Threshold of pain Hard Rock Band 120 Threshold of feeling Accelerating Motorcycle at a Few 110 Very loud Feet Away Pile Driver; Noisy Urban 100 Very loud Street/Heavy City Traffic Ambulance Siren; Food Blender 95 Very loud Garbage Disposal 90 Very loud Freight Cars; Living Room Music 85 Loud Pneumatic Drill; Vacuum Cleaner 80 Loud Busy Restaurant 75 Moderately loud Near Freeway Auto Traffic 70 Moderately loud Average Office 60 Moderate Suburban Street 55 Moderate Light Traffic; Soft Radio Music in 50 Quiet Apartment Large Transformer 45 Quiet Average Residence Without Stereo 40 Faint Playing Soft Whisper 30 Faint Rustling Leaves 20 Very faint Human Breathing 10 Very faint

Physiological Effects of Noise. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s 1985 Noise Guidebook, permanent physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 to 90 dBA. Exposure to high noise levels affects our entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, and thereby affecting blood pressure, functions of the ear, and the nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the human ear even with short-term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. For avoiding adverse effects on human physical and mental health in the workplace or in communities, the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupation Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) requires the protection of workers from hearing loss when the noise exposure equals or exceeds an 8-hour time-weighted average of 85 dBA.2

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.127 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Unwanted community effects of noise occur at levels much lower than those that cause hearing loss and other health effects. Annoyance to noise occurs when it interferes with sleeping, conversation, noise-sensitive work, including learning or listening to radio, television, or music. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) noise studies, during daytime hours, few people are seriously annoyed by activities with noise levels below 55 dBA, or moderately annoyed with noise levels below 50 dBA.3

4.9.1 Regulatory Setting

Federal, state, and local regulations and policies are established to limit noise exposure to noise sensitive land uses.

4.9.1.1 Federal

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency The USEPA, pursuant to the Noise Control Act of 1972, established guidelines for acceptable noise levels for sensitive receivers such as residential areas, schools, and hospitals (see Table 4.9-3). The levels set forth are 55 dBA Ldn for outdoor use areas, and 45 dBA Ldn for indoor use areas. These provide guidance for local jurisdictions, but do not have regulatory enforceability.

Table 4.9-3: Summary of EPA Noise Levels

Effect Level Area

Hearing loss Leq(24) ≤ 70 dB All areas.

Outdoor activity interference Ldn ≤ 55 dB Outdoors in residential areas and annoyance and farms and other outdoor areas where people spend widely varying amounts of time and other places in which quiet is a basis for use

Leq(24) ≤ 55 dB Outdoor areas where people spend limited amounts of time, such as school yards, playgrounds, etc.

Indoor activity interference Leq ≤ 45 dB Indoor residential areas. and annoyance Leq(24) ≤ 45 dB Other indoor areas with human activities such as schools, etc.

Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974. “Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety.” March.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.128 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has also established guidelines for acceptable noise levels for sensitive receivers such as residential areas, schools, and hospitals. The HUD noise levels include a two-pronged guidance, one for the desirable noise level and the other for the maximum acceptable noise level. The desirable noise level established by HUD conforms to the USEPA guidance of 55 dBA Ldn for outdoor use areas of residential land uses and 45 dBA Ldn for indoor use areas of residential land uses. The secondary HUD standard establishes a maximum acceptable noise level of 65 dBA for outdoor use areas of residential areas. These standards are enforceable through eligibility for HD funding and Project support. Residential developments with noise levels exceeding the maximum acceptable HUD standard have restricted eligibility for HUD funding and loan programs, including Federal Housing Administration loans.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulates noise levels in industrial environments under the Department of Labor. OSHA regulations require that the time-averaged noise level of any work environment be limited to 90 dBA for any 8-hour period. Work environments exceeding 85 dBA for an 8-hour period require a hearing conservation program for workers.

Federal Transit Administration

The FTA has set guidelines for transit projects to control future project related-noise level increases at sensitive land uses such as residential areas, schools, recreation areas, hospitals, etc.

Noise impacts from transit projects area to be evaluated using the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2006). shows the FTA’s noise impact criteria. The FTA has divided the land uses into three categories Category 1 includes land where quiet is an essential element for operation such as amphitheaters, Category 2 includes residences and areas where people generally sleep, and Category 3 includes institutional buildings where quiet is important such as schools, libraries, and churches. Figure 4.9-1 shows that for a residential land use with an Ldn between 60 dBA and 70 dBA, an increase greater than 5 bBA would be considered severe. In addition to providing guidance for assessing noise impacts, the FTA manual details procedures for assessing vibration impacts from transit projects.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.129 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.9-1: FTA Noise Impact Criteria

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.130 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.9.1.2 State

California Government Code Section 63502(g)

The State of California Department of Health Services, Environmental Health Division, has published recommended guidelines for noise and land use compatibility referred to as the Guidelines for Noise and Land Use Compatibility (the State Guidelines). The State guidelines, illustrated in Table 4.9-4, indicate that residential land uses and other noise-sensitive receptors generally should be located in areas where outdoor ambient noise levels do not exceed 65 to 70 dBA Ldn (or CNEL). The Department of Health Services does not mandate application of this compatibility matrix to development projects. However, each jurisdiction is required to consider the State Guidelines when developing its general plan noise element and when determining acceptable noise levels within its community.

Table 4.9-4: Summary of Human Effects in Areas Exposed to 55 dBA Ldn Type of Magnitude of Effect Effects Speech – 100 percent sentence intelligibility (average) with a 5 dB margin of Indoors safety. Speech – 100 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 0.35 meters. Outdoors 99 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 1.0 meters. 95 percent sentence intelligibility (average) at 3.5 meters. Average None evident; 7 dB below level of significant complaints and threats Community of legal action and at least 16 dB below “vigorous action.” Reaction Complaints 1 percent dependent on attitude and other non-level related factors. Annoyance 17 percent dependent on attitude and other non-level related factors. Attitude Noise essentially the least important of various factors. Towards Area

Under the State Guidelines, an exterior noise level of 70 dBA Ldn/CNEL is typically the dividing line between an acceptable and unacceptable exterior noise environment for all noise-sensitive uses, including schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, day care centers, and nursing homes of conventional construction. This standard also applies to residential uses. Noise levels below 75 dBA Ldn/CNEL are typically acceptable for office and commercial buildings, while levels up to 80 dBA Ldn/CNEL are typically acceptable for industrial uses.

Title 24, California Code of Regulations

California has established noise standards in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations—the State of California Noise Insulation Standards. These standards state that the “interior CNEL attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed an annual CNEL of 45 dBA in any habitable

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.131 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 room,” and that multi-family residential buildings or structures to be located near an existing or adopted major thoroughfare, railroad, rapid transit line, or industrial noise source within exterior CNEL contours of 60 dBA or greater shall requires an acoustical analysis showing that the building has been designed to limit interior noise to a CNEL of 45 dBA.

4.9.1.3 Regional/Local

The City of Vallejo addresses noise policies in the Noise Element of the General Plan and in the zoning chapter of the Municipal Code. The City’s land use compatibility standards for community noise environments are shown in Table 4.9-5. The noise policies of the General Plan limit construction, maintenance, and unloading and loading activities from operating in such a manner as to cause noise disturbance across residential real property boundaries except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. In addition, the City’s noise policy limits project- related noise increases to no more than 10 dB in non-residential areas and 5 dB in residential areas where with-project noise level is less than the maximum “normally acceptable level” in Table 4.9-5.

The Noise Performance Standards Ordinance, of the City of Vallejo’s Municipal Code identifies maximum sound pressure levels by zoning district shown in Table 4.9-6. The City’s ordinance allows noise from temporary construction or demolition work, or sounds from transportation equipment used for the movement of goods or people to and from given premises to exceed the maximum sound pressure levels listed in Table 4.9-6 upon compliance with State conditions. Section 7.84.020 of the City’s Municipal Code prohibits the loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, or other similar objects between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in such a manner as to cause a noise disturbance across a residential real property boundary.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.132 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Table 4.9-5: Land Compatibility Standards for Community Noise Environments

Source: Vallejo, City of, 1983. City of Vallejo General Plan. Amended through December 6, 2006.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.133 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Vallejo General Plan. The City of Vallejo adopted a revised Noise Element in July of 2004. There are several General plan goals and policies related to noise. Relevant goals and policies include the following:

Noise Goal: Maintain noise compatibility in a manner that is acceptable to residents and reasonable for commercial and industrial land uses.

Noise Policy 1 : Apply the noise guidelines shown in Table 2 (of the Noise Element) to land use decisions and other City actions.

1a: The exterior noise level at primary outdoor use areas for residences should not exceed the maximum "normally acceptable" level in Table 2 (Ldn of 60 dB for residences). Small decks and entry porches do not need to meet this goal. Noise levels up to Ldn 65 dB may be allowed at the discretion of the City where it is not economically or aesthetically reasonable to meet the more restrictive outdoor goal.

1b: The interior noise standard shall be 45 dB- Ldn, for all residential uses, including single- and multi-family housing, hotels/motels, and residential healthcare facilities.

Noise Policy 2: Avoid adverse effects of noise-producing activities on existing land uses by implementing noise reduction measures, limiting hours of operation, or by limiting increases in noise.

2a: Continue to enforce the noise regulations within the Vallejo Municipal Code, including - Chapter 7.84 "Regulation of Noise Disturbances" and Chapter 16.72 "Performance Standards Regulations."

2b; Where appropriate, limit noise generating activities (for example, construction and maintenance activities and loading and unloading activities) to the hours of 7:00 a.m. and,9:00 p.m.

2c: When approving new development limit project-related noise increases to no more than 10 dB in nonresidential areas and 5 dB in residential areas where the with-project noise level is less than the maximum "normally acceptable" level in Table 2 (of the Noise Element). Limit project-related increases in all areas to more than 3 dB where the with-project noise level exceeds the "normally acceptable" level in Table 2 (of the Noise Element).

Table 4.9-6: Noise Performance Standards Zoning District Maximum Sound Pressure Levels, dB Resource Conservation, Rural Residential, and 55 Medical Districts Low, Medium, and High Density Residential 60 Districts Professional Offices, Neighborhood, Pedestrian, 70 and Waterfront Shopping and Services Districts Freeway Shopping and Service, Linear Commercial 75 and Intensive Use Districts Source: Vallejo, City of, 2008. The Vallejo, California Municipal Code. December 2

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.134 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.9.2 Environmental Setting

The project is located in a suburban area and is, therefore, influenced by several surrounding noise sources including traffic and stationary noise sources as discussed below.

Existing Ambient Noise Levels. Traffic on Curtola Parkway is the primary noise source affecting the existing noise levels in the project vicinity. Other noise sources in the project vicinity include operational noise from adjacent Interstate 80 (I-80) and Interstate 780 (I-780) and parking lot activities such as cars doors slamming and people conversing. The vehicle mix on I-80 and I-780 is characterized by a substantial number of medium and heavy trucks, which generate more noise that automobiles. The Noise Element of the City of Vallejo’s General Plan contains a contour map drawn using five dBA contour intervals. The 60 dBA noise contour is shown on the map in the General Plan

The closest airport to the project site is Napa County Airport, located approximately 8 miles north of the Project site. Travis Air Force Base is located approximately 18 miles to the northeast of the Project site. Buchannan Field Airport is located approximately 10 miles southeast of the Project site. Due to the distance of the Project from these airports, the Project site lies well beyond the 55 dBA CNEL noise contours of each of these airports. Thus, aircraft activities are not a significant source of noise in the Project vicinity.

The closest railroad line is located approximately one mile west of the Project site. At this distance, the Project site lies well beyond the 55 dBA Ldn noise contour of the railroad. Thus, railroad activities are not a significant noise source in the Project vicinity.

Existing Noise Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity. Some land uses are more sensitive to noise levels than others, due to the amount of noise exposure (in terms of both time and insulation from the noise) and the types of activities typically involved. Residences, motels and hotels, schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing homes, auditoriums, and parks and outdoor recreation areas are more sensitive to noise than are commercial and industrial land uses. Based on this definition, future workers and users of the proposed project would not be considered sensitive receptors; however, the open space in Lake Dawglik Park and the residences along Curtola Parkway would be considered noise-sensitive land uses.

4.9.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.9.3.1 Methodology

CEQA requires determination of the significance of noise impacts associated with proposed projects. The process of assessing the significance of noise impacts associated with the project involves establishing thresholds at which significant impacts on noise-sensitive uses may occur. Noise levels associated with activities related to the project were predicted and compared to the significance thresholds. Where a noise level is predicted to exceed a threshold, the impact was considered significant and mitigation measures are proposed as applicable.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.135 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.9.3.2 Criteria of Significance

A project would have a significant noise impact if it would result in:

 Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies

 Exposure of person to, or generation of, excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels

 Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project

 Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project

 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels

 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the finding made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels

 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels

4.9.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

IMPACT NOISE-1: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies

Implementation of the proposed project could result in noise levels from construction activities that would expose sensitive receptors to excessive noise levels.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.136 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Two types of short-term noise impacts would occur during site preparation and project construction. The first type would result from the increase in traffic flow on local streets, associated with the transport of workers, equipment, and materials to and from the project site. The transport of workers and construction equipment and materials to the project site would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. According to the City’s noise ordinance, noise from temporary transportation of goods or people to and from a given premises is exempt from the City’s noise standards (City of Vallejo Municipal Code, Section 16.72.050 – Noise Performance Standards, Exceptions). Therefore, short-term construction- related noise associated with worker and equipment transport to the proposed project site is exempt from the noise ordinance and would not expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of established standards. This is a less than significant impact to receptors along the access routes leading to the proposed project site.

The second type of short-term noise impact is related to the noise generated by heavy construction equipment operating on the project site or temporary off-site parking areas related to minor improvements for the provision of approximately 205 parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure. Noise generated during demolition, excavation, grading, site preparation, and building erection on the project site would result in potential noise impacts to sensitive receptors. Existing receptors in the vicinity, such as the residential land uses along Curtola Parkway, would be subject to short-term noise generated by construction equipment and activities on the project site when construction occurs near the project boundary.

Construction is performed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These phases would change the character of the noise generated on the project site and, therefore, the noise levels surrounding the site as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Table 4.9-7 lists typical construction equipment noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. Typical noise levels range up to 91 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase, which includes grading of the site, tends to generate the highest noise levels, because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, draglines, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full-power operation followed by three or four minutes at lower power settings.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.137 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Table 4.9-7: Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels (Lmax)

Range of Maximum Suggested Maximum Sound Sound Levels Levels for Analysis Type of Equipment (dBA at 50 feet) (dBA at 50 feet) Pile Drivers 81 to 96 93 Rock drills 83 to 99 96 Jackhammers 75 to 85 82 Pneumatic Tools 78 to 85 85 Pumps 74 to 84 80 Scrapers 83 to 91 87 Haul Trucks 83 to 94 88 Cranes 79 to 86 82 Portable Generators 71 to 87 80 Rollers 75 to 82 80 Dozers 77 to 90 85 Tractors 77 to 82 80 Front-end Loaders 77 to 90 86 Hydraulic Backhoe 81 to 90 86 Hydraulic Excavators 81 to 90 86 Graders 79 to 89 86 Air Compressors 76 to 89 86 Trucks 81 to 87 86 Source: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, 1987. Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants.

Demolition of the existing parking lot and construction of the proposed project is expected to require the use of earthmovers such as bulldozers and scrapers, loaders and graders, water trucks, and pickup trucks. As shown in Table 4.9-7, the typical maximum noise level generated by backhoes on the proposed project site is assumed to be 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the operating equipment. The maximum noise level generated by bulldozers is approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by water and other trucks is approximately 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with equal strength would increase the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance apart from the other equipment, the worst- case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area.

The closest noise sensitive land uses to the project construction areas are the residences along Curtola Parkway whose rear property line borders Curtola Parkway which borders the Project site. These properties are located approximately 100 feet away from the nearest point of the Project. At this distance, maximum noise levels from construction activities at the building site could range up to 91 dBA Lmax at the property line of the residences. When site preparation and pavement construction activities occur adjacent to the project border, these off-site sensitive land uses could be exposed to equipment noise levels in excess of 100 dBA Lmax during full-power operation cycles. Since the existing site is a parking lot, demolition activities will be minimal and include the removal of pavement. Demolition of the existing pavement will be short term (less than a week during each phase of the Project) and will not require large amounts of earth moving and grading since the site is already level. The implementation of best i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.138 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 management practices, restriction of the hours of noise producing construction activities, and requirement that construction workers wear noise protection ear-ware would mitigate the impact from temporary construction noise sources to a less-than-significant level.

The implementation of Phase 1 of the Project will not modify existing noise levels since traffic levels are anticipated to remain the same. Implementation of Phases 2 and 3 of the proposed Project would increase vehicle traffic and traffic noise in the project area. Traffic data contained in the Vallejo Transit Center Traffic Impact Analysis Technical Study prepared by AECOM (2011) was used to calculate potential project-related traffic noise levels along roadways in the Project vicinity. The surrounding roadway network was modeled with the Federal Transit Administration’s Noise Impact Assessment Spreadsheet, version 7/3/2007 (HMMH, Inc. 2007), to evaluate traffic-related noise impacts to surrounding residential land uses. The sensitive receptors along Curtola Parkway are the closest to the proposed Project at approximately 100 feet away and the traffic volumes along Curtola Parkway are the highest in the Project area so the traffic-related noise impacts along Curtola Parkway are used for this impact discussion. Both the am and pm peak hour periods were modeled for the Project. Although the results were similar for a.m. and p.m. peak hours, the p.m. hour was slightly higher than the a.m. hour, so the results discussed here are for that scenario.

