Table of Contents - Appendices 1 of 2 Appendices Appendix AQ Air Quality and Health Risk Assessment Appendix BIO Biological Assessment Appendix CUL Cultural Resources Memorandum PLN19-0037 903 Manor Blvd. Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix $4 ŝƌYƵĂůŝƚLJĂŶĚ,ĞĂůƚŚZŝƐŬƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚ MEMO Date: January 17, 2020 To: Ashley Munce From: Michael Keinath Sarah Manzano Michael Howley Subject: CEQA AIR QUALITY AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR A NEW DEVELOPMENT AT 903 MANOR BLVD, SAN LEANDRO, CALIFORNIA Ramboll US Corporation (Ramboll) conducted California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analyses of greenhouse gases (GHGs), criteria air pollutants (CAPs) and precursors, as well as a health risk assessment (HRA), from construction and Ramboll 201 California Street operations of a new development consisting of the demolition of an existing bowling Suite 201 alley and the construction of 39 residential units totaling 102,100 square feet (the San Francisco, CA 94111 “Project”). The Project is located at 903 Manor Blvd. in San Leandro, California. USA Ramboll assumed construction activities will include demolition, site preparation, T +1 415 796 1950 F +1 415 398 5812 grading activities, building construction, architectural coating, and paving. Based on www.ramboll.com information from the Project Sponsor, the Project will begin construction in 2021, and will require approximately 5,000 cubic yards of soil import. For all other construction information in this assessment, including scheduling, on-road trips, and off-road equipment, Ramboll relied on CalEEMod®1 default values (see Appendix A). The Project Area location, as well as surrounding receptors and sensitive receptor locations, is presented in Figure 1. CEQA THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The City of San Leandro is the lead agency responsible for Project approval. Per City of San Leandro requirements, Ramboll evaluated the Project in accordance with the current Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines, which were updated in May 2017.2 These guidelines present methods for evaluating compliance with CEQA as well as thresholds for determining significance. With respect to the Project, the BAAQMD thresholds of significance are as follows: 1 CALifornia Emissions Estimator MODel (CalEEMod). Version 2016.3.2. 2 BAAQMD. 2017. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality Guidelines. May. Available online at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en 1/9 BAAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance Operational-Related Construction- Related Average Maximum Average Daily Daily Annual Criteria Air Pollutants Emissions Emissions Emissions (and Precursors) (lbs/day) (lbs/day) (tons/year) ROGs 54 54 10 NOX 54 54 10 82 PM10 82 15 (exhaust only) 54 PM2.5 54 10 (exhaust only) PM /PM (fugitive Best Management 10 2.5 None dust) Practices 9.0 ppm (8-hour average) CO (local concentration) None 20.0 ppm (1-hour average) Compliance with Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy GHGs – Projects other OR than Stationary None 1,100 MT of CO2e/yr 3 Sources OR 4.6 MT CO2e/SP/yr (residents + employees) Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR Risks and Hazards for Same as Increased cancer risk of >10.0 in a New Sources and Operational million Receptors Thresholds Increased non-cancer risk of > 1.0 HI (Individual Project) (chronic or acute) 3 Ambient PM2.5 increase: > 0.3 μg/m annual average Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from fence line of source or receptor 3 Ramboll assumes that the Project will not be operational prior to 2020 and therefore will evaluate compliance with SB 32 GHG reduction goals for 2030, rather than AB 32 GHG reduction goals for2020. BAAQMD thresholds are tied directly to AB 32 and statewide emissions reduction goals for 2020.BAAQMD has not yet released an updated 2030 thresholds; however, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) recently updated their CEQA guidelines to discuss the change in GHG targets. SMAQMD used the same threshold of 1,100 MT/year for their 2020 target, and has determined that the same threshold is applicable for 2030 GHG targets. As such, we are proposing to continue to use the BAAQMD’s 1,100 MT/year for comparison here. 2/9 BAAQMD CEQA Thresholds of Significance Operational-Related Construction- Related Average Maximum Average Daily Daily Annual Criteria Air Pollutants Emissions Emissions Emissions (and Precursors) (lbs/day) (lbs/day) (tons/year) Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR Risks and Hazards Increased cancer risk of >100 in a million Same as for New Sources (from all local sources) Operational and Receptors Increased non-cancer risk of >10 HI Thresholds (Cumulative Threshold) (from all local sources) (chronic) 3 Ambient PM2.5 increase: > 0.8 μg/m annual average (from all local sources) Zone of Influence: 1,000-foot radius from fence line of source or receptor Complaint History – five confirmed Odors None complaints per year averaged over 3 years Abbreviations: BMP = best management practices MT of CO2e/yr = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year MT CO2e/SP/yr = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent per service population per year HI = hazard index; μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter. This Technical Memorandum evaluates Project emissions and health risks and hazards with respect to these BAAQMD thresholds of significance. In addition, Ramboll also assessed the Project’s consistency with the requirements outlined in Appendix G of the State of California CEQA Guidelines, which were updated in December 2018.4 The relevant Appendix G checklist questions for air quality and GHG emissions are listed below for reference. 4 California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA). 2018. Final Adopted Text of the 2018 Amendments and Additions to the State CEQA Guidelines. December. Available online at: http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_FINAL_TEXT_122818.pdf 3/9 III. Air Quality Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The City of San Leandro uses CEQA significance criteria established by the BAAQMD to determine the significance of a project’s air emissions under the Appendix G thresholds. SUMMARY OF RESULTS This analysis utilized conservative assumptions, with respect to Project emissions estimation and construction health risk impacts on offsite receptors, as discussed in the sections below. The Project is smaller than screening level size for construction and operational CAP and GHG analysis, and the HRA results are summarized in Tables 6 and 7. The Project does not exceed any BAAQMD CEQA significance thresholds, and is consistent with the requirements outlined in Appendix G of the State of California CEQA Guidelines. EMISSIONS METHODS AND RESULTS The following sections present the details and results for two analyses: 1. Criteria Air Pollutant (CAP) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Construction and Operations; and 2. Community Risks and Hazards from Construction and Operations. Construction-Related CAP and GHG Emissions During construction activities, emissions of fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) from earth-moving activities and ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 from the exhaust of off-road construction equipment and on-road vehicles from land use projects could potentially contribute to existing violations of ambient air quality standards in the SFBAAB. 4/9 In its CEQA Guidelines,5 BAAQMD provides screening level sizes for land use projects in Table 3-1. As stated in the guidelines, “If a project meets the screening criteria in Table 3-1, a project would result in a less-than-significant impact from criteria air pollutant and precursor emissions.” If a project meets these criteria, a detailed analysis of construction-related CAPs is not required. The screening level size for construction CAPs for condos/townhouses is 240 dwelling units (DU). Because the Project is 39 DU, it meets the screening criteria. Therefore, the Project would have a less- than-significant impact on construction-related air quality standards. These results are responsive to Appendix G checklist items III-a, VIII-a, and VIII-b. Operational CAP and GHG Emissions During Project operation, emissions of ozone precursors and exhaust PM10 and PM2.5 from land use projects could potentially contribute to existing violations of ambient air quality standards in the SFBAAB; these emissions would primarily be from mobile sources (i.e., vehicle trips). Other common sources of emissions include energy use from natural gas, consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape equipment. In its CEQA Guidelines,6 BAAQMD