i
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
Class 32 CEQA Exemption
Prepared for:
City of Berkeley
Department of Planning & Development
2120 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
April 2016
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................ 1
PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 3
Existing Setting and Neighboring Land Uses ........................................................................ 3
Description of Project .............................................................................................................. 6
Project Construction ..............................................................................................................18
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CRITERIA ........................................................................................20
Class 32 (Infill Development) ................................................................................................20
Exceptions ..............................................................................................................................20
City of Berkeley – Standard Conditions of Approval for All Projects .................................21
CEQA EXEMPTION CHECKLIST ...................................................................................................23
Criterion Section 15332(a): General Plan and Zoning Consistency ...................................23
Criterion Section 15332(b): Project Location, Size, and Context ......................................26
Criterion Section 15332(c): Endangered, Rare of Threatened Species ..............................26
Criterion Section 15332(d): Traffic ......................................................................................27
Criterion Section 15332(d): Noise ........................................................................................36
Criterion Section 15332(d): Air Quality ...............................................................................58
Criterion Section 15332(d): Water Quality ...........................................................................68
EXCEPTIONS TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS CHECKLIST .......................................................73
Criterion 15300.2(a): Location .............................................................................................73
Criterion 15300.2(b): Cumulative Impact ............................................................................73
Criterion 15300.2(c): Significant Effect ...............................................................................75
Criterion 15300.2(d): Scenic Highway .................................................................................75
Criterion 15300.2(e): Hazardous Waste Sites .....................................................................75
Criterion 15300.2(f): Historical Resources ..........................................................................82
Criterion 15300.2: Other Potential Effects ..........................................................................85
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Traffic and Transportation – Level of Service Calculations
Appendix B: Traffic and Transportation – Updated Cumulative Analysis Memorandum
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
ii
Appendix C: Noise
Appendix D: Air Quality
Tables
Table 1 Project Development Summary ................................................................................ 7
Table 2 Existing Intersection Levels of Service ..................................................................29
Table 3 Automobile Trip Generation Summary ..................................................................30
Table 4 Trip Generation By Travel Mode .............................................................................31
Table 5 Existing and Existing Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service ........................32
Table 6 Future and Future Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service .............................33
Table 7 Definition of Acoustical Terms ..............................................................................37
Table 8 Maximum Sound Levels for Short-Term Operation (less than 10 days) of
Mobile Equipment (dBA) .........................................................................................42
Table 9 Maximum Sound Levels for Long-Term Operation (period of 10 days or
more) of Stationary Equipment (dBA) ....................................................................43
Table 10 Typical Noise Levels from Construction Equipment (dBA) and a General
Assessment of Construction Noise ........................................................................45
Table 11 Construction Noise Levels at Different Distances ................................................46
Table 12 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ..........................................52
Table 13 Vibration Criteria to Prevent Disturbance – RMS (Vdb) ........................................52
Table 14 Vibration Criteria to Prevent Damage to Structures .............................................53
Table 15 Existing and Existing Plus Project Traffic volumes and Predicted Traffic
Noise ........................................................................................................................56
Table 16 Summary of Land-Use Input Parameters for CalEEModError! Bookmark not defined.
Table 17 Summary of Criteria Pollutant Emissions during Project Construction ..............60
Table 18 Summary of Criteria Pollutant Emissions during Project Operation ...................62
Table 19 Summary of the Health Risk Assessment for DPM and PM2.5 Emissions
during Project Construction ...................................................................................65
Table 20 Summary of Risks and Hazards from Nearby TAC SourcesError! Bookmark not defined.
Table 21 Summary of Cortese List Search Results for 1500 San Pablo Avenue ................76
Table 22 History of Hazardous Materials on the Project Site ..............................................78
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
iii
Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map .................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2 Project Site Map ......................................................................................................... 5
Figure 3 Perspectives ............................................................................................................... 9
Figure 4 East Elevation ..........................................................................................................10
Figure 5 West Elevation .........................................................................................................11
Figure 6 Site Plan ...................................................................................................................12
Figure 7 Ground Floor – Townhomes / Basement – Mixed-Use Building ...........................13
Figure 8 Ground Floor – Mixed-Use Building .......................................................................14
Figure 9 Typical Floorplate – Mixed-Use Building ...............................................................15
Figure 10 Noise Land Use Compatibility Matrix ....................................................................40
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Project Title: 1500 San Pablo Avenue
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Berkeley
Land Use Planning Division
2120 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Immanuel Bereket, Associate Planner
Land Use Planning Division
2120 Milvia Street
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 981-7410
4. Project Location:
1500 San Pablo Avenue (the southeast corner of San Pablo Avenue and Jones Street)
Assessor’s Parcel No. 59-2310-2-5
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
4Terra Investments
Attn: Amir Massih
95 Federal Street, Suite D
San Francisco, CA 94107-1412
6. Existing General Plan Designations:
Avenue Commercial and Low Medium Density Residential
7. Existing Zoning:
Limited Two-Family Residential District (R-1A) in the western portion of the site, and
West Berkeley Commercial District Provisions (C-W) in the eastern portion of the site.