The noise spreadsheet indicated that the Project would not result in traffic noise levels exceeding acceptable levels at sensitive receivers near the site (e.g., residences). By 2015 traffic-noise levels (under no-project conditions) are anticipated to increase by approximately 4 dBA along Curtola Parkway, which is considered a moderate impact according to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Manual. With the implementation of Phase 1 of the Project the 2015 conditions are not anticipated to change and total noise exposure is anticipated to be 64 dBA. Under no-Project conditions, 2035 traffic-noise levels along Curtola Parkway are anticipated to increase 5dB from existing levels, a moderate impact according to the FTA manual. Implementation of Phases 2 and 3 of the proposed Project will have a negligible consequence and will not exceed the 5 dBA increase of no-project conditions and reach a total noise exposure of 65 dBA. The traffic related noise levels are projected to remain below the applicable noise criteria (65 dBA Leq) and the slight increase at some of the residences would be less than significant because it would be less than a 5 dBA increase.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: All construction equipment must have appropriate sound muffling devices, which shall be properly maintained and used at all times such equipment is in operation.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Where feasible, the project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: The construction contractor shall locate on-site equipment staging areas so as to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noise- sensitive receptors nearest the project site. i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.139 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measure NOISE-4: Except as otherwise permitted, construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. No construction is permitted to occur on Sunday or Federal holidays.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-5: Any necessary pile driving activities with the use of an impact hammer will be restricted to Monday through Friday between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT NOISE-2: Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels

The Project does not include any component that has the potential to generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels during operation. Construction of the proposed Project could result in groundborne vibration or noise levels that could be perceptible at adjacent land uses when heavy earthmoving equipment operates near the project boundaries.

Vibrating objects in contact with the ground radiate vibration waves through various soil and rock strata to the foundations of nearby buildings. As the vibration propagates from the foundation throughout the remainder of the building, the vibration of floors and walls may cause perceptible vibration from the rattling of windows or a rumbling noise. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration of room surfaces is called groundborne noise. When assessing annoyance from groundborne noise, vibration is typically expressed as root mean square (rms) velocity in units of decibels of 1 micro-inch per second. To distinguish vibration levels from noise levels, the unit is written as “VdB.” Human perception to vibration starts at levels as low as 67 VdB and sometimes lower. Annoyance due to vibration in residential settings starts at approximately 70 VdB. Groundborne vibration is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors. Although the motion of the ground may be perceived, without the effects associated with the shaking of the building, the motion does not provoke the same adverse human reaction.

In extreme cases, excessive groundborne vibration has the potential to cause structural damage to buildings. Common sources of groundborne vibration include trains and construction activities such as blasting, pile driving and operating heavy earthmoving equipment. No permanent noise sources that would expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels are proposed as part of the project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not permanently expose persons within or around the project site to excessive groundborne vibration. However, construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed project could temporarily expose persons in the vicinity of the project site to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Typical vibration source levels for construction equipment are shown in Table 4.9-8. Typical groundborne vibration levels measured at a distance of 25 feet from heavy construction equipment in full operation, such as

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.140 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 vibratory rollers, range up to approximately 94 VdB. Based on the preliminary plans available at the time of this analysis, the use of pile driving is not proposed for construction.

Table 4.9-8: Typical Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Type of Equipment Approximate VdB at 25 feet Upper range 112 Pile Driver (impact) Typical 104 Upper range 105 Pile Driver (sonic) Typical 93 Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 94 In Soil 66 Hydromill (slurry wall) In Rock 75 Vibratory roller 94 Jackhammer 79 Hoe Ram 87 Large bulldozer 87 Small bulldozer 58 Caisson drilling 87 Loaded truck 86

The City’s vibration performance standards restrict any land use from producing vibration levels that are discernible without instruments at any point on the property line on which the use is located. Groundborne vibration levels from the operation of heavy construction equipment that will be used in demolition or construction of the proposed project would not be expected to cause damage to residential buildings of normal northern California construction. Sensitive receptors will be exposed to ground vibrations for short-limited periods of time during construction; however, impacts will be temporary. To ensure no groundborne vibrations are perceived, Mitigation Measures NOISE-1 through NOISE-4 above and NOISE-5 below shall be required to reduce the impact to a less than significant level for all sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity. Therefore, Project impacts to sensitive receptors from groundborne vibrations are considered less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure NOISE-5: listed above in IMPACT NOISE-1.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT NOISE-3: A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project

Operations on the Project site that would generate high noise levels are similar to existing sources including the operation of City and commuter buses, cars operating at slow speeds, and typical parking lot activities such as doors slamming and people conversing.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.141 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Increased traffic may cause a slight increase in noise levels at the Project site, but as discussed above in IMPACT NOISE-1, increases in noise levels are anticipated with or without Project implementation. Representative parking activities, such as vehicles cruising at slow speeds, door slamming, cars starting, would generate approximately 60 dBA to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Conversation between two persons at a distance of 3 to 5 feet apart would generate a noise level of 60 dBA Leq at 5 feet. At 50 feet, this noise would be reduced to approximately 40 dBA Leq. However, single daytime or nighttime events, even with relatively high noise-generating activities such as periodic car doors slamming, cars starting, or people talking would not cause the Ldn to exceed the City’s normally acceptable land use compatibility standard of 60 dBA Ldn for adjacent residential land uses nor result in a substantial permanent increase of more than 5 dBA compared to levels existing without the project. Potential increases in ambient noise levels as a result of using off-site areas to provide approximately 205 parking spaces during construction of the Phase 1 parking structure would be temporary and not permanently increase noise levels. Therefore, the Project is expected to have a less-than-significant impact on permanent ambient noise levels.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. Level of Significance Less than Significant

IMPACT NOISE-4: A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project

Phase 1 of the Project is designed to meet existing parking and commuter needs and therefore will not alter the existing ambient noise levels of the Project because usage levels will remain the same. By providing adequate parking capacity to meet current demand the ambient noise levels in nearby neighborhoods will improve, as facility users will no longer be forced to find parking in nearby neighborhoods, reducing traffic and general parking noise from car doors shutting and people talking during commute hours in neighborhood areas. The increased concentration of ambient noise at the Project site may slightly increase from the additional users; however, as discussed above under IMPACT NOISE-1, the increase in noise will be a less-than-significant impact on the nearby residences.

Future Phases of the Project are designed to accommodate additional users and additional bus routes. These additions may slightly increase ambient noise levels in the project area; however, as discussed above, they are not anticipated to cause a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. Therefore, impacts to temporary or period increases in ambient noise levels are anticipated to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. Level of Significance Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.142 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.10 PUBLIC SERVICES

Unlike public facilities and utilities, public services are provided to the community as a whole, usually from a central location or from a defined set of nodes. The resource base for delivery of these services, including the physical service delivery mechanisms, is financed on a community- wide basis, usually from a unified or integrated financial system. The service delivery agency can be a city, county, service or other special district.

The impact of a particular project on public facility services is generally a fiscal impact. By increasing the demand for a type of service, a project could cause an eventual increase in the cost of providing the service. That is a fiscal impact, not an environmental one. CEQA does not require an analysis of fiscal impacts. However, CEQA analysis is required if the increased demand is of sufficient size to trigger the need for a new or physically altered facility.

Park, recreation, school and library services are not evaluated as the proposed Project would not introduce a residential population to the area, which would utilize these services (refer to the Initial Study in Appendix A for a discussion of these topics).

4.10.1 Regulatory Setting

Below are the applicable policies, goals, and implementation measures for public services found in the Vallejo General Plan.

4.10.1.1 Regional/Local

Police Services

General Plan goals and policies that address police services and are applicable to the proposed project are listed below:  Other Services Goal: To provide an efficient and financially sound system of urban services to protect the health, safety and general welfare of Vallejo area residents.  Policy.11c: Landscape areas should provide adequate visual access to all entrances.  Policy 11e: Defensible design techniques should be encouraged in all new developments. 4.10.2 Environmental Setting

This section discusses the existing conditions, including service locations, capacities, and expansion possibilities related to police and fire/emergency services. The information presented here was gathered from a variety of sources, including direct communication with the agencies and organizations that administer or provide each service.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.143 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Police Services

The project site is under jurisdiction of the City of Vallejo Police Department (VPD). VPD provides police protection services throughout the City and VPD headquarters are located at 111 Amador Street, approximately 1.1 miles northwest of the project site. Currently, there are 90 sworn officers, 31 civilian staffers, 12 part-time cadets and about 20 citizen volunteers at the VPD. Current staffing levels are in line with budgeted staffing levels; however, in recent years, the VPD reduced the number of sworn personnel by 68 officers (Vallejo Police Department 2010).

The VPD service area is divided into eight beats, which are then subdivided into districts. The project site is designated as Beat 1, which covers the northeast portion of the City. Overall, there is one beat police officer assigned to Beat 1 and during occasional overlap periods, there are two officers assigned. Pro-active patrolling can vary significantly depending on the number of calls for service occurring within beat 1. The City has not established a response time goal for police protection services. Incoming calls are prioritized and responded to according to level of urgency. Priority 1 calls are defined as involving immediate danger of injury or loss of life, and Priority 2 calls are those which require an urgent response to prevent the situation from escalating to a Priority 1. The VPD reported a City-wide average response time of 5.8 minutes for Priority 1 calls, 22.8 minutes for Priority 2 calls, and 27.8 minutes for Priority 3 calls during the period between January 2010 and mid-September 2010. The VPD’s estimated response time to the project site would vary greatly depending on the priority of the call and other pending calls for service within beat 1. However, the location of the project site provides the VPD easy access from I-80. The project site is near other patrol beats and would most likely result in a reasonable response time for higher priority calls from patrolling officers. The three most common incident types reported in Vallejo include theft, burglary, and traffic-related matters.

Fire and Emergency Services

The Vallejo Fire Department (VFD) provides fire services to the Project area. VFD responds to structural and wildland fires, rescue and medical emergencies, hazardous materials spills, and vehicle accidents in this area. VFD serves the City of Vallejo and the East Vallejo Fire Protection District, a service area totaling 51 square miles. From January 2010 to June 2010, VFD responded to 5,988 incidents.

VFD operates eight fire stations located throughout the City, but presently only five of the stations are being operated. VFD personnel include one Chief, four assistant chiefs, 21 fire captains, 16 fire engineers, 25 firefighters, two fire prevention inspectors, and 2 administrative personnel (Vallejo Fire Department, 2010). Fire suppression personnel are deployed on three shifts where each shift is supervised by an Assistant Fire Chief. All of the engine companies have a paramedic firefighter assigned on duty to provide advance life support (ALS) capabilities. The current staffing level at each station is 15 firefighters per day. Response includes three firefighters on four engines and one ladder truck.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.144 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

VFD Station 22 is located at 700 5th Street, 0.6 miles from the project site, and would be the first station to respond to calls originating from the Project site. The current average response time for calls is 5 minutes 30 seconds for all of Vallejo. However, Station 22 is located 0.6 miles from the project site, and response time would be less than 2 minutes. Station 24 is located at 1005 Oakwood Avenue, 2.2 miles from the Project site, and would provide the secondary response. VFD Stations 22, 23, 24, and 27 all are staffed with three firefighters on an Engine. Station 21 is located at 1220 Marin Street, 2.3 miles away from the Project site. Response time to the Project site from Station 24 and 21 is approximately 6 minutes or less. Station 21 is staffed with three firefighters on an 110 foot Ladder Truck. The Battalion Chief also responds out of fire station 21.

The City of Vallejo also participates in an automatic aid program with the City of Benicia. This automatic aid program assigns the closest responding first-due units, when available, in several designated areas in Vallejo and Benicia, providing improved emergency medical services and fire protection services to each jurisdiction. The project site is not designated as an area that is served by the program since it only serves the Glen Cove area, the southeast area of the City.

The City of Vallejo also participates in countywide and Statewide Mutual Aid Programs with many other fire agencies in Solano County, Napa County and Contra Costa County. Through this program, should any of the participating jurisdictions need additional assistance in a major emergency, and a significant portion of their own resources are committed to emergency operations, strike teams, composed of designated units from one or more of the program cities, would provide assistance to address the emergency. The City of Vallejo maintains mutual aid agreements with the cities of American Canyon, Benicia and Crocket.

VFD has a standard level of service for fire protection, rescue, and emergency medical services. For any structure fire, the initial response includes three engines and one truck, with a minimum staffing of 12 firefighting personnel. Accounting for the VFD’s emergency medical services cooperative with Solano County and medical ambulance, the VFD response time goal is 7 minutes, 90 percent of the time. Currently, the VFD maintains a travel time standard of 5½ minutes for Fire Department first-due emergency response. With the purchase of new equipment and training in firefighter survival, low angle rescue and confined space rescue, the VFD has increased its rescue services.

Schools

The project site and vicinity are within the Vallejo City Unified School District (VCUSD), which serves 16,500 students in 2010-2011. VCUSD consists of 23 schools: 16 elementary schools, four middle schools, and three high schools.

Parks and Recreation

The Greater Vallejo Recreation District (GVRD) is responsible for park planning for the City. The General Plan lists GVRD’s standards that are used by the District to ensure equitable citywide parks distribution. The standard for neighborhood parks (i.e., 4- to 7-acre parks serving residential neighborhoods) is 4.25 acres per 1,000 people.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.145 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.10.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.10.3.1 Methodology

The analysis contained in the following section addresses the project-specific impacts of the proposed project concerning public services within Vallejo. This analysis is based on information and analysis contained in the Vallejo General Plan and other research performed by Stantec.

4.10.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The Vallejo CEQA Implementation Document and Environmental Checklist state that a proposed project would have significant impacts on public services if it would:

 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

o Fire Protection o Police Protection o Schools o Parks o Other Public Facilities

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the findings made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed Project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

o Schools o Parks o Other Public Facilities 4.10.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.146 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT PUB-1: Increased need for or alter Fire Protection Services

The project site will change from a park-and-ride lot to a transit center with two parking structures. The proposed project does not include the construction of residential, commercial, or substantial industrial structures that could significantly increase demand for fire protection services. The addition of parking structures is not expected to create substantial demand for fire protection services beyond existing fire protection response capacity. The impact can be reduced to a less than significant level through implementation of the below mitigation measure.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure PUB-1: The parking structures will be built with sprinkler systems installed.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT PUB-2: Increased need for or alter Police Protection Services

The proposed Project does not include a residential component or other development that would substantially increase population growth that could require police/law enforcement services. There is a potential that crime such as theft or vandalism could occur during both the construction and operation phases of the proposed Project which could increase demand on local law enforcement services. However, any increase in demand for police protection services as a result of the project will be incremental and will not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the following public services . This is a less than significant impact

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure PUB-2: Two emergency call boxes will be located on each floor of the parking structures near the stairways and elevators. In addition to emergency call boxes, there will be a security office in the structure (one for phase 1 and a second for phases 2 and 3) with a security officer on duty at all times. Video cameras will record activity within the parking structures and be sent to closed circuit televisions within a central office in Vallejo and/or into the security office onsite. The video cameras can be viewed live or recorded. The use of cameras, emergency call boxes and the security officer onsite should help to deter theft and vandalism in the parking structures.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.147 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC

4.11.1 Regulatory Setting

4.11.1.1 Federal

National Environmental Policy Act and Transportation Decision Making

The principles of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decision-making include:

 Assessment of social, economic, and environmental impacts of the project  Analysis of alternatives to the project  Consideration of appropriate impact mitigation  Interagency coordination  Public involvement  Documentation and disclosure

FHWA Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume VI: Definition, Interpretation, and Calculation of Traffic Analysis Tools Measures of Effectiveness

FHWA Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume VI presents how to correctly interpret findings and present recommendations that are easy to comprehend by decision makers and the public. Computing one or more traffic performance measures of effectiveness is to quantify the achievement of a project’s traffic operations. These measures include travel time, speed, delay, queuing, stops, density, and travel-time variance. The Transportation Research Board’s (TRB’s) 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) LOS and volume-to-capacity ratio are commonly used indicators of performance used to communicate the quality of facility performance to decision- makers (TRB, 2000).

4.11.1.2 State

Caltrans’ Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies

Caltrans policies are summarized in the Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, 2002). These guidelines identify circumstances under which Caltrans believes that a traffic impact study would be required, information that Caltrans believes should be included in the study, analysis scenarios, and guidance on acceptable analysis methodologies.

Caltrans Transportation Corridor Concept Reports

Caltrans TCCRs (Caltrans, 2010) are long-range (20-year) planning documents for each State highway that identify existing route conditions and future needs. Each TCCR includes a route summary, segment summaries, existing and forecasted travel data, route maps, and a list of planned, programmed, and needed projects for the highway over the next 20 years. The TCCR establishes the minimum standard at which Caltrans District 4 expects the highway to function.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.148 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

If travel forecasting predicts the LOS would drop below the minimum standard, Caltrans District 4 will design improvements to maintain acceptable highway conditions.

4.11.1.3 Regional/Local

Solano County General Plan

The Solano County General Plan (Solano County, 2008) is a long-term planning document guiding important community issues such as new growth, housing needs, environmental protection, as well as projecting future growth demand services for sewer, water, roadways, parks and emergency services. The “Transportation and Circulation” chapter of the Solano County General Plan focuses on maintaining and improving the County’s transportation systems to enhance safety, resident access to basic needs, mobility, and convenience.

Transportation 2035 Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area

The Transportation 2035 Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area (Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 2009) is a long-range planning document for identifying and programming transportation improvements throughout the nine-county Bay Area, which includes Solano County. The MTC funds and delivers identified transportation projects through state and local sources.

City of Vallejo Traffic Impact Analysis/Study Guidelines

The City of Vallejo Traffic Impact Analysis/Study Guidelines (City Guidelines) incorporate and are consistent with Caltrans’ requirements.

City of Vallejo General Plan

Plans and policies from the Circulation and Transportation Element of the Vallejo General Plan (City of Vallejo, 1999) were used in this analysis.

Solano Countywide Bicycle Plan

The Solano Countywide Bicycle Plan (Bicycle Plan) (Solano Transportation Authority, 2004) identifies existing and planned bicycle routes in the vicinity of the proposed Project site. The Bicycle Plan also contains design, safety, and traffic control standards for use in constructing and/or upgrading facilities. The Circulation and Transportation Element of the County General Plan also identifies goals and policies for bicycle facilities.

Solano Countywide Pedestrian Plan

The Solano Countywide Pedestrian Plan (Pedestrian Plan) (Solano Transportation Authority, 2004) identifies existing and planned pedestrian routes and facilities in Solano County. The Pedestrian Plan develops an overall vision and systematic plan for accommodating pedestrians

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.149 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 in urban areas based on current shared policies, principles, and criteria. The Plan highlights current and potential projects to fulfill this vision.

I-80 / I-680 / I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study

The I-80 / I-680 / I-780 Major Investment and Corridor Study (Solano Transportation Authority, 2004) analyzes existing highway capacity and usage along the I-80 / I-680 / I-780 corridor and prioritizes a list of Mid-Term and Long-Term Projects to the year 2030.

I-80 / I-680 / I-780 Transit Corridor Study

The I-80 / I-680 / I-780 Transit Corridor Study (Solano Transportation Authority, 2004) analyzes existing transit services and demand, and provides short and long range transit plans for intercity express bus services and auxiliary facility improvements, such as direct access ramps to center median HOV lanes, park-and-ride, and transit center demand and site planning.

4.11.2 Environmental Setting

The purpose of this study is to present the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the transportation impact analysis prepared by AECOM for the proposed Transit Center at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street in Vallejo, California. This section evaluates the transportation impacts associated with the roadways, parking, pedestrians, bicycle and transit systems, site access and circulation, and construction. Pertinent regulatory requirements are presented to assist in understanding the Federal, State, and Regional/Local regulatory framework the project is governed under. Mitigation measures are suggested to reduce or eliminate potential significant impacts of the project. The Appendix contains technical documentation supporting the findings in this section of the EIR.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

A description of the existing transportation conditions near the Project site are listed below, including existing roadway, transit, pedestrian, and bikeway networks and documentation of the existing traffic, transit, pedestrian, bicycle, site access and circulation, and parking conditions.

Roadway Network

A brief description of the regional and local roadway network serving the project site is provided below.

Interstate 80 (I-80) is the major north-south route through Vallejo, a freeway connecting the San Francisco Bay Area with the Sacramento Valley, the Sierras, and Nevada.

Interstate 780 (I-780) is an east-west freeway connecting Vallejo with I-680 in neighboring Benicia. I-780 terminates at the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection, adjacent to the Project site.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.150 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Curtola Parkway is a major arterial street connecting east-west between Sonoma Boulevard (State Route 29) at the south end of downtown Vallejo, and I-780 east of Downtown. Curtola Parkway is owned/maintained by the City of Vallejo west of Lemon Street. East of Lemon Street, Caltrans maintains Curtola Parkway.

Lemon Street is a major arterial street connecting southwest-northeast between Sonoma Boulevard (State Route 29) and Curtola Parkway / I-780. Lemon Street is owned/maintained by the City of Vallejo from Carlson Street to Sonoma Avenue and by Caltrans/ Solano County from Carlson Street to Benicia Road.

Benicia Road is a major arterial street roughly paralleling Curtola Parkway and I-780 between Solano Avenue and Columbus Parkway. Benicia Road is owned/maintained by the City of Vallejo from Solano Avenue to Beach, Laurel to Home Acres, Rollingwood to Columbus. Benicia Road is owned/maintained by Solano County from Beach to Laurel and Home Acres to Rollingwood.

Solano Avenue is a major arterial street connecting southwest-northeast between Sonoma Boulevard (Highway 29) and Springs Road, intersecting with Curtola Parkway and Benicia Road. Solano Avenue is owned/maintained by the City of Vallejo.

Fifth Street is a major collector street generally of residential character paralleling Sonoma Boulevard (Highway 29) south of Solano Avenue. Fifth Street is owned/maintained by the City of Vallejo.

Carlson Street is a local street intersecting with Lemon Street directly south of Curtola Parkway and forming the southern boundary of the Project site. Carlson Street is owned/maintained by the Solano County.

Cypress Avenue is a local residential street paralleling Curtola Parkway one block north of the project site. Cypress Avenue is owned/maintained by the City of Vallejo from Benicia Road to Beach and by Solano County from Beach to the end of the roadway.

Transit Conditions

Vallejo Transit provides local bus service on seven routes in Vallejo and express service on three routes between Vallejo, Fairfield, El Cerrito, Benicia and Walnut Creek. The Project site at the existing park-and-ride at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street is served by one local service, Route 1, and two of the express services, Route 78 and Route 80. An additional local route, Route 6, operates near the Project site but does not directly serve it. Existing transit services near the Project site are described below and shown in Figure 4.11-2.

Route 1 provides local service between neighborhoods south of Downtown Vallejo and Rancho Vallejo, a northern neighborhood of the city. The north-south route generally follows Broadway, serving the area south of downtown in a clockwise loop that includes Curtola Parkway. Accordingly, the existing Curtola park-and-ride lot is served only in the southbound direction.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.151 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Riders boarding at the park-and-ride that are bound for downtown and Rancho Vallejo travel first outbound toward Fifth Street and Sonoma Boulevard, where buses turn north toward downtown. Route 1 operates every half hour from approximately 5:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and every half hour from approximately 6:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturdays and holidays.

Route 6 provides local service between Downtown Vallejo and neighborhoods along Tennessee Street and Benicia Road on a counterclockwise circuit. To serve the Beverly Hills neighborhood east of the Project site, the route deviates from Benicia Road, turning on Lemon Street to reach the neighborhood via I-780. Route 6 operates every hour from approximately 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. on weekdays, and every hour from approximately 7:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. on Saturdays and holidays.

Route 78 provides express service between Downtown Vallejo, Benicia, and the Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre and Walnut Creek BART Stations. The route stops at the York and Marin Transit Center and the Ferry Terminal in Downtown Vallejo and at the existing Curtola park-and- ride lot. The route travels east on I-780 to Benicia, where it makes four local stops along Military West and Military East. The route then travels south on I-680 and stops at Pleasant Hill / Contra Costa Centre BART Station and Walnut Creek BART Station. At the existing Curtola park-and- ride lot, eastbound buses stop on Curtola Parkway; westbound buses are routed from I-780 to Lemon Street to Carlson Street, stop inside the park-and-ride, and return to Curtola Parkway. On weekdays, Route 78 operates every half hour from about 5:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m., every hour from about 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., and every half hour from 3:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Saturday service is provided every two hours from approximately 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.

Route 80 provides express service between Downtown Vallejo and the El Cerrito del Norte BART Station. The route stops at the York and Marin Transit Center in downtown Vallejo and at the existing Curtola park-and-ride lot. The route travels south on I-80 to El Cerrito, stopping at the El Cerrito del Norte BART Station. At the existing Curtola park-and-ride lot, southbound buses stop on Curtola Parkway; northbound buses are routed from I-780 to Lemon Street to Carlson Street, stop inside the park-and-ride, and return to Curtola Parkway. On weekdays, Route 80 begins service at approximately 4:30 a.m. and operates every fifteen minutes from about 5:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m., every half hour from about 8:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., every fifteen minutes from about 2:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., and every half hour from about 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m., with the last bus operating at approximately 10:30 p.m. Service on Saturday and Sunday is provided every half hour from approximately 6:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.152 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.11-1: Study Intersections

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.153 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.11-2: Existing Transit Network

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.154 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Pedestrian Conditions

Sidewalks are currently provided near the Project site along Curtola Parkway, Lemon Street, and Carlson Street. Pedestrian conditions on these and surrounding streets in the neighborhoods around the Project site are described below.

Curtola Parkway features sidewalks on both sides of the street from Lemon Street as far west as Wilson / Lake Dalwigk Park, where a pedestrian overcrossing of Curtola Parkway is provided. At this location, the sidewalk on the north side of Curtola Parkway is diverted into the park; the sidewalk on the south side continues to Solano Avenue. Sidewalks do not continue east from the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection, as pedestrians are prohibited on I- 780. The Solano Countywide Pedestrian Plan1 identifies improvements to the intersection of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street as both a “Pedestrian Connection Project” and a “Crossing Improvement Project”. The Plan listed this intersection as having multiple vehicle-pedestrian accidents in 2001 and 2002.

Lemon Street is provided with sidewalks on both sides of the street north and south from Curtola Parkway; however, the east side of the street between Carlson Street and Cypress Avenue does not have a sidewalk. Accordingly, a pedestrian-activated crossing is provided only across the west leg of the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection. This provides pedestrian access to the existing park-and-ride from the north. Marked pedestrian crossings are provided across Lemon Street on the north side of Cypress Avenue and across Lemon Street at the Carlson/Greyhound Driveway.

Carlson Street features a sidewalk only on its north side, west of Lemon Street. This sidewalk provides pedestrian access to the existing park-and-ride from the south. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of residential Carlson Street east of Lemon Street. As noted above, marked crossings are not provided across Lemon Street.

Sidewalks are provided on the streets in the neighborhood northwest of the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection. No neighborhood streets connect through to Curtola Parkway; thus all pedestrian traffic to and from the neighborhood is routed along Lemon Street.

In the neighborhood northeast of the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection, sidewalks are generally not provided, except along portions of Woodrow Avenue. However, a pedestrian- only connection between Reis Avenue (a cul-de-sac) and Lemon Street is provided, and a pedestrian crossing of Lemon Street at Cypress Avenue near this location is provided, as noted above.

In the area southeast of the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection, sidewalks are provided on Carlson Street as described above. Vallejo Mobile Estates, a gated community, lies immediately south of Carlson Street and is designated a “Higher Density Residential” Pedestrian Area in the Solano Countywide Pedestrian Plan. Though residences within Vallejo

1 Solano Countywide Pedestrian Plan, Solano Transportation Authority, 2004. i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.155 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mobile Estates are located in close proximity to the Project site, the community’s only entrance is on its east side and there are no pedestrian connections to Lemon Street or Carlson Street. Pedestrian access between the community and the existing park-and-ride is thus impractical. Further south, there are no sidewalks along Union Avenue, which serves commercial properties, but sidewalks are provided on the residential streets further south, such as Sheridan Street and Fifth Street. Marked crossings are provided across Lemon Street at these streets, and the sidewalk along Lemon Street provides access from this area to the Project site.

In the area southwest of the Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection, commercial properties front Lemon Street, west of which lies Wilson / Lake Dalwigk Park. Sidewalks are provided on the residential streets south and west of the park, which connect with the sidewalk along Lemon Street to provide access to the Project site.

Bicycle Conditions

Bikeways are classified as Class I, Class II, and Class III facilities.

 Class I bicycle facilities are typically known as bicycle paths. This is a dedicated path for bicyclists and pedestrians that does not permit motorized travel.  Class II bicycle facilities are also known as bicycle lanes, a portion of the roadway network that has been striped and signed for bicycle use.  Class III bicycle facilities are also known as bicycle routes, bikeways that primarily serve to connect other facilities and destinations in the bikeway network but provide a lower level of service than Class I or Class II bikeway facilities.

In California, bicycle parking is classified as either Class I or Class II facilities. Class I facilities are designed for long-term use and provide security and weather protection. Class II facilities are designed for short-term use and typically consist of bicycle racks. The existing park-and-ride facility provides Class I bicycle parking in the form of 12 lockers.

4.11.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.11.3.1 Methodology

Study Scope and Approach

The following scenarios were evaluated to identify the potential transportation impacts of the project:

 Existing Conditions  Near-Term 2015 Conditions  Near-Term 2015 with Phase 1 Conditions  Cumulative 2035 Conditions

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.156 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

Existing Conditions reflect year 2011. The terms “Near-Term” and “Cumulative” herein refer to year 2015 conditions and year 2035 conditions, respectively.

Traffic Evaluation

Intersection Operations

For this study, seven intersections were selected for analysis in coordination with City of Vallejo staff. In addition, three new intersections are proposed by the Project. The locations of the ten study intersections surrounding the Project site are shown in Figure 4.11-1 and listed as follows:

1. Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (signalized) 2. Lemon Street / Carlson Street (stop-controlled) 3. Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (stop-controlled, proposed by the Project) 4. Curtola Parkway / Bus Entrance (stop-controlled, proposed by the Project) 5. Curtola Parkway / Bus Exit (stop-controlled, proposed by the Project) 6. Curtola Parkway / Solano Avenue (signalized) 7. Lemon Street / Benicia Road (signalized) 8. Lemon Street / Cypress Avenue (stop-controlled) 9. Lemon Street / Fifth Street (stop-controlled) 10. Lemon Street / Sonoma Boulevard (signalized)

Intersection operating conditions were analyzed at the ten key intersections near the Project site for the peak hour of the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak periods (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.)

Existing Conditions (2011) traffic volumes, lane configuration and signal timing information were observed and recorded during counts collected during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours on October 19, 2010 and March 1, 2011.

The operations of the study intersections were evaluated using the level of service (LOS) methodology. This methodology qualitatively characterizes traffic conditions associated with varying levels of vehicular traffic, ranging from LOS A (indicating free-flow traffic conditions with little or no delay) to LOS F (indicating congested conditions where traffic flows exceed design capacity and result in queuing and delay). Intersection LOS for the study intersections were calculated using Trafficware’s Synchro 7 (Build 773) software package.

Signalized Intersections

The signalized study intersections were analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000) operations methodology for signalized intersections. The operations analysis uses various intersection characteristics (e.g., traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing/timing) to estimate the average control delay experienced by motorists at an intersection. This

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.157 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 methodology then uses the estimated average control delay to assign a LOS to the intersection as a whole. The HCM operations methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections is summarized in Table 4.11-1.

Unsignalized Intersections

At unsignalized (one-way, two-way, and all-way stop-controlled) study intersections, traffic conditions were evaluated using the HCM 2000 operations methodology for unsignalized intersections. With this methodology, LOS is related to the total delay per vehicle for the intersection as a whole (for all-way stop-controlled intersections) or for the worst stop-controlled approach (for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections). Total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of the queue until the vehicle departs from the queue. This time includes the time required for a vehicle to travel from the last-in-queue position to the first-in-queue position. The HCM operations methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections is summarized in Table 4.11-1.

Table 4.11-1: Intersection Level of Service Definitions—HCM Methodology Average Delay (sec/veh) LOS Description Signalized Unsignalized Intersections Intersections A Little or no delay < 10.0 < 10.0 B Short traffic delay > 10.0 and < 20.0 > 10.0 and < 15.0 C Average traffic delay > 20.0 and < 35.0 > 15.0 and < 25.0 D Long traffic delay > 35.0 and < 55.0 > 25.0 and < 35.0 E Very long traffic delay > 55.0 and < 80.0 > 35.0 and < 50.0 F Extreme traffic delay > 80.0 > 50.0 Notes: HCM = 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, sec/veh = seconds per vehicle For signalized intersections, average delay represents the average of all approaches. For unsignalized intersections, average delay represents the average of all approaches (all- way stop control) or the worst approach (one- or two-way stop control). Source: TRB 2000

Traffic Conditions

To establish Existing Conditions (year 2011), new intersection counts were obtained for the study intersections. Traffic volumes for Near-Term (2015) Conditions and Cumulative (2035) Conditions were forecast using the most recent versions of the Napa-Solano Travel Demand Model. The travel demand model captures the traffic growth expected in the vicinity of the Project due to land use changes, shifts in travel behavior, planned transportation improvements and other considerations. Two different techniques were used for post-processing of the model output. The first technique compares model output for existing and future scenarios, and calculates non-compounded growth rates for intersection approaches and movements. These growth rates were applied to existing traffic counts to develop future year traffic volumes. The second technique compares model output for existing and future scenarios, and calculates the incremental difference in traffic by subtracting the model’s baseline data from its future year i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.158 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 data. This incremental difference was layered directly over existing traffic counts to develop Cumulative traffic volumes. This approach was found to be appropriate only for trips associated with the Project. At all other movements at study intersections, the growth rate methodology was applied.

Existing Conditions intersection LOS is summarized in Table 4.11-2. The analysis is based on data collected on October 19, 2010 for Intersections 1 and 2, and on March 1, 2011 for Intersections 6 through 10. Detailed LOS calculations are included in Appendix F.