8. Requested Permits:
Regular Design Review
Use Permits:
Mixed-use Development over 20,000 SF (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
Alcoholic Beverage Retail Sales (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
Alcoholic Beverage Service (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
Full Service Restaurant over 2,501 SF (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
2
159 Dwelling Units in C-W (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
Construction of more than 5,000 SF of new floor area (BMC 23E.64.050.B)
11 Dwelling units in R-1A (BMC 23D.20.030)
Demolition of an existing commercial building (BMC 23C.08.050)
Administrative Use Permits:
Alcoholic Beverage Service of beer and wine incidental to food service at quick
and full service restaurants (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
Quick Service Restaurants (not drive-through) (BMC 23E.64.030.A)
Demolition Permit (BMC 22.12.060)
Extend parapet height to above height limit to allow for the OSHA-required
railing for maintenance of rooftop mechanical equipment and the roof deck.
This is both the base project and the proposed. The proposed building height
above the average site grade is 62'2" for the ‘proposed’ project and 52'2" for
the ‘base’ project. The maximum building height measured from the lowest
point on the site is 64'7" for ‘proposed’ and 54'7" for the ‘base’. (BMC
23E.64.070.B)
Extending townhouse building height to 30', for both the ‘base’ project and the
‘proposed’ project. (BMC 23E.64.070.C)
Resume minimum distance between new curb cuts on 10th
Street closer than
required 75'. (BMC 23D.12.080.J)
Zoning Certificates:
Outdoor Café Seating (not abutting R-District)
Short fences along 10th
Street and Jones Street, and a 6-foot fence along
portion of south property line
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
3
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Existing Setting and Neighboring Land Uses
As shown in Figure 1, the project site is in the West Berkeley area of the City of Berkeley
(City). The project site is an approximately 1.71-acre lot, consisting of a single parcel
(Assessor’s Parcel Number 59-2310-2-5). The project site is bounded by a range of
residential and commercial buildings, including several one-to three-story multi-family
residential developments and mixed commercial uses, including retail and light industrial.
Regional access is provided by Interstate 80 (I-80), approximately 1.1 miles to the west. In
addition, the North Berkeley Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station is approximately 0.7
miles east of the project site on Sacramento Street, providing direct daily service between
San Francisco, Fremont, Millbrae, and Richmond. The site also benefits from Alameda-
Contra Costa (AC) Transit bus service along San Pablo Avenue.
The dominant existing land use in the commercial corridor is mixed commercial and retail
including restaurants, retail, a gas station, mixed-use commercial and apartments, and a
two-story hotel. The majority of buildings in the immediate area are residences of pre-war
vintage and one to two stories in height. Figure 2 shows the project site in relation to
neighboring land uses.
Consistent with the dominant uses in the area, the approximately 1.71-acre project site is
developed with a 24,000 square-foot former Cadillac-Volkswagen dealership building and
surface parking areas. The project site is composed of a single lot with split zoning
designation (see Figure 2). The eastern portion of the lot is within the Berkeley General
Plan’s West Berkeley Avenue Commercial land use designation and is zoned C-W. The
intent behind the C-W zoning designation is to increase the opportunities for housing and
mixed-use developments in commercial areas to support local retailing, pedestrian-
oriented uses and the use of transit lines in a manner that is compatible with adjacent
commercial, residential, and industrial areas.
The western portion of the lot is within Berkeley General Plan’s Low Medium Density
Residential land use designation and is zoned R-1A. The intent of the R-1A zoning is to
recognize and protect the existing pattern of low medium density residential areas and to
protect properties from unreasonable obstruction of light and air from adjacent
properties. The R-1A zone allows for a wide range of uses supportive to its stated intent,
including single-family and multi-family dwellings.