Table 4.11-2: Intersection Level of Service—Existing Conditions Existing Conditions Control Peak LOS # Intersection Delay Type Hour (Worst V/C Ratio (veh/s) Approach) Curtola Parkway / a.m. C 34.3 0.68 1 Signal Lemon Street p.m. C 33.6 0.84 Lemon Street / a.m. C (SEB) 19.7 0.45 2 2WSC Carlson Street p.m. D (SEB) 31.1 0.58 Curtola Parkway / a.m. B 14.0 0.47 6 Signal Solano Avenue p.m. B 15.7 0.52 Lemon Street / a.m. C 23.0 0.57 7 Signal Benicia Road p.m. C 23.1 0.52 Lemon Street / a.m. B (SEB) 11.1 0.12 8 1WSC Cypress Avenue p.m. B (SEB) 11.3 0.12 Lemon Street / a.m. B (SEB) 11.3 0.12 9 2WSC Fifth Street p.m. B (SEB) 13.6 0.21 Lemon Street / a.m. C 34.9 0.27 10 Signal Sonoma Boulevard p.m. B 10.7 0.37 Notes: LOS = level of service, 1WSC = one-way stop control, 2WSC = two-way stop control, SEB = southeast-bound, V/C = volume to capacity Source: Data compiled by AECOM, 2011

All the study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. peak hour and LOS D or better during the p.m. peak hour.

Trip Generation

Because it reflects how the existing facility is used and local commuting patterns, the trip generation based on the 2008 study will be used in the travel demand calculations of this study. The trip generation numbers for the 1,160 spaces at full build out are summarized in Table 4.11- 3 below.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.159 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Table 4.11-3: Vehicle-Trip Generation

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total 695 224 919 352 819 1171

Mode Split

In the 2008 study, the access mode of park-and-ride users was surveyed. It was found that 97 percent of survey respondents arrived by private automobile, either by driving and parking or being dropped off. Two percent reported taking the bus, one percent walked to the park-and- ride, and less than one percent arrived by bicycle. For onward trips from the park-and-ride, 74 percent reported traveling in a carpool, 18 percent reported taking a bus, and 4 percent reported taking a Genentech employee shuttle. For purposes of this study, it is assumed that the mode splits determined in the 2008 study will remain constant as growth in demand increases into the future.

Trip Distribution/Assignment

The trips generated by the project are distributed throughout the surrounding road network. Trip distribution is based on travel patterns determined in a 2008 User Survey. One thousand surveys were distributed in April 2008 between approximately 6:00 am and 8:30 am. Surveys were handed to those waiting for buses or to join a carpool, and were placed on tehwindshileds of vehicles parked in the facility’s two lots. An online version of the survey was made available and received 31 responses; 199 surveys were returned by mail, for a total response of 230 surveys (23% response rateVehicle trips are distributed as follows for the Project site:

 From the east via I-780 and from the north and south via I-80: 60%  From the west (via Curtola Parkway): 7%  From the north (via Lemon Street): 28%  From the south (via Lemon Street): 5%

The distribution above assumes that minor changes in travel patterns are expected with the new location of the site access. The trip distribution was adjusted as follows to reflect the potential changes in travel patterns:

 From the east via I-780 and from the north and south via I-80: 60%  From the west (via Curtola Parkway): 10%  From the north (via Lemon Street): 25%  From the south (via Lemon Street): 5%

Parking Demand The demand for parking at the existing park-and-ride currently outstrips supply, with both lots filling up by approximately 7 a.m. In a recent count, 224 vehicles parked on surrounding neighborhood streets were attributed to park-and-ride users. Therefore, the total current i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.160 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 constrained demand is estimated at 709. In the 2008 study, 10 percent of survey respondents indicated that they had previously parked at the park-and-ride, but now arrive some other way due to the lack of parking. Thus, unconstrained demand is estimated to be 780, 10 percent greater.

Future parking demand at the transit center is related directly to overall travel demand. Therefore, it is assumed that the growth in parking demand will correspond to the overall growth in travel demand forecasted by the Napa-Solano Travel Demand Model. By 2015, the constrained parking demand is expected to increase to 772 and the unconstrained demand to 850. By 2035, the constrained parking demand is expected to increase to 1,025 and the unconstrained demand to 1,128. The weekday peak period estimated parking demand for the Project is presented in Table 4.11-4.

The proposed project would provide 1,160 spaces, exceeding the 2035 parking demand by approximately 32 spaces.

Table 4.11-4: Project Parking Demand

Weekday a.m. / p.m. Peak Hour Demand Current (2011) 2015 2035 Constrained1 709 772 1,025 Unconstrained2 780 850 1,128 Notes: 1 Reflecting current conditions, with greater demand than supply. 2 Constrained demand plus an additional ten percent, reflecting users that would park if there was greater supply. Source: AECOM, 2008, 2011

The current parking inventory is 485 spaces. The 2015 and 2035 parking inventory will be 700 and 1,160 spaces, respectively.

Background Growth

Impacts on the roadway system for Near-Term 2015 Conditions were determined by forecasting the increase in weekday a.m. and p.m. peak-hour traffic volumes that would occur with implementation of the Project. Projections from the Napa-Solano Travel Demand Model were utilized to derive growth rates and develop weekday a.m. and weekday p.m. peak-hour traffic volume forecasts for study intersections. Volume balancing utilizing Furness methodology was conducted in order to ensure realistic future year projections and consistency.

4.11.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The criteria for determining the significance of effects encompass the factors taken into account under NEPA to determine the significance of an action in terms of its context and intensity. The significance criteria for this analysis are based on the environmental checklist in Appendix G of

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.161 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, because CEQA is more stringent than NEPA. The Proposed Action and alternative under consideration were determined to result in a significant impact related to transportation and circulation if they would:

 Cause significant traffic delays during peak commute hours  Result in an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system  Result in a change in air traffic patterns  Result in substantially increased hazards due to a design feature, such as a sharp curve, or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment  Result in inadequate emergency access  Result in inadequate parking capacity  Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, such as bus turnouts and bicycle racks

For the purposes of this analysis, the impact thresholds of Solano County and City of Vallejo are also used. An impact is considered significant at an intersection when any of the following increases in the volume to capacity (V/C) ratios occur between the “without project” and the “with project” conditions:

 Greater than 0.04 for study intersections operating at LOS C  Greater than 0.02 for study intersections operating at LOS D  Greater than 0.01 for study intersections operating at LOS E or LOS F

To determine whether signals should be installed at any one location, signal warrants as contained in the Traffic Manual (Caltrans 1995) are typically reviewed. The peak-hour signal warrant analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether and when to install a signal. To reach such a decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on field- measured, rather than forecasted, traffic data, and on a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions conducted by an experienced engineer. Furthermore, the decision to install a signal should not be based solely on the warrants, because the installation of signals can lead to certain types of collisions (i.e., rear-end collisions). Although signals provide increased capacity at intersections and may be needed (from a capacity perspective) to serve predicted volume demands at the intersection, the potential safety implications associated with signal installation should be reviewed by the responsible state or local agency (depending on whether the intersection is controlled by the State, the County, or the City). The responsible agency should undertake regular monitoring of actual traffic conditions and accident data, and a timely reevaluation of the full set of warrants to prioritize and program intersections that may be identified for signalization in this study.

4.11.3.3 Project Impacts

The project impacts are discussed below by Phase 1 impacts and full build out impacts. Full build out impacts assume construction of the parking structures in subsequent phases of the project, but do not account for the relocation of the Greyhound bus station.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.162 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT TRANS-1: Cause significant traffic delays during peak commute hours

PHASE 1 IMPACTS

Near-Term Year 2015 Conditions intersection LOS is summarized in Table 4.11-5. Detailed LOS calculations are included in Appendix F.

The following study intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS F under Near-Term 2015 Conditions:

 Lemon Street / Carlson Street (weekday p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #2).

Table 4.11-5: Intersection Level of Service—Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions

Near-Term 2015 Near-Term 2015 plus Conditions Project (Phase 1) Conditions Peak # Intersection LOS LOS Hour Delay V/C Delay V/C (Worst (Worst (s/veh) Ratio (s/veh) Ratio Approach) Approach) Curtola Parkway / 1 a.m. D 37.0 0.77 C 25.0 0.65 Lemon Street p.m. D 44.2 0.92 C 33.6 0.77 Lemon Street / a.m. C (SEB) 23.4 0.52 C (SEB) 15.5 0.38 2 Carlson Street p.m. F (SEB) >50.0 1.05 E (SEB) 45.1 0.80 Curtola Parkway / a.m. - - - B (WBL) 10.4 0.36 3 Carlson Street p.m. - - - B (NB) 12.1 0.15 Curtola Parkway / a.m. - - - B (WBL) 10.9 0.02 4 Bus Entrance p.m. - - - C (WBL) 15.1 0.04 Curtola Parkway / a.m. - - - C (NB) 15.3 0.03 5 Bus Exit p.m. - - - D (NB) 25.4 0.08 Curtola Parkway / a.m. B 15.8 0.52 B 16.3 0.54 6 Solano Avenue p.m. B 18.8 0.60 B 18.9 0.61 Lemon Street / a.m. C 26.4 0.67 C 26.4 0.67 7 Benicia Road p.m. C 25.9 0.64 C 25.9 0.64 Lemon Street / a.m. B (SEB) 12.3 0.15 B (SEB) 12.2 0.13 8 Cypress Avenue p.m. B (SEB) 11.9 0.14 B (SEB) 11.6 0.10 Lemon Street / a.m. B (SEB) 12.4 0.18 B (SEB) 12.4 0.18 9 Fifth Street p.m. C (SEB) 16.3 0.30 C (SEB) 16.3 0.30 Lemon Street / a.m. A 7.9 0.38 A 7.9 0.38 10 Sonoma Boulevard p.m. A 9.2 0.40 A 9.1 0.40 Notes: LOS = level of service, s/veh = seconds per vehicle, V/C = volume to capacity, SEB = southeast-bound; Bold indicates intersection operates at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F). For stop-controlled intersections, average delay beyond 50 seconds is shown as “>50.0”, as delays greater than 50 seconds are beyond the meaningful range of the analysis methodology. ‘-’ indicates not applicable to scenario Source: Data compiled by AECOM, 2011

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.163 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

All the study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. peak hour and LOS D or better during the p.m. peak hour. In Near-Term 2015 Conditions, all of these intersections are expected to continue to operate at acceptable levels of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours except the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #2).

The southeast-bound approach of the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #2), with the existing configuration of the park-and-ride facility, currently operates at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and is expected to continue operating at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour under future conditions. However, during the p.m. peak hour the southeast-bound approach at this intersection, which currently operates at LOS D, is expected to operate at LOS F by 2015.

Increases to Peak-Hour and Daily traffic volumes, resulting in unacceptable Levels of Service under Near-Term 2015 plus Project Conditions.

Under Near-Term 2015 plus Project conditions, project implementation would affect LOS at study intersections. Impacts associated with the increased traffic were compared against the previously identified thresholds of significance. For the sake of brevity, only intersections and roadway segments where significant impacts would occur are discussed below, followed by required mitigation measures.

Traffic Impacts

Intersection geometry changes were assumed at the following three study intersections in the Near-Term Year 2015 Conditions analysis as a result of the expected year 2015 completion of Phase 1 of the proposed Project:

 Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3);  Curtola Parkway / Bus Loop Entrance (Intersection #4); and,  Curtola Parkway / Bus Loop Exit (Intersection #5).

The Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions intersection LOS is summarized in Table 4.11-5. Detailed LOS calculations are included in Appendix F.

The following study intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS E under Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions:

 Lemon Street / Carlson Street (weekday p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #2).

The reconfiguration of the Curtola park-and-ride lot with Carlson Street extended to Curtola Parkway and operating in the eastbound direction will result in the redistribution of Project traffic. In addition, a significant portion of park-and-ride users who park on-street will find spaces in the expanded park-and-ride facilities, and traffic will be rerouted accordingly. Intersections located close to the proposed Project are expected to experience the most significant changes

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.164 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 in traffic distribution as a result of the Project’s implementation. Conversely, intersections located farther away from the Project are expected to see less of a change.

The study intersections were evaluated to determine if the Project contributed to any intersection impacts. With the redistribution of Project traffic in Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions, all of the study intersections are expected to continue to operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. peak hour. In the p.m. peak hour, the southeast-bound approach of the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #2)is expected to operate at unacceptable LOS during the p.m. peak hour, though it would improve from LOS F to LOS E.

Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3)

The new intersection at the Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #3, the Project entrance) is also proposed to be stop-controlled and would operate at LOS B or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. However, a significant number of left-turns are expected during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours when patrons are accessing the park-and-ride lot. The 95th percentile queue lengths for the westbound left turn during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours are expected to be 41 feet and 25 feet, respectively. Assuming buses can reach a speed of approximately 15 mph exiting the bus loop, approximately 300 feet of acceleration distance will be required to accelerate to the current speed limit on Curtola Parkway, which is 40 mph. A traffic signal is not expected to be required at the Project entrance in 2015, as long as there is enough linear space in the median to accommodate a left-turn pocket to provide storage for a 41-foot queue, and a 300-foot acceleration lane to allow buses to merge into westbound traffic. A signal warrant should be conducted in 2015 to determine the need for a traffic signal at that time.

Curtola Parkway / Bus Loop Entrance and Exit (Intersection #5)

The new intersections at the bus loop entrance (Intersection #4) and exit (Intersection #5) along the south side of Curtola Parkway are proposed to be stop-controlled, and would operate at LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.

Unacceptable LOS at Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2, Project Exit) under Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions

The redistribution of traffic proposed by the Project is expected to reduce delay and improve LOS at this unsignalized intersection. As a result, the intersection would operate at better LOS, with lower delays and V/C ratio under Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions than under Near-Term 2015 Conditions, but still at unacceptable LOS E during the p.m. peak hour. However, as the V/C ratio at the intersection would not increase beyond the 0.01 threshold, this impact is considered less than significant. However, to improvements would need to be made for the intersection to operate at an acceptable level (see Mitigation Measure TRANS-1).

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.165 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

FULL BUILD OUT IMPACTS

Cumulative Year 2035 Conditions intersection LOS is summarized in Table 4.11-6. Detailed LOS calculations are included in Appendix F.

The following study intersections would operate at unacceptable LOS F under Cumulative 2035 Conditions:

 Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #1)  Lemon Street / Carlson Street (weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #2)  Lemon Street / Fifth Street (weekday p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #9)

Table 4.11-6: Intersection Level of Service—Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

Cumulative 2035 Cumulative 2035 plus Conditions Project Conditions Peak # Intersection LOS LOS Hour Delay V/C Delay V/C (Worst (Worst (s/veh) Ratio (s/veh) Ratio Approach) Approach) Curtola Parkway / F >80.0 1.10 E 61.5 1.01 1 a.m. Lemon Street p.m. F >80.0 1.34 F >80.0 1.14 Lemon Street / a.m. F (SEB) >50.0 0.99 C (SEB) 21.5 0.54 2 Carlson Street p.m. F (SEB) >50.0 4.43 F (SEB) >50.0 2.53 Curtola Parkway / a.m. - - - C (WBL) 19.1 0.75 3 Carlson Street p.m. - - - C (NB) 15.1 0.48 Curtola Parkway / a.m. - - - B (WBL) 11.6 0.02 4 Bus Entrance p.m. - - - C (WBL) 18.6 0.05 Curtola Parkway / a.m. - - - C 17.0 0.03 5 Bus Exit p.m. - - - D 35.0 0.11 Curtola Parkway / a.m. C 26.1 0.79 C 28.8 0.83 6 Solano Avenue p.m. D 41.6 0.92 D 44.7 0.95 Benicia Road / a.m. E 71.4 0.99 E 71.4 0.99 7 Lemon Street p.m. D 52.2 0.85 D 52.2 0.85 Cypress Avenue / a.m. C (SEB) 24.4 0.38 C (SEB) 24.4 0.37 8 Lemon Street p.m. B (SEB) 15.0 0.23 B (SEB) 13.8 0.11 Lemon Street / a.m. D (SEB) 26.9 0.58 D (SEB) 26.9 0.58 9 Fifth Street p.m. F (SEB) >50.0 1.41 F (SEB) >50.0 1.41 Lemon Street / a.m. B 14.0 0.77 B 14.0 0.77 10 Sonoma Boulevard p.m. B 13.2 0.75 B 13.2 0.75 Notes: LOS = level of service, s/veh = seconds per vehicle, V/C = volume to capacity, SEB = southeast-bound; Bold indicates intersection operates at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F). For stop-controlled intersections, average delay beyond 50 seconds is shown as “>50.0”, as delays greater than 50 seconds are beyond the meaningful range of the analysis methodology. For signalized intersections, average delay beyond 80 seconds is shown as “>80.0”, as delays greater than 80 seconds are beyond the meaningful range of the analysis methodology. ‘-’ indicates not applicable to scenario Source: Data compiled by AECOM, 2011

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.166 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

All the study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. peak hour and LOS D or better during the p.m. peak hour. In Cumulative 2035 Conditions, three intersections are expected to operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS F). The Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection, which currently operates at LOS C during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, is expected to operate at LOS F during both peak hours by 2035. The southeast-bound approach of the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection is also expected to operate at LOS F during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours by 2035. Lastly, the southeast-bound approach of the Lemon Street / Fifth Street intersection, which currently operates at LOS B during the p.m. peak hour, is expected to operate at LOS F by 2035. The remaining intersections are all expected to operate at LOS E or better during the a.m. peak hour and at LOS D or better during the p.m. peak hour in Cumulative 2035 Conditions.

Under Cumulative 2035 plus Project conditions, project implementation would affect LOS at study intersections. Impacts associated with the increased traffic were compared against the previously identified thresholds of significance. For the sake of brevity, only intersections and roadway segments where significant impacts would occur are discussed below, followed by required mitigation measures.

Traffic Impacts

Intersection geometry changes were assumed at the following four study intersections in Cumulative Year 2035 Conditions analysis as a result of the expected year 2035 completion of the proposed Project:

 Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2)  Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3)  Curtola Parkway / Bus Loop Entrance (Intersection #4)  Curtola Parkway / Bus Loop Exit (Intersection #5)

The Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions intersection LOS is summarized in 4.11-6. Detailed LOS calculations are included in Appendix F.

The following study intersections would operate at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions:

 Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #1)  Lemon Street / Carlson Street (weekday p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #2)  Benicia Road / Lemon Street (weekday a.m. peak hour) (Intersection #7)  Lemon Street / Fifth Street (weekday p.m. peak hour) (Intersection #9)

The reconfiguration of the Curtola Park-and-Ride lot with Carlson Street extended to Curtola Parkway and operating in the eastbound direction will result in the redistribution of project traffic. In addition, implementation of the full Project will include enough parking capacity to accommodate expected demand through 2035. Therefore, park-and-ride users would no longer park on-street in the surrounding neighborhood as they currently do, and their trips would be

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.167 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 rerouted accordingly. Intersections located close to the proposed Project are expected to experience significant changes in traffic distribution as a result of the Project’s implementation. Conversely, intersections located farther away from the Project are expected to see less of a change.

The study intersections were evaluated to determine if the Project contributed to any intersection impacts. With the redistribution of Project traffic in Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions, six of the study intersections are expected to continue to operate at LOS D or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.

Under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions, four study intersections would operate at unacceptable LOS, as described below. The Project would have impacts at two additional study intersections, as described below.

Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (Intersection #1)

With the relocation of Project-bound left-turns, the signalized Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street intersection (Intersection #1) is expected to experience a decrease in delay during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with an improved LOS during the a.m. peak hour; however, during the p.m. peak hour the intersection is expected to continue to operate at LOS F.

Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2)

The southeast-bound approach of the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #2) is expected to improve to acceptable LOS C during the a.m. peak hour with the overall reduction in Project traffic at this location; however, operation will continue to fail during the p.m. peak hour.

Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3)

The new Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #3, the Project entrance) is also proposed to be unsignalized and its worst approach would operate at LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. However, a significant number of left-turns are expected during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours when patrons are accessing the transit center. The 95th percentile queue lengths for the westbound left turn during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours are expected to be 178 feet and 66 feet, respectively. Assuming buses can reach a speed of approximately 15 mph exiting the bus loop, approximately 300 feet of acceleration distance will be required to accelerate to the current speed limit on Curtola Parkway, which is 40 mph. Based on the transit center’s preliminary design, there is not enough linear space in the median to accommodate a 178-foot queue and a 300-foot acceleration lane, making a traffic signal at the Project entrance necessary by 2035.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.168 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Curtola Parkway / Solano Avenue (Intersection #6)

The signalized Curtola Parkway / Solano Avenue intersection (Intersection #6) is expected to continue to operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour, with increases to delay and V/C ratio during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, which require mitigation.

Benicia Road / Lemon Street (Intersection #7)

The signalized Benicia Road / Lemon Street intersection (Intersection #7) is expected to continue to operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour, unaffected by the redistribution of Project traffic.

Lemon Street / Fifth Street (Intersection #9)

The southeast-bound approach of the Lemon Street / Fifth Street intersection (Intersection #9) is expected to continue to operate at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour, unaffected by the redistribution of Project traffic.

The impacts of the Project under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions are presented below. Proposed mitigation and improvement measures follow the description of each impact.

Unacceptable LOS at Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (Intersection #1) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

This signalized intersection would degrade from acceptable LOS C to unacceptable LOS F by 2035. Despite an expected improvement in the amount of delay that would be experienced by traffic at the intersection due to the relocation of Project-bound traffic to the Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street intersection proposed by the Project, the intersection would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F. However, as the V/C ratio at the intersection would not increase beyond the 0.01 threshold, this impact is considered not significant. However, improvements would need to be made to ensure that the intersection operates at an acceptable LOS (see Mitigation Measure TRANS-2).

Unacceptable LOS at Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2, Project Exit) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

This unsignalized intersection would degrade from acceptable LOS D at the worst approach to unacceptable LOS F by 2035. Despite an expected improvement in the amount of delay that would be experienced by traffic at the intersection due to the redistribution of traffic proposed by the Project, the intersection would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F. However, as the V/C ratio at the intersection would not increase beyond the 0.01 threshold, this impact is considered not significant. However, improvements would need to be made to ensure that the intersection operates at an acceptable LOS (see Mitigation Measure TRANS-3).

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.169 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Unacceptable queue lengths at Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

This new unsignalized intersection would operate at acceptable LOS C at the worst approach in 2035; however, the 95th percentile queue length for the westbound left turn during the a.m. peak hour is expected to be 178 feet. Based on the transit center’s preliminary design, there is not enough linear space in the median to accommodate this queue and a 300-foot acceleration lane for buses exiting westbound from the bus loop, resulting in a significant impact. To mitigate this impact to a less than significant level, implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-4 will be implemented.

Significant increase in volume to capacity (V/C) ratio at Curtola Parkway / Solano Avenue (Intersection #6) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

This signalized intersection would degrade from acceptable LOS B to acceptable LOS D during the p.m. peak hour by 2035. Despite the fact that the intersection is expected to continue to operate at acceptable LOS D with the redistribution of traffic as proposed by the Project, the 0.03 increase in the V/C ratio exceeds the threshold for an intersection operating at LOS D, resulting in a significant impact. To mitigate this impact to a less than significant level, implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 will be implemented.

Unacceptable LOS at Lemon Street / Benicia Road (Intersection #7) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

This signalized intersection would degrade from acceptable LOS C to unacceptable LOS E during the a.m. peak hour by 2035. Redistribution of traffic as proposed by the Project is not expected to improve intersection operations, and the intersection would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS E. However, as the V/C ratio at the intersection would not increase beyond the 0.01 threshold, this impact is considered less than significant. However, improvements would need to be made to ensure that the intersection operates at an acceptable LOS (see Mitigation Measure TRANS-6.

Unacceptable LOS at Lemon Street / Fifth Street (Intersection #9) under Cumulative 2035 plus Project Conditions

This unsignalized intersection would degrade from acceptable LOS B at the worst approach to unacceptable LOS F by 2035. Redistribution of traffic as proposed by the Project is not expected to improve intersection operations, and the intersection would continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F. However, as the V/C ratio at the intersection would not increase beyond the 0.01 threshold, this impact is considered not significant. However, improvements would need to be made to ensure that the intersection operates at an acceptable LOS (see Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.170 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 (PHASE 1): Signalization at Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2, Project Exit will improve intersection operations to acceptable LOS A with 9.8 seconds of delay per vehicle in the a.m. peak hour, and LOS B with 11.3 seconds of delay per vehicle in the p.m. peak hour.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-2 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Curtola Parkway / Lemon Street (Intersection #1). Separating right-turns from the through movement on Lemon Street by combining left-turns with the through movement would allow for northeast-bound right-turn permitted-overlap phasing. The reconfiguration of the northeast-bound approach and the phasing adjustments are expected to improve the intersection’s operation to acceptable LOS C, with 28.7 seconds of delay per vehicle in the a.m. peak hour and 30.6 seconds of delay per vehicle in the p.m. peak hour.

There is a potential alignment conflict if the through movements are combined with the left-turn movements; however, this can be addressed by striping a dashed line connecting the centerlines of the northeast- and southwest-bound approaches to direct the northeast-bound through movements to the receiving lane on the opposite side of the intersection.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-3 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Lemon Street / Carlson Street (Intersection #2, Project Exit). Signalization of this intersection (Improvement Measure #1) is expected to improve operations in the a.m. peak hour to LOS B with 11.3 seconds of delay per vehicle, and to LOS C with 29.6 seconds of delay per vehicle in the p.m. peak hour.

Traffic flow on Lemon Street between Carlson Street and Curtola Parkway could be improved by adjusting the striping on the northeast leg of the intersection to provide a wider receiving lane for left turns from Carlson Street to northeast-bound Lemon Street.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-4 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street (Intersection #3, Project Entrance). Improvements must be made to address unacceptable queue lengths for the westbound left-turn at this intersection. Signalization of this intersection would improve intersection operations to LOS A, with 5.5 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour and 3.5 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. The 95th percentile queue lengths are expected to be reduced to 99 feet and 34 feet in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, with this measure. This reduction would allow sufficient linear space to accommodate an acceleration lane for buses turning westbound out of the bus loop. Furthermore, with a traffic signal in place, the signal timing could be adjusted as necessary to reduce queue lengths if additional space is required to accommodate bus acceleration. A signal warrant should be completed in 2015 to determine the need at that time.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-5 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Curtola Parkway / Solano Avenue (Intersection #6). Improvements must be made to ensure that the change in the V/C ratio at this intersection does not exceed the allowable threshold. Given the fact that the intersection would continue to operate at acceptable LOS D with the redistribution of traffic,

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.171 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 major intersection improvements would not be warranted. Increasing the total cycle length from 90 seconds to 95 seconds in the p.m. peak hour and assigning this additional time to the more critical approaches is expected to improve the V/C ratio from 0.95 to 0.89, which would result in a -0.03 change, as compared to Cumulative 2035 Conditions. During the p.m. peak hour the intersection would operate at LOS D with 42.7 seconds of delay. No changes would be required for acceptable a.m. operation.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-6 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Lemon Street / Benicia Road (Intersection #7). The Project would not affect delay at this intersection compared to Cumulative 2035 Conditions, and would not result in a significant impact at this location. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Nevertheless, improvements would need to be made to ensure that this intersection operates at an acceptable LOS. Adding a separate westbound right-turn lane and providing permitted-overlap phasing for the westbound right-turns is expected to improve the operation of the intersection to LOS D, with 54.6 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour and 46.2 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. However, a new dedicated right-turn lane would require some widening of the east leg of the intersection. There appears to be available right-of-way in the northeast quadrant of the intersection that could be used to accommodate the separate right-turn lane.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-7 (FULL BUILD OUT): Improvements at Lemon Street / Fifth Street (Intersection #9). The Project would not affect delay at this intersection compared to Cumulative 2035 Conditions, and would not result in a significant impact at this location. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Nevertheless, improvements would need to be made to ensure that this intersection operates at an acceptable LOS. Converting the intersection to a four-way stop and adding a separate northwest-bound right-turn lane is expected to improve the operation of the southeast-bound approach to LOS B with 11.6 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 16.9 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour.

The northeast and southwest approaches of the intersection currently operate at LOS A and experience only minimal delay. With the conversion of the intersection to a four-way stop, LOS would decrease to LOS B in the a.m. peak hour and LOS C in the p.m. peak hour. As a four- way stop-controlled intersection, the intersection average operation would be LOS B with 10.7 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 18.9 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour.

The addition of a separate right-turn lane to the northwest-bound approach would require widening the southeast leg of the intersection and the elimination of some on-street parking on Fifth Street in the northeast quadrant of the intersection. There appears to be right-of-way in the northeast quadrant of the intersection that could be obtained to accommodate the separate right-turn lane.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.172 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT TRANS-2: Result in an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system

PHASE 1 IMPACTS

Site Access/Circulation Impacts

Implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project would change the site access and circulation as presented earlier in the Project Description. The proposed site access and circulation has been developed through a separate analysis and consideration of alternatives in the 2008 study, as well as subsequent refinement, and is intended to improve overall conditions for all users of the park-and-ride facility.

With implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project, access to the PG&E facility immediately south of the existing park-and-ride would continue to be provided at the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #1). Therefore, the impact of the Project on site access and circulation would be considered less than significant.

FULL BUILD OUT IMPACTS

Site Access/Circulation Impacts

Implementation of the proposed Project would change the site access and circulation as presented earlier in the Project Description. The proposed site access and circulation has been developed through a separate analysis and consideration of alternatives in the 2008 study, as well as subsequent refinement, and is intended to improve overall conditions for all users of the park-and-ride facility.

With implementation of the proposed Project, access to the PG&E facility immediately south of the existing park-and-ride would no longer be provided at the Lemon Street / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #1), but would be relocated to the new Curtola Parkway / Carlson Street intersection (Intersection #3). With Carlson Street rerouted one-way eastbound, outbound PG&E traffic would exit via Carlson Street as it currently does.

Depending on the origins and destinations of PG&E-related traffic, the change in site access and circulation may mean a slight increase or decrease in travel time, but is expected to have minimal effect overall. The Project will maintain PG&E’s existing access points and Carlson Street will be designed to accommodate PG&E vehicles. Therefore, the impact of the Project on site access and circulation would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.173 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Less than Significant

IMPACT TRANS-3: Result in a change of air traffic patterns

The project will not result in the change of air traffic patterns.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT TRANS-4: Result in substantially increased hazards due to a design feature, such as a sharp curve, or incompatible uses, such as farm equipment

The project will be designed to decrease hazards by separating the modes of transportation and improving the site configuration to accommodate busses.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT TRANS-5: Result in inadequate emergency access

The project will be designed for large vehicles and will not restrict access for emergency services.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.174 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT TRANS-6: Result in inadequate parking capacity

PHASE 1 IMPACTS

Construction Impacts

Construction-related impacts generally would not be considered significant due to their temporary and limited duration. However, in circumstances where construction would occur over long periods of time, construction-related impacts may be considered significant.

Implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed project would require portions of the west end of the existing park-and-ride facility to be closed to commuter use while the Phase 1 parking structure and/or transit plaza are being constructed. Parking at the east end of the existing park-and-ride, as well as the lot at the southeast corner of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street, would remain in use and could be restriped to maximize the number of parking spaces. However, supply would ultimately not meet demand with the loss of the west-end spaces.

Loss of Parking Capacity prior to Near-Term 2015 plus Project (Phase 1) Conditions

The proposed location of the Phase 1 parking structure and transit plaza occupy approximately 241 spaces, about half of the existing facility’s capacity. The loss of these spaces during construction of Phase 1 would result in a significant impact on the operations of the park-and- ride facility. To mitigate the impact to a less than significant level, Mitigation Measure TRANS-8 will be implemented.

FULL BUILD OUT IMPACTS

Construction Impacts

Construction-related impacts generally would not be considered significant due to their temporary and limited duration. However, in circumstances where construction would occur over long periods of time, construction-related impacts may be considered significant.

Implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed project would require portions of the west end of the existing park-and-ride facility to be closed to commuter use while the Phase 1 parking structure and/or transit plaza are being constructed. Similarly, implementation of Phase 2 and Phase 3 would require portions of the surface lots at the east end of the transit center site to be closed while new parking structures are being constructed.

The construction impact of the implementation of Phase 1 is considered significant as described in the previous section, “Near-Term Effects”, with Temporary Parking Facilities required as Mitigation Measure TRANS-8.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.175 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

The location of the Phase 2 parking structure occupies approximately 100 spaces, about 15 percent of the transit center capacity following completion of Phase 1. The loss of these spaces during construction of Phase 2 could be met by the lot at the southeast corner of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street and/or on-street parking. The location of the Phase 3 parking structure occupies approximately 30 spaces, about 3 percent of the transit center capacity following completion of Phase 2. The loss of these spaces could be met by the lot at the southeast corner of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street. Therefore, the construction impact of the implementation of Phase 2 and/or Phase 3 would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

MITIGATION MEASURE TRANS-8 (PHASE 1): Temporary Parking Facilities. During the 2008 study, a number of sites were considered for the transit center. While ultimately the existing park-and-ride site was selected, one of the sites evaluated in the 2008 study could be used for temporary “satellite” parking during the construction period. The site would need to accommodate the number of spaces taken out of service by construction activities, which would amount to approximately 241 vehicles. The size of the temporary satellite facility would be determined once a construction staging plan is developed for the implementation of Phase 1. Property acquisition may be required. Because the bus and carpool staging activities occurring at the park-and-ride require a central location, a shuttle service may also be necessary to connect the satellite lot to the existing park-and-ride during the construction period.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

IMPACT TRANS-7: Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, such as bus turnouts and bicycle racks

PHASE 1 IMPACTS

Transit Impacts

Transit operations would be modified with implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project, providing a dedicated bus loop for the routes stopping at the transit center. This would alleviate conflicts with other vehicles that buses may now encounter as they enter the park-and-ride on Carlson Street and circulate through the west end of the park-and-ride.

Eastbound buses would continue to stop on Curtola Parkway, while westbound buses would be rerouted to the proposed bus loop. Travel time for westbound buses would be reduced, as the time to enter the bus loop, stop to allow passengers to alight and board, and exit the bus loop, would be less than the time currently required for westbound buses stopping at the site, which requires a circuitous path along Lemon Street, Carlson Street, and a loop through the west end of the park-and-ride before returning to Curtola Parkway. This impact to transit operations would be considered less than significant.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.176 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Pedestrian Impacts

The transit center plaza proposed in Phase 1 of the Project would offer enhanced amenities for pedestrians and offer more clearly-delineated areas for pedestrian circulation and waiting. Pedestrian activity that occurs within the aisles of the existing park-and-ride facility would be accommodated by the transit plaza, reducing pedestrian-vehicle conflicts.

Implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project would impact pedestrian activity by introducing three new intersections along Curtola Parkway: at an extended Carlson Street, and at the entrance and exit to the proposed bus loop.

Pedestrian activity along Curtola Parkway is currently relatively minimal, with pedestrian traffic related to the existing park-and-ride occurring mainly along Lemon Street. Greater levels of pedestrian activity along Curtola Parkway are not expected in 2015 or with implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project. Delays for pedestrians as a result of the three new stop- controlled intersections are expected to be minimal. Therefore, the impact of the Project on pedestrian activity would be considered less than significant.

Bicycle Impacts

Implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project would impact bicycle activity by introducing three new intersections along Curtola Parkway: at an extended Carlson Street, and at the entrance and exit to the proposed bus loop.

According to the Vallejo Trails Master Plan, the nearest bike lanes planned are shown on Benicia Road and Lemon Street. There are no bike lanes anticipated for Curtola Parkway. There will be a new traffic signal and crosswalks at the intersection of Lemon Street and Carlson Street, which will provide good access for cyclists entering the transit center from the Lemon Street bike lanes. Bicycle activity along Curtola Parkway is currently relatively minimal, and appreciably greater levels of bicycle activity are not expected in 2015 or with implementation of Phase 1 of the proposed Project. Delays for cyclists as a result of the three new stop-controlled intersections are expected to be minimal. Therefore, the impact of the Project on bicycle activity would be considered less than significant.

FULL BUILD OUT IMPACTS

Transit Impacts

Transit operations would be modified with implementation of the proposed Project, providing a dedicated bus loop for the routes stopping at the transit center. This would alleviate conflicts with other vehicles that buses may now encounter as they enter the park-and-ride on Carlson Street and circulate through the west end of the park-and-ride.

Eastbound buses would continue to stop on Curtola Parkway, while westbound buses would be rerouted to the proposed bus loop. Travel time for westbound buses would be reduced, as the

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.177 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 time to enter the bus loop, stop to allow passengers to alight and board, and exit the bus loop, would be less than the time currently required for westbound buses stopping at the site, which requires a circuitous path along Lemon Street, Carlson Street, and a loop through the west end of the park-and-ride before returning to Curtola Parkway. This impact to transit operations would be considered less than significant.

Pedestrian Impacts

The transit center plaza proposed in Phase 1 of the Project would offer enhanced amenities for pedestrians and offer more clearly-delineated areas for pedestrian circulation and waiting. Pedestrian activity that occurs within the aisles of the existing park-and-ride facility would be accommodated by the transit plaza, reducing pedestrian-vehicle conflicts.

Implementation of the full Project beyond Phase 1 (Phases 2 and 3) would offer additional benefits for pedestrian activity. Park-and-ride users would no longer park at on-street locations or in the lot at the southeast corner of Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street, because sufficient parking capacity would be provided at the transit center. Thus, potential conflicts between pedestrians parking in these peripheral locations and crossing Curtola Parkway or Lemon Street to reach the transit center would be eliminated.

Implementation of the proposed Project would impact pedestrian activity by introducing three new intersections along Curtola Parkway: at an extended Carlson Street, and at the entrance and exit to the proposed bus loop. A potential reduction in delays for pedestrians (absent overall traffic growth) along Lemon Street may be realized with the conversion of Carlson Street to a one-way eastbound facility, as pedestrians crossing Carlson Street would encounter traffic operating in a single direction.

Pedestrian activity along Curtola Parkway is currently relatively minimal, with pedestrian traffic related to the existing park-and-ride occurring mainly along Lemon Street. Greater levels of pedestrian activity along Curtola Parkway are not expected in 2035 or with implementation of the proposed Project. Delays for pedestrians as a result of the three new stop-controlled intersections are expected to be minimal. Therefore, the impact of the Project on pedestrian activity would be considered less than significant.

Bicycle Impacts

Implementation of the proposed Project would impact bicycle activity by introducing three new intersections along Curtola Parkway: at an extended Carlson Street, and at the entrance and exit to the proposed bus loop.

Bicycle activity along Curtola Parkway is currently relatively minimal, and appreciably greater levels of bicycle activity are not expected in 2035 or with implementation of the proposed Project. Delays for cyclists as a result of the three new stop-controlled intersections are expected to be minimal. Therefore, the impact of the Project on bicycle activity would be considered less than significant.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.178 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.179 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

4.12 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

This section describes major utilities serving the project site and evaluates the effects of the proposed project on utilities. Potential impacts to utilities that could result from implementation of the proposed Project are identified, and mitigation measures are recommended, as appropriate. Background information related to service systems has been compiled from the City of Vallejo online documents; specifically the LSA Associates EIR for the Vallejo Winco Foods Project, March 2011.

4.12.1 Regulatory Setting

Regional/Local

Vallejo General Plan Policies Related to Water Source

Other Services Goal: To provide an efficient and financially sound system of urban services to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of Vallejo area residents.

 Policy 2: New development should bear the cost to extend or upgrade public services and/or provide or upgrade public facilities to serve the new development proportionately to the demand generated by the new development. It is recognized that in some instances the City may also participate in the cost to extend public services and/or public facilities to areas in which such services/facilities do not currently exist when the City makes a specific finding that such an extension will benefit the community.  Policy 7a: Landscaping of public facilities should feature drought tolerant species.

Water Resources Goal: To protect the city’s water resources against pollution and wasteful use so that it will be available for the city’s future needs.

 Policy 3: The City should actively encourage conservation of water through reduced per capita consumption.

Vallejo General Plan Policies Related to Wastewater

Other Services Goal: To provide an efficient and financially sound system of urban services to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of Vallejo area residents.

 Policy 2. New development should bear the cost to extend or upgrade public services and/or provide or upgrade public facilities to serve the new development proportionately to the demand generated by the new development. It is recognized that in some instances the City may also participate in the cost to extend public services and/or public facilities to areas in which such services/facilities do not currently exist when the City makes a specific finding that such an extension will benefit the community.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.180 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Vallejo General Plan Policies Related to Electricity and gas

Energy Resources Goal: To reduce the City’s dependence on non-renewable energy resources through conservation and development of renewable energy sources

 Policy 3. Encourage participation in the PG&E programs for reducing energy.

4.12.2 Environmental Setting

The following types of utilities and infrastructure are addressed: water supply, wastewater, solid waste, electricity and natural gas, and telecommunications and cable.

WATER

The following discussion provides background information on the City’s sources of water, water treatment facilities, and water distribution system.

Water Sources

Water is supplied to City residents by the City of Vallejo Water Department and the Solano County Water Agency. The City obtains almost all of its water from three major sources: the Solano Water Project, the State Water Project, and Vallejo’s State License water. Water from the Solano Project is impounded in Lake Berryessa and transported to the Putah South Canal. State Water Project water is conveyed from Lake Oroville to the North Bay Aqueduct pumping facility at Barker Slough. Vallejo also has three sources of water for the Lakes System (Lake Curry, Lake Frey, and Lake Madigan). The Lakes System serves Gordon Valley, Old Cordelia, Green Valley, and parts of American Canyon. Lake Curry, located in Napa County, is a standby source for the City, and, as of 2004, is not available as a water source due to a lack of conveyance systems. The Lakes System could be used to supplement the City of Vallejo water supply in an emergency water situation.

Currently, Vallejo holds contract rights to a permanent water supply from the State Water Project, the Solano Project, the Vallejo Permit and the Lakes System in the amount of approximately 37,890 acre-feet per year. The City of Vallejo uses about 60 percent of its total entitlements from all water sources. The maximum annual amount of State Water that Vallejo holds license to is 22,780 acre-feet.

The Water Management Plan includes a Water Shortage Contingency Plan. The Plan includes a four staged response program to deal with water shortages. Each stage consists of specific prohibitions, regulations, fines, penalties, and a rate structure to encourage the appropriate level of conservation. Each stage and set of prohibitions are tied to a water use reduction goal (Stage I=15 percent reduction, Stage II=30 percent reduction, Stage III=50 percent, Stage IV=over 50 percent) to be reached by prohibiting certain behaviors (e.g., washing paved areas, landscape irrigation, etc). Though all four stages have both voluntary and mandatory components, none can be considered a rationing program because they do not strictly limit or ration water use. The

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.181 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

City has established “triggers” for the Public Works Director to implement the various stages of conservation based on the City’s water supply analysis.

Water Treatment Facilities

Most of the City’s water is treated at the Fleming Hill Water Treatment Plant (WTP). The plant underwent a comprehensive upgrade that was completed in April 1996. The project upgrade increased the plant’s capacity to 43 million gallons of water a day (mgd), incorporated water treatment technology that utilizes fewer chemicals, and brought the plant up to the standards mandated by the Safe Drinking Water Act. The processing flow at the plant is well within the plant’s capacity. On average, the plant processes about 20 mgd, with flow peaking during the summer months at about 30 mgd. During the winter months, the flow rate decreases to about 14 mgd.

Water Distribution Systems

The existing water distribution system service for the City originates at the Fleming Hill WTP. Distribution facilities consist of pumping, pressure regulation, storage and transmission lines. The area served by the Fleming Hill WTP varies in elevation between 0 and 636 feet, City elevation datum. To accommodate this range in elevation, the system is divided into 20 pressure zones. Pump stations are needed within the distribution system to convey water from lower to higher zones. Pressure reducing stations are used in the transfer of water from higher to lower zones. As water demand is not constant over a 24-hour period, water storage reservoirs are used to equalize the distribution systems.

There is an existing water line along the west and southern portions of the project in Lemon Street and Carlson Street as shown in Figure 4.12-1. In addition, there is a waterline running from north to south in the western portion of the proposed Project site.

WASTEWATER

The Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District (VSFCD) provides wastewater treatment, collection, and disposal of wastewater to the City of Vallejo and outlying areas. The current population served by the District is approximately 118,700 with a projected build-out limit of approximately 127,350.

Collection System

The wastewater collection system in Vallejo consists of a 370-mile network of pipes that carry wastewater from homes and businesses to the Ryder Street Wastewater Treatment Plant. The pipes of the collection system range in diameter from 4 inches for lateral pipes to 60 inches for interceptor pipes. Wastewater in the pipes is conveyed by 28 collection system pump stations that range in age and capacity.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.182 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

There is an existing sanitary sewer pipe conveying water from east to west along Curtola Parkway as shown in Figure 4.12-1. At the eastern extent of the proposed Project site, the sanitary sewer collection system is in a 12 inch pipe and a 18 inch pipe. The two sanitary sewer pipes combine around the midpoint of the proposed site and continue westerly in a 27 inch pipe.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.183 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Figure 4.12-1: Utility Exhibit

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.184 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Wastewater Treatment Facilities

All wastewater collected in the area served by VSFCD, is routed to the Ryder Street Wastewater Treatment Plant where it is processed. The Ryder Street Plant, which was constructed in 1957, discharges treated wastewater through two export pipelines, the Mare Island Strait outfall and the Carquinez Strait outfall. Currently only secondary-treated wastewater can be discharged into Mare Island Strait; both primary and secondary-treated wastewater can be discharged in the Carquinez Strait.

SOLID WASTE

Recology Vallejo, formally known as Vallejo Garbage Service, Inc. currently provides non- hazardous solid waste removal for the City of Vallejo. Solid waste collected by Recology is transported to the Devlin Road Transfer Station, a regional facility operated by the Napa-Vallejo Waste Management Authority. The waste is then trucked to the Keller Canyon Landfill in Contra Costa County. Keller Canyon, which has a permitted capacity of 75,018,280 cubic yards, has a remaining capacity of 63,279,670 cubic yards and an anticipated closing date of December 31, 2030. Currently, the landfill receives 3,500 tons of garbage a day (CIWMB 2004).

Vallejo Recycling, a subsidiary of VSG, provides recycling services for cardboard, office paper, and aluminum to the residences surrounding the project site. Materials to be recycled are taken to the Napa garbage facility on Levitin Road, where it is sorted and the sent to various facilities.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) required municipalities to divert 50 percent of their solid waste from landfills by the end of calendar year 2000 through the implementation of various strategies, including source reduction, composting, recycling, and yard waste programs. In 2006, the year for which the most current reporting data is available, Vallejo’s reporting year diversion rate was estimated at 54 percent.

ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS

The Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) provides electricity and natural gas service to Vallejo. PG&E charges connection and user fees for all new development, in addition to sliding rates for electrical and natural gas service based on use. These services are currently available near the project site. Existing gas and electric distribution lines would need to be extended to meet the needs of any future construction on the project site.

Measures for conservation of energy and fuel consumption are recommended for new and additional development in the Project area. This Specific Plan includes development standards and accompanying Design Guidelines that are intended to incorporate energy-conserving measures in the design of new development.

Regulatory requirements for efficient use of electricity and gas are contained in Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations, entitled “Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings.” These regulations specify the State’s minimum energy efficiency

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.185 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011 standards and apply to new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings. The standards regulate energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating and lighting. Compliance with these standards is verified and enforced through the local building permit process.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND CABLE

AT&T provides telephone services within Vallejo. AT&T also provides or hosts a variety of other telecommunication services, including Digital Subscriber Line (DSL), Internet Service Provider (ISP), web hosting, virtual private networking, U-verse, Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS), and wireless/cellular paging services. The California Public Utilities Commission requires that AT&T anticipate and serve new growth. To meet this requirement, AT&T continually upgrades its facilities and infrastructure, adding new facilities and technology to remain in conformance with California Public Utilities Commission tariffs and regulations and to serve customer demand in the City. Additions to the City’s infrastructure and proposals for development would result in a need for extending service to new development. The extension of service could require expansion or changes to AT&T’s infrastructure, which could involve suitable siting for equipment placement. Suitable sites must meet requirements for the physical transmission of telecommunication services and conform to the City’s guidelines. AT&T also works with the City to ensure that construction of new facilities does not interfere with any new or newly-paved streets.

4.12.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

4.12.3.1 Methodology

This section analyzes impacts on Utilities and Service Systems from the implementation of the proposed Project based on changes to the environmental setting described above. This analysis first established baseline conditions for the affected environment relative to Utilities and Services Systems. These baseline conditions were evaluated based on their potential to be affected by the construction activities as well as operation activities for the proposed Project.

4.12.3.2 Criteria of Significance

The following section provides the criteria of significance and presents a discussion of potential impacts to Utilities and Service Systems that could result from implementation of the proposed project.

The proposed project would have a significant effect on Utilities and Service Systems if it would:

 Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board

 Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, with the subsequent construction causing significant environmental effects

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.186 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

 Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, with the subsequent construction causing significant environmental effects

 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed

 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

 Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs

 Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste

The following criterion was eliminated from the EIR scope of analysis based on the findings made in the IS/NOP published for the proposed project. Please refer to Appendix A of this EIR for a copy of the IS/NOP and additional information regarding this issue area.

4.12.3.3 Project Impacts

The Project impacts discussed below apply to Phase 1 and future phases. Phases will be discussed individually when impacts are different in for different phases. Future phases of the project may require additional evaluation at the time of project implementation.

Utility relocations are proposed as part of the Project; however, as discussed in the impact discussion below, the Project will not require increases in treatment plant capacities. An exhibit showing the utilities is shown in Figure 4.12-1.

Water

The existing water line along the eastern and southern portions of the project will be abandoned, and a new 20 inch water line will be constructed in Carlson Street. The 2 inch waterline running from north to south in the western portion of the project will be rerouted around the proposed parking structure. The capacity of the pipe will not be increased. There will be two water service stubs off the new 20 inch waterline in Carlson Street for the Project, one for each phase.

Sanitary Sewer

There is no need to relocate any sanitary sewer pipes. There will be two sanitary sewer stubs off the sanitary sewer pipe in Curtola Parkway for the Project, one for each phase.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.187 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Storm Drainage

The existing 36 inch storm drain pipe extending in a southwesterly direction across the project from Curtola Parkway to the outlet into Lake Dalwigk will be removed and a new 36 inch storm drain pipe will be constructed around the proposed parking structure. There will be two storm drain stubs for the proposed Project, one for each phase.

IMPACT UTIL-1: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board

The Project wastewater stream will be treated at the Vallejo Wastewater Treatment plant. Impacts from the four toilets proposed as part of the Project are anticipated to be less than significant for all phases. The project will be required to obtain a wastewater connection from the Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than significant

IMPACT UTIL-2: Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects

Estimated sanitary sewage flow from the project site would not exceed the existing wastewater collection system’s capacity. The proposed Project site is located within a high-density urban/residential area with water and wastewater connections on site. Construction of the water and wastewater connections will not require new or expanded treatment facilities. There will be two single occupancy restrooms constructed for public use in each phase of the project. Impacts are less than significant for all phases of the Project.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.188 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

IMPACT UTIL-3: Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects

The proposed Project site is currently entirely impervious and is located within a high-density urban/residential area. There is an existing 36” storm drain pipe that traverses across the western portion of the site in a southwesterly direction from Curtola Parkway to Lake Dalwigk. There is an existing junction structure at the southwest corner of the site that discharges into Lake Dalwigk. The runoff rate and volume will not increase as part of project development and the existing outfall structure into Lake Dalwigk will remain unmodified as part of this project. The existing 36” storm drain pipe will be relocated along the perimeter of the site so that it is located underneath landscaping and not the parking structure.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT UTIL-4: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed

Although development of the proposed project would lead to increased water demand, it can be accommodated by the City’s existing water supply, and the City has a Water Shortage Contingency Plan to ensure that the water supplies will be sufficient to serve the project and other planned growth in normal, dry and multiple-dry years. Therefore, the proposed project’s demand for additional water would be less-than-significant and no new or expanded water entitlements would be needed.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT UTIL-5: 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

The Vallejo Wastewater Treatment Plant has adequate capacity to handle wastewater from the proposed Project. Impacts are less than significant for all phases of the Project.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.189 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation December 2011

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT UTIL-6: Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs

Recology Vallejo provides solid waste disposal for the city of Vallejo. There is adequate collection and landfill capacity to accommodate the project area without adversely affecting their operations. The Project will comply with all federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts are less than significant for all phases of the Project.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

IMPACT UTIL-7: Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste

Recology Vallejo provides solid waste disposal for the city of Vallejo. There is adequate collection and landfill capacity to accommodate the project area without adversely affecting their operations. The Project will comply with all federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance

Less than Significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 4.190 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

5.0 Alternatives

5.1 INTRODUCTION

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project or to the location of the proposed project site that could feasibly avoid or lessen any significant environmental impacts of the proposed project while attaining most of the project’s basic objectives. An` EIR also must compare and evaluate the environmental effects and comparative merits of the alternatives. This chapter describes alternatives considered but eliminated from further consideration (including the reasons for elimination), and compares the environmental impacts of several alternatives retained with those of the proposed project.

The following are key provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6):

 The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the proposed project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the proposed project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the proposed project objectives, or would be more costly.

 The No Project Alternative shall be evaluated, along with its impacts. The no project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation was published, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the proposed project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.

 The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a “rule of reason;” therefore, the EIR must evaluate only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the proposed project.

 For alternative locations, only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the proposed project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR.

 An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative.

The range of feasible alternatives is selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision making. Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives (as described in Section 15126.6(f)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines) are environmental impacts, site suitability, economic viability, social and political acceptability, technological capacity, availability of infrastructure, general plan

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011 consistency, regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent could reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to an alternative site. An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects could not be reasonably identified, whose implementation is remote or speculative, ant that would not achieve the basic project objectives.

Project Objectives

The goal of the proposed project is to improve access to public transit and give commuters viable alternatives to driving to work, either alone or in a carpool. Deficiencies at the current park-and-ride lot include:

 Inadequate number of parking spaces

 Conflicts in vehicular usage and circulation throughout the site and on the roadways surrounding the site.

 Lack of security features.

 Inadequate pedestrian access to the transit stop.

The site master plan responds to these needs by:

 Providing, at the conclusion of Phase 1, enough parking to meet the current demand for parking spaces.

 Providing mode separation between buses and automobiles entering and circulating through the site, and providing designated areas for automobiles to perform necessary functions on the site, such as cueing for carpool pick-up and kiss-and-ride, and entering and exiting the parking structure. Entry and exit of automobiles and buses is separated, and an additional signalized automobile exit is located at the western end of the site. Analysis has been conducted for vehicular site usage that predicts no exacerbation of current congestion on Curtola Parkway or Lemon Street through the year 2025, and actually alleviates congestion currently caused by the park-and-ride lot.

 Providing proven and effective passive security features such as centralizing the pedestrian use in a central open plaza, designing features to “see and be seen” such as open stairwells and glass-backed elevators, and planning the parking structure layout to include long span beams, which reduces the quantity of columns and “hiding places”, and reducing the length of pedestrian travel within the parking structure by creating two shorter buildings rather than a single large one.

 Designing the transit plaza for pedestrian activity with unhindered pedestrian travel along the Curtola Parkway sidewalk into and through the site. Also, setting the parking structures back from Curtola Parkway to soften the street edge, and allow for generous landscaping and sidewalk width.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Alternatives Eliminated from Further Consideration

Alternatives may be eliminated form detailed consideration in an EIR if they fail to meet most of the project objectives, are infeasible, or do not avoid or substantially reduce any significant environmental effects (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[c]). Alternatives that are remote or speculative, or the effects of which cannot be reasonably predicted, also do not need to be considered (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126[f][2]). Per CEQA, the lead agency may make an initial determination as to which alternatives are feasible and warrant further consideration and which are infeasible. The following alternatives were initially considered but were eliminated from further consideration in this EIR because they do not meet project objectives or were infeasible.

There were a total of ten potential sites considered for the transit center including the proposed project site along with two alternatives analyzed in this EIR. The remaining seven sites include 239 Lincoln Road –RV Park; 124 Lincoln Road East – Millennium Sports Club; Northwest corner of Magazine Street and Sonoma Boulevard; 5th Street, Sonoma Boulevard, and Lincoln Road West; Maritime Academy Drive north of Country Lane Drive; Admiral Callaghan Lane at Turner Parkway (north side of site); and Six Flags Discovery Kingdom parking lot.

The remaining seven sites are not considered alternatives for various reasons. All seven of these sites are not located near an HOV lane on I-80. One of the indirect objectives of the proposed Project is to enhance the opportunity for carpooling and alternative modes of transportation. HOV lanes are only open to vehicles with two or more passengers during rush hour times, thus improving commute times and decreasing vehicular emissions. Another issue for these sites is the topography of the sites. The prime topography for the proposed project is on flat land. Some of these sites have grade changes of 15 to 20 feet, which is not ideal for construction of a transit center. The height of surrounding structures is another issue that the proposed Project is not compatible with. Most of these sites have surrounding structures that are lower than the proposed 4-story transit center. Thus, the aesthetics would be greatly affected in these areas if the transit center was constructed there.

5.2 ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN THIS EIR

Alternatives that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project and that would feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives are analyzed below. Each alternative is discussed with respect to its relationship to the proposed project’s objectives. The city of Vallejo has considered the following alternatives, which are identified in Table 5.2-1 and discussed individually below:

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.3 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Comparative Summary of Impacts

See Table 5.2-1 below, for a summary of the alternatives’ environmental impacts.

Table 5.2-1: Summary of Alternatives Proposed Project Alternative # A Alternative # B Alternative # C Site remains Project Project park-and-ride relocated to site relocated to site Transit Center lot 4.3 miles North 3.4 miles North Extent to Which Project Objectives Satisfied Total None None Total Environmental Ranking 1 2 3 Environmental Impacts Less than significant with Less than Potentially Potentially Aesthetics mitigation significant significant impact significant impact

Agriculture and Forest Resources No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact Less than Less than Less than significant with Less than significant with significant with Air Quality mitigation significant mitigation mitigation Less than significant with Potentially Potentially Biological Resources mitigation No Impact significant impact significant impact Less than Less than Less than significant with significant with significant with Cultural Resources mitigation No Impact mitigation mitigation Less than Less than Less than significant with significant with significant with Geology / Soils mitigation No Impact mitigation mitigation Potentially Less than Less than Less than significant with significant significant with significant with Greenhouse Gases mitigation Impact mitigation mitigation Less than significant with Less than Less than Hazards and Hazardous Materials mitigation No Impact Significant Significant Less than significant with Less than Less than Less than Hydrology and Water Quality mitigation significant Significant Significant

Land Use and Planning No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact

Mineral Resources No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact Less than Less than Less than significant with Less than significant with significant with Noise mitigation significant mitigation mitigation Population and Housing No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact Less than significant with Less than Less than Less than Public Services mitigation significant significant significant

Recreation No Impact No Impact No Impact No Impact Potentially Less than significant with significant Less than Less than Transportation / Traffic mitigation Impact Significant Significant Less than Less than Utilities Less than significant No Impact significant significant

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.4 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Alternative A: No Project

Under Alternative A, the proposed project would not be constructed and existing conditions at the proposed project site would remain unchanged for the foreseeable future. The site would continue as a Park-and-Ride lot.

Under Alternative A, the existing Park-and-Ride lot at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street will continue to operate over-capacity. By 6:30 am on weekdays the parking lot is crowded and the only solution for many commuters is to park their car in the adjacent neighborhood and walk several minutes back to the park-and-ride lot. The existing park-and-ride lot is also congested with westbound bus operations combined on-site with cars searching for a parking space. In addition to lack of parking and congestion, a survey of the Curtola/Lemon park-and-ride facility users indicates that a significant concern is safety and security – both for themselves returning to their cars in the evening as well as for their cars, which are subject to theft and vandalism.

With respect to transportation, this alternative would hinder achievement of Solano Transit Authority’s (STA) goal of improving transportation and congestion conditions in Solano County. According to projections by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the population of Solano County will grow by 45% between 2000 and 2025, and transportation demands on the county’s freeway network are expected to increase accordingly. If transportation improvements are not pursued within the study corridors within this time frame, forecasts show dramatic increases in vehicular traffic and congestion.

Alternative B: Project Relocation to Admiral Callaghan Lane at Columbus Parkway

Alternative B involves moving the project site to a location 4.3 miles to the north of the proposed project site location. This site is a vacant lot that meets the requirements of the project objectives in the following ways – Close proximity to I-80 exit; flat topography; good pedestrian access (a bike path originated here and heads north along I-80); low potential of contaminated soil on site; height of surrounding structures are 2-story; use of surrounding structures include a shopping center across Columbus Pkwy to the south, and it is not located near a school or park (no increase in traffic danger to children).

Alternative C: Project Relocation to Admiral Callaghan Lane South of Turner Parkway

Alternative C involves moving the project site to a location 3 miles to the north of the proposed project site location. This site is a vacant lot that meets the requirements of the project objectives in the following ways – close proximity to 1-80 exit; flat topography; currently a vacant lot; low potential of contaminated soil on site; use of surrounding structures include a car dealership to the south and vacant lots to the north and east; and it is not located near a school or park (no increase in traffic danger to children). Table 5.2-2 compares the impacts from the alternatives.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.5 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Table 5.2-2: Comparison of Alternatives

Proposed Project Alternative # A Alternative # B Alternative # C

Site remains park- Project relocated to Project relocated to Transit Center and-ride lot site 4.3 miles North site 3.4 miles North

Extent to Which Project Objectives Satisfied Total None None Total

Environmental Ranking 1 2 3

Environmental Impacts Would construct four- No change would A 4-story transit center A 4-story transit center story parking facilities occur at the site under would alter the visual would alter the visual in the viewshed of Alternative A. There character of the site by character of the site by residences along would be no blocking views of the blocking views of the Curtola Parkway. component that would hills to the north. hills to the north. Implementation of impact visual and Alternative B would Alternative C would Aesthetics aesthetic treatments aesthetic resources. have a potentially have a potentially and landscaping plans Therefore, the “No significant impact on significant impact on will minimize impacts. Project” Alternative aesthetics. aesthetics. would have no impact on the existing aesthetic environment. The project will provide Since the Project Site Due to an increase in Due to an increase in additional parking for would remain a park- traffic at the site, traffic at the site, the use of mass transit and-ride lot, there emissions have the emissions have the and carpools, therefore would not be any potential to result in potential to result in reducing the impact of change in emissions significant air quality significant air quality the proposed project at the Site. There impacts. It is impacts. It is anticipated on air quality. would not be a conflict anticipated that these that these impacts could with or obstruction of impacts could be be mitigated to a less Air Quality implementation of the mitigated to a less than than significant level. applicable air quality significant level. Therefore, Alternative C plan. Therefore, no air Therefore, Alternative would have a significant quality impacts B would have a but mitigable impact on associated with the significant but mitigable air quality. “No Project” impact on air quality. Alternative would result. The proposed Project No change would Development on this Development on this site is located on an occur at the site under site has the potential to has the potential to existing paved parking Alternative A. There directly and indirectly directly and indirectly lot and is not would be no impact biological impact biological anticipated to have an component that would resources. Four special resources. Four special adverse impact on affect biological status species are status species are found biological resources. resources. Therefore, found near the site near the site including the “No Project” including the Suisun the Suisun shrew, Biological Resources Alternative would shrew, California red- California red-legged have no impact on legged frog, burrowing frog, burrowing owl and biological resources. owl and golden eagle. golden eagle. Therefore, Therefore, Alternative Alternative C could have B could have a a significant impact on significant impact on biological resources. biological resources.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.6 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Proposed Project Alternative # A Alternative # B Alternative # C

Site remains park- Project relocated to Project relocated to Transit Center and-ride lot site 4.3 miles North site 3.4 miles North The proposed Project No change would Transit center Transit center is located on an occur at the site under construction at this site construction at this site existing paved parking Alternative A. There has the potential to has the potential to lot and is not would be no significantly impact significantly impact anticipated to have an component that would cultural resources if cultural resources if they adverse impact on affect cultural they exist at the site. It exist at the site. It is cultural resources. resources. Therefore, is anticipated that anticipated that these Cultural Resources Alternative A would these impacts could be impacts could be have no impact on mitigated to less than mitigated to less than cultural resources. significant levels. significant levels. Therefore, Alternative Therefore, Alternative C B would have would have significant significant but mitigable but mitigable impacts on impacts on cultural cultural resources. resources. The proposed Project No change would Alternative B does not Alternative C does not does not include any occur at the site under include any component include any component components that would Alternative A. There that would substantially that would substantially substantially increase would be no increase the exposure increase the exposure of the exposure of people component that would of people or property to people or property to or property to geologic affect geology and geologic hazards. geologic hazards. hazards. Mitigation soils. Therefore, Construction activities Construction activities measures will be Alternative A would have the potential to have the potential to implemented and have no impact on result in significant result in significant Geology / Soils California Building geology and soils. impacts due to erosion. impacts due to erosion. Code requirements will It is anticipated that this It is anticipated that this be followed. impact could be impact could be mitigated to a less than mitigated to a less than significant level. significant level. Therefore, Alternative Therefore, Alternative C B would have would have significant significant but mitigable but mitigable impacts on impacts on geology geology and soils. and soils. The current park-and- The current park-and- The site used as a The site used as a ride lot cannot ride lot cannot transit center will have transit center will have accommodate the accommodate the increased vehicle use, increased vehicle use, demand of users. demand of users. which may add to the which may add to the Construction of the Staying in its current emissions of emissions of proposed project will state will lead to more greenhouse gases. It is greenhouse gases. It is maintain the/improve vehicles on the road, anticipated that this anticipated that this the parking capacity and less availability impact could be impact could be Greenhouse Gases and therefore, reduce for carpooling and bus mitigated to a less than mitigated to a less than vehicle miles traveled. transportation. significant level. significant level. Therefore, Alternative Therefore, Alternative Therefore, Alternative C A could ultimately B would have would have significant lead to a potentially significant but mitigable but mitigable significant impact on greenhouse gas greenhouse gas greenhouse gases in impacts. impacts. the area. The proposed project No Impact Alternative B does not Alternative C does not does not include any include any component include any component component that would that would substantially that would substantially substantially increase increase the exposure increase the exposure of Hazards and the exposure of the of the public to hazards the public to hazards or Hazardous Materials public to hazards or or hazardous materials. hazardous materials. It hazardous materials. It is anticipated that is anticipated that impacts would be less impacts would be less than significant. than significant.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.7 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Proposed Project Alternative # A Alternative # B Alternative # C

Site remains park- Project relocated to Project relocated to Transit Center and-ride lot site 4.3 miles North site 3.4 miles North The proposed Project The Project site in its The site used as a The site used as a would does not current state does not transit center could transit center could significantly alter or alter or conflict with significantly impact significantly impact conflict with existing existing drainage hydrology and water hydrology and water Hydrology and Water drainage patterns and patterns of the site or quality. However, there quality. However, there Quality will not have a area. Therefore, are no major bodies of are no major bodies of significant impact on Alternative A would water or drainage water or drainage areas hydrology and water have no impact on areas nearby and nearby and impacts quality. hydrology and water impacts would be less would be less than quality. than significant. significant. The project site is The Project site is The site used as a The site used as a zoned for public zoned for public transit center would be transit center would be facilities, and the facilities, and the compatible with the compatible with the proposed transit center current park-and-ride current zoning which is current zoning of is consistent with this lot is consistent with for Mixed Use Planned Pedestrian Shopping zoning designation. this zoning Development. and Service since it Land Use / Planning designation. Therefore, no land use would provide Therefore, Alternative impact would result. alternative modes of A would have no transit to the shopping impact on land use facilities. Therefore, no and planning. land use impact would result. The proposed Project Alternative A would The site used as a The site used as a will maintain the not increase any transit center would transit center would current use of the site short- or long-term introduce new noise introduce new noise due and provide additional noise levels above due to increased to increased numbers of parking capacity which current conditions. numbers of vehicles. vehicles. However, no Noise with mitigation Therefore, Alternative However, no sensitive sensitive receptors are incorporated will not A would result in no receptors are located located near the site and significantly impact the noise impacts. near the site and impacts would be less noise environment. impacts would be less than significant. than significant. The site used as a The Project site in its The site used as a The site used as a transit center would not current state would transit center would not transit center would not result in substantial not result in adverse result in substantial result in substantial adverse impacts physical impacts adverse physical adverse physical associated with the associated with the impacts associated impacts associated with provision f new or provision of new or with the provision of the provision of new or physically altered physically altered new or physically physically altered Public Services government facilities; governmental altered government government facilities. therefore, there is not a facilities, or need for facilities. Therefore, Therefore, Alternative C significant impact on new or physically Alternative B would would have a less than public services. altered governmental have a less than significant impact on facilities. Therefore, significant impact on public services. Alternative A would public services. have no impact on public services. This site in its current The Project site in its The site used as a The site used as a state is congested current state does not transit center would transit center would during commute times support the demand increase vehicular use increase vehicular use while buses and cars for park-and-ride associated with use of associated with use of Transportation / compete for road users in the area. This the center. It is the center. It is Traffic access. The proposed will ultimately lead to anticipated that this anticipated that this project will separate more vehicles on the increase would not increase would not bus and car traffic and road, and less exceed a level of exceed a level of service provide signalization carpooling, and public service standard, standard, increase for the proposed modes of increase hazards, or hazards, or result in project to improve transportation. result in inadequate inadequate emergency

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.8 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Alternatives December 2011

Proposed Project Alternative # A Alternative # B Alternative # C

Site remains park- Project relocated to Project relocated to Transit Center and-ride lot site 4.3 miles North site 3.4 miles North traffic conditions. Therefore, Alternative emergency access. access. Therefore, Therefore, the A would have a Therefore, Alternative Alternative C would proposed Project would potentially significant B would have a less have a less than have a less than impact on than significant impact significant impact on significant impact on transportation and on transportation and transportation and transportation and traffic in the future. traffic. traffic. traffic.

Alternative A Comparison to Project Objectives

The No Project Alternative would result in the appreciable reduction in identified impacts related to most environmental resource areas analyzed in the EIR. However, development of the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the objectives identified for the proposed Project.

Alternative B – Project Relocation (Admiral Callaghan Lane at Columbus Parkway) Comparison to Project Objectives

Alternative B would have similar environmental impacts compared to the Proposed Project. However, Alternative B requires the development of a new site where the proposed Project will build a transit center at an existing park and ride facility. Alternative B would have greater traffic impacts than the proposed Project, potentially requiring the re-routing of current park-and-ride and bus route traffic or additional bus connections for commuters.

Alternative C – Project Relocation (Admiral Callaghan Lane South of Turner Parkway) Comparison to Project Objectives

Alternative C would have similar if not greater environmental impacts compared to the Proposed Project. However, Alternative C requires the development of a new site where the proposed Project will build a transit center at an existing park and ride facility. Alternative C would have greater traffic impacts than the proposed Project, potentially requiring the re-routing of current park-and-ride and bus route traffic or additional bus connections for commuters.

.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 5.9 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

6.0 CEQA Required Assessment

As required by the Section 15128 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this chapter discusses the following types of impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed project: growth inducing impacts; significant irreversible changes; cumulative impacts; effects found not to be significant; and significant unavoidable environmental impacts.

6.1 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS

The purpose of this section of an EIR is to disclose whether or not the construction of the proposed Project is likely to foster additional growth, either directly or indirectly. This information can be an important factor in a decision to approve a project because such approval can, in turn, lead to additional projects that may have environmental consequences.

The fact that a project may result in additional growth does not imply that such growth is either detrimental or beneficial. For example, a project that furthers growth consistent with the adopted goals and policies of a County's General Plan would likely be considered beneficial. Conversely, a project that fosters growth that would conflict with such goals and policies would likely be considered detrimental.

The Vallejo General Plan recognizes that certain forms of growth are beneficial, both economically and socially. Section 15126.2 [d] of the State CEQA Guidelines provides the following guidance on growth-inducing impacts: a project is identified as growth inducing if it “could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.”

Finally, projects can induce growth directly or indirectly or both. A direct growth-inducing impact occurs when the construction of one or more projects is "conditioned on" the construction of another project. An indirect growth-inducing impact occurs when a project fosters such growth but there is not direct linkage to future projects, such as the provision of infrastructure in excess of an individual project’s needs to an area that was previously not served.

In general, a project may foster spatial, economic, or population growth in a geographic area if it meets any one of the criteria identified below:

 The project removes an impediment to growth (e.g., the establishment of an essential public service, or the provision of new access to an area)

 The project results in the urbanization of land in a remote location (leapfrog development)

 The project establishes a precedent-setting action (e.g., a change in zoning or general plan amendment approval)

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET CEQA Required Assessment December 2011

 Economic expansion or growth occurs in an area in response to the project (e.g., changes in revenue base, employment expansion, etc.)

If a project meets any one of these criteria, it may be considered growth inducing. Generally, growth inducing projects are either located in isolated, undeveloped, or underdeveloped areas, necessitating the extension of major infrastructure such as sewer and water facilities or roadways, or encourage premature or unplanned growth.

6.1.1 Growth Inducing Impacts of the Vallejo Transit Center at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street

The San Francisco Bay Area has a large available workforce from which the majority of the construction and operational workers can be hired. Workers would not need to relocate to accommodate Project construction or operation. Project operation is estimated to generate a small number of full time jobs to provide security and maintenance to the facility, not including administrative positions. The resulting economic growth from these positions would be considered insignificant in the larger San Francisco Bay Area economy, or even within the local area of the proposed Project.

People may also move to an area due to a perceived increase in the quality of life afforded by an increase in transit service. This is not likely to significantly affect population growth in the study area because the surrounding community is relatively developed and accessible by transit.

The proposed Transit Center project would serve developed urban land uses. The proposed Project is located within the boundaries of the Vallejo General Plan. As such, the City of Vallejo has identified the importance of a transit system “that results in a significant increase in transit usage especially among commuters and better service for transit dependent residents” and having “parking needs satisfied in well-designated off-street parking facilities”. Development of the proposed Project would not result in any population growth within the City as it does not propose new housing. The proposed Project may reduce potential impacts related with this growth by improving transit service and reducing automobile trips.

6.1.2 Remove Obstacles to Growth

A project may also be growth inducing if it removes an impediment to growth through the construction of infrastructure or the provision of additional public services, such as utilities, roadways, or police or fire protection.

The Project proposes the construction of a parking garage and transit center at the site of an existing park and ride and bus stop. The proposed Project will not remove an impediment to growth and will not provide additional services to promote growth.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET CEQA Required Assessment December 2011

6.1.3 Require Construction of New Facilities

The proposed Project alone is not anticipated to increase population significantly to require the construction of new community service facilities (see Section 4.10 and Section 4.12).

6.2 CONSEQUENCES OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

6.2.1 Environmental Effects Found Not To Be Significant

Based on the analysis provided in the Initial Study, included in Appendix A, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to the following topics (agricultural resources, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, and recreation), which are not further evaluated in the EIR. Some topics considered in the Initial Study would require implementation of standard mitigation measures to be implemented during the construction period to reduce impacts to a less-than- significant level. After further study and environmental review in this EIR, impacts in the following areas would be less-than-significant or could be reduced to less-than-significant levels with mitigation measures:

 Agricultural resources

 Biological resources

 Cultural resources

 Greenhouse gasses

 Geology and soils

 Hazards and hazardous materials

 Hydrology and water quality

 Land use and planning

 Mineral resources

 Noise

 Public Services

 Recreation

 Transportation and traffic

 Utilities and service systems

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.3 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET CEQA Required Assessment December 2011

6.3 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

The analysis completed as part of this EIR shows that there are no unavoidable significant environmental impacts.

6.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

CEQA defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which can compound or increase other environmental impacts.” Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR evaluate potential environmental impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively significant. These impacts can result from the proposed project alone or together with other projects.

1. Methodology

For the evaluation of cumulative impacts, CEQA allows the use of either a list of past, present, or reasonably anticipated relevant projects, including projects outside the control of the lead agency, a summary of the projections in an adopted planning document or a thoughtful combination of the two.

For this EIR, the cumulative traffic analysis and, therefore, cumulative air quality, noise, and global climate change analyses, used year 2030 for the cumulative condition based on traffic modeling that includes assumptions for future land uses and development consistent with build- out of the City’s General Plan. For all other topic areas, the cumulative impacts analysis used information provided by the City of Vallejo on currently planned, approved, or proposed projects in the project site vicinity, as listed in below, that have the potential to contribute to environmental impacts in the vicinity. Each of the environmental topic areas and their significance criteria analyzed in Chapter 4 are considered below for cumulative impacts.

City of Vallejo has seven planned development projects that have been recently completed, are in construction, or in the final stages of design. These projects include: the Downtown Streetscape Improvement Project Phase 1A (in construction), Toyota Dealership (recently completed), Solano 80 Center (in construction), Lowes Home Improvement Store (recently completed), Sonoma/Yolano Plaza (approved), Reuse of the Mare Island Dry Docks (approved), and the Vallejo Station Parking Structure (in construction). An additional project in the area includes the Lake Dalwigk Habitat Enhancement Project.

2. Cumulative Effects of the Proposed Project

The following analysis examines the cumulative effects of the proposed project for each of the topics that are analyzed in Chapter 4 of the EIR.

a. Aesthetics. The eventual buildout of all phases of the transit center combined with the development of several nearby developments may serve to add to the incremental effects of the light and glare emanating from the Vallejo Transit Center at

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.4 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET CEQA Required Assessment December 2011

Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street., and would result in additional light and glare in combination with approved development projects that are nearby to the project area. However, no planned Projects are in the immediate vicinity of the Project area so the cumulative light and glare impacts would be limited to those discussed in Chapter 4. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would ensure that lighting plans are developed to reduce the cumulative impact of light spillage and glare from the proposed Project.

The proposed parking structures would alter views of residences along Curtola Parkway as discussed in Chapter 4 and would alter the visual character of the site and surroundings. Scenic views and vistas within and in the vicinity of the site would be minimally affected and/or improved incorporating visual treatment design measures, appropriate lighting and glare minimization measures, and landscaping improvements. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts related to visual resources.

b. Air Quality. In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, BAAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, additional analysis to assess cumulative impacts is unnecessary (BAAQMD, 2011a). As the Project’s impacts on air quality are all less than significant or reduced to a less than significant level after mitigation, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable air quality impact on the region’s existing air quality conditions. This is a less than significant impact.

c. Biological Resources. The transit center site is fully developed as a parking lot with a few small areas of man-made landscaping. Existing natural communities are relatively small and fragmented. Lake Dalwigk is adjacent to the project site and provides habitat for plant and wildlife species, however, the lake will not be impacted by the Project. The proposed Project will not impact waters of the U.S. and will not have a significant biological impact due to the highly developed site. The nearby projects discussed above may potentially add to the cumulative impact on biological resources however, they will be required to comply with necessary permitting requirements. Due to the disturbed nature of the proposed site, the Project will not have a significant impact on biological resources and therefore, will not have a significant cumulative impact on biological resources.

d. Cultural Resources. The proposed Project will not result in any cumulative impacts for cultural resources.

e. Geology and Soils. The proposed Project parking structures will be constructed to the requirements of the California Building Code Seismic Zones. Site Specific

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.5 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET CEQA Required Assessment December 2011

geotechnical investigations will be performed prior to final design and construction. Since construction and operation of the proposed Project will not cause significant impacts to geological resources, it will not cause cumulative impacts to geological resources.

Geologic hazards such as seismicity, landslides, and erosion and other geologic and soil hazards at the proposed Project Site would be mitigated by implementing standard design measures, which would reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. Residential structures and underground utility lines are designed to withstand geological hazards. The other planned projects listed above would also be required to mitigate potential geologic hazards.

Geologic and soil hazards are site specific. The greater Bay Area region is considered to be seismically active. All of the Projects listed above would be vulnerable to seismic events, with the degree of impacts being directly related to the site-specific details of location of faults, location of structures, areas of potential liquefaction, subsidence, and unstable slopes. Cumulative impacts for projects in seismically active areas and with unstable slopes could occur if projects place a potential hazard near a populated area that could be a danger during a seismic event. All the nearby proposed projects would be required to implement design measures to reduce potential seismic hazards and ensure slope stability and include mitigation measures to prevent hazards. Since the proposed Project and other projects would be designed to reduce impacts associated with geology and soils, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

f. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The Project has been designed to accommodate existing and planned future demand of the existing park-and-ride facility. Research indicates that a number of interested facility users do not attempt to do so due to the lack of parking capacity. It is reasonable to assume that those who use the transit center would otherwise travel longer distances, presumably in a high proportion of personal vehicles. Although not quantified as part of this analysis, it is likely that operation of the transit center would reduce future regional vehicle miles traveled and thus GHG emissions compared to the continuation of existing Project site conditions. Considering that the Project is anticipated to reduce long-term GHG emissions by promoting ridesharing, access to intermodal transport, and reducing congestion, the Project is anticipated to have a less than significant cumulative impact on climate change and will not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.

g. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. If the proposed Project is constructed at the same time as the Lake Dalwigk Habitat Enhancement Project, there could be cumulative impacts resulting from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or through the accidental upset or release of hazardous materials from the project sites. Stormwater contaminated with hazardous materials

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.6 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET CEQA Required Assessment December 2011

could affect surface and groundwater quality. Accidental releases of hazardous materials into the air could affect public health. With the implementation of hazard mitigation measures discussed in Section 4.7 above, cumulative effects associated with hazardous materials from other identified development projects are not considered significant.

h. Hydrology and Water Quality. With the implementation of BMPs and erosion control measures implementation of the proposed project will not have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality. With the implementation of the mitigation measures addressed in Chapter 4, cumulative effects associated with water resources from other identified development projects are not considered significant.

i. Noise. Construction of the transit center and other reasonably foreseeable projects in the vicinity, are not expected to occur at the same time. Therefore noise and vibration impacts would be spread over an extended period of time. Operation of the transit center would impact noise mainly during working hours and is not expected to vary greatly from existing conditions. Cumulative impacts associated with noise and vibration from other identified development projects are not considered significant.

j. Public Services. The proposed Project will not result in any cumulative impacts to public services in the project area.

k. Transportation and Traffic. The traffic analysis found that the Vallejo Transit Center at Curtola Parkway and Lemon Street would not result in any cumulative adverse effects to the intersections within the study area, as the project is designed to improve circulation. Cumulative effects associated with traffic and transportation systems from other identified projects are not considered significant.

l. Utilities and Service Systems. The proposed Project will not result in any cumulative adverse impacts to utilities in the project area.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 6.7 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET December 2011

7.0 Report Preparation

7.1 REPORT PREPARERS

Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 3875 Atherton Road Rocklin, CA 95876 916-773-8100

 Sarah McIlroy, PE, CPESC, Project Manager  Michael Weber, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Quality Control  Dalton LaVoie, Aesthetics  Amy Croft, Biological Resources  Bob Larkin, AICP, Cultural Resources  Davina Gonzalez, PE, Hydrology and Water Quality  Jeff Shaw, PE, Transportation/Traffic and Utilities  Kim Smith, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Public Services, Alternatives, CEQA Required Assessment, and GIS graphics  Lori Baccus, Word Processing

AECOM: Traffic Impact Study 2101 Webster Street, Suite 1900 Oakland, CA 94612 510.622.6600

 Ryan Park

7.2 REFERENCES

AECOM, 2011, Curtola Transit Center Traffic Impact Analysis.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2011a, California Environmental Quality Act, Air Quality Guidelines.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2010a, 2010 Clean Air Plan.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2010b, Construction Risk and Hazard Analysis.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2011b, Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards, Version 2.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 7.1 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Report Preparation December 2011

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2011d, Roadway Screening Analysis Tables, Solano County.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2011c, Stationary Source Screening Analysis Tool, Solano County.

California Air Resources Control Board (2010) http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 2000, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos.

California Energy Commission. 2008. Marsh Landing Generating Station Application for Certification. Marsh Landing Plant Licensing Case – AFC Files – Volume I. Available online at: http:www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/marshlanding/documents/applicant/afc/Volume%2OI/

California Environmental Health Tracking Program, 2011, Traffic Volume Tool, available online at http://www.ehib.org/page.jsp?page_key=136, data accessed July 15, 2011.

California Geological Survey, Geologic Data Map No. 2. Compilation and Interpretation by: Charles W. Jennings (1977). Updated version by: Carlos Gutierrez, William Bryant, George Saucedo, and Chris Wills. http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/GMC/stategeologicmap.html)

California Integrated Waste Management Board, 2004. Website: www.ciwmb.ca.gov.

City of Vallejo, 2008, Vallejo Transit Center, Site Analysis and Conceptual Design Report.

City of Vallejo Fire Department. 2011. Personal Communication with Battalion Chief. August 25, 2011.

City of Vallejo General Plan www.ci.vallejo.ca.us/GovSite/default.asp Accessed July 12, 2011.

City of Vallejo Police Department. 2011. Email communication with Sergeant Jeffery Bassett. August 9, 2011.

City of Vallejo Utilities Department/Water Division, City of Vallejo 2005 Urban Water Management Plan

ENGEO, Inc.. 2009. Geotechnical Characterization Report. Intermodal Transit Center, Hercules, California.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 06095C 0630E, May 4, 2009

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 7.2 VALLEJO TRANSIT CENTER AT CURTOLA PARKWAY AND LEMON STREET Report Preparation December 2011

Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Climate Change Program, 2011, available online at http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/climate/

National Flood Insurance Program, 44 CFR Part 60.3 (c)

San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Board, 2007, San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)

State Water Resources Control Board 2006 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2010

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2007 Air Quality Database

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Endangered Species Program (fws.gov/endangered/)

Vallejo Trails Master Plan 1988

Water Transit Authority (WTA). 2003. Final Program Environmental Impact Report – Expansion of Ferry Transit Service in the San Francisco Bay Area (prepared by URS Corporation).

Working Group on Northern California Earthquake Potential (WGNCEP), 1996. Database of potential sources for earthquakes larger than magnitude 6 in northern California. U.S> Geological Survey. Open-File Report 96-705. 53 pp. Available online at http://quake.usgs.gov/prepare/ncep/index.html

7.3 CONTACTS

Jackson, David, 2010. Captain, Vallejo Police Department Bureau of Field Operations. Personal communication. September 23.

Tweedy, William, 2010. Fire Department Information Officer, Vallejo Fire Department. Personal communication. September 16.

i j:\pl\marcus\curtola-lemon st. transit center\draft eir.doc 7.3

Appendix A: Notice of Preparation, Initial Study, and Comments

Appendix B: Vallejo Transit Center Feasibility Report

Appendix C: Air Quality Calculations

Appendix D: Cultural Resources Information

Appendix E: Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessment

Appendix F: Traffic Impact Analysis