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
Figure 1Project Vicinity Map
City of Berkeley, 2016
Not to Scale
FIFTH ST
TENTH ST
NINTH ST
EIGHTH ST
FOURTH ST
SIXTH ST
SEVENTH ST
PAGE ST
VIRGINIA ST
CURT
IS S
T
JONES STKAINS AVE
SECOND ST
CAMELIA ST
HEARST AVE
N
I80 WEST HW
YALLSTON WAY
BANCROFT WAY
TRAIL
DELAWARE ST
GILMAN ST
CHANNING WAY
HARRISON ST
E
CEDAR ST
RAMP
HOPKINS ST
STANNAGE AVE
ROSE ST
BO
NA
R ST
PERA
LTA
AVE
CH
ESTNU
T STB
RO
WN
ING
ST
FRANCISCO ST
FRO
NTA
GE R
D
BO
LIVAR
DR
OR
DWAY
ST
E
BYR
ON
ST
DWIGHT WAY
EASTSH
OR
E HW
Y
WEST ST
UNIVERSITY AVE OVERPASS
NEIL
SON
STADDISON ST
UNIVERSITY AVE
NO
RTHS
IDE
AVE
CHAUCER ST
S ST
LINCOLN STKAINS AVE
CU
RTIS ST
HEARST AVE
ADDISON ST
WW
FRO
NTA
GE R
D
ADA ST
Project Site
24
580
80
80
San PabloAv
Bay Bridge
EMERYVILLE
RICHMOND
BERKELEY
ALAMEDA
OAKLANDSANFRANCISCO
Project Area
N
10TH
ST.
JONES ST.
SAN
PABL
O AV
E.
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
R-1AC-W
R-1A
C-W
CEDAR ST.
GAS STATION1580
SAN PABLO
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
41 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
37 C
EDAR
APAR
TMEN
T2
STO
RY
1033
/103
5 C
ED
AR
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
31 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
29 C
EDAR
RESTAURANT1 STORY
1610 SAN PABLO AVE.
HO
TEL
2 ST
OR
Y16
20 S
AN P
ABL
O A
VE.
WINE MERCHANT1 STORY
1605 SAN PABLO AVE.
ACME BREAD1 STORY
1601 SAN PABLO AVE.
PET STORE2 STORY
1531 SAN PABLO AVE.
BIRD STORE1 STORY
1523 SAN PABLO
COMPUTER REPAIR1 STORY
1521 SAN PABLO AVE.
RETAIL1 STORY
1511 SAN PABLO AVE.
AUTO REPAIR1 STORY
1519 SAN PABLO AVE.
AUTO REPAIR1 STORY
1513 SAN PABLO AVE.
RETAIL1 STORY
1507 SAN PABLO AVE.
AUTO BODY SHOP1 STORY
1505 SAN PABLO AVE.
BOUTIQUE1 STORY
1501 SAN PABLO AVE.
AUTO REPAIR1 STORY
1499 SAN PABLO AVE.
AUTO REPAIR1 STORY
1485 SAN PABLO AVE.
RETAIL1 STORY
SAN PABLO AVE.
RETAIL1 STORY1475-1479
SAN PABLO AVE.
CHURCH1 STORY
1469 SAN PABLO AVE.
RETAIL1 STORY
1443-1445 SAN PABLO
DWELLING2 STORY
JONES ST.
DWELLING
1460 KAINS
APARTMENT2 STORY
1456 KAINS
APARTMENT2 STORY
1452 KAINS
DWELLING1 STORY
1450 KAINS
DWELLING1 STORY
1444 KAINS
Dwelling1 Story
1120 Jones St.
DWELLING1 STORY
1506 KAINS
DWELLING2 STORY
1510 KAINS
DWELLING/2 STORY1512 KAINS
DWELLING1 STORY
1514 KAINS
DWELLING
1109 HOPKINS
APARTMENT3 STORY
1608 KAINS
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
32 C
EDA
R S
T.
DWELLING1 STORY
1601 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1603 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1605 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1615 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1606 10TH ST.
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
20 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
16 C
EDA
R S
T.
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
14 C
EDA
R S
T.
DW
ELLI
NG
3 ST
OR
Y10
10 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
08 C
EDAR
1 ST
OR
Y10
04 C
EDAR
1 ST
OR
Y10
05 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
09 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
13 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
17 C
EDA
R S
T.
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
21 C
EDAR
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
25 C
EDA
R S
T.
DWELLING1 STORY
1520 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1518 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1516 10TH
APARTMENT1 STORY
APARTMENT1 STORY
APARTMENT1 STORY
APARTMENT1 STORY
APAR
TMEN
T2
STO
RY
1504
10T
H S
T.
DW
ELLI
NG
3 ST
OR
Y15
04 1
0TH
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
20 J
ON
ES
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
16 J
ON
ES
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
12 J
ON
ES
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
08 J
ON
ES
ST.
1 ST
OR
Y10
04 J
ON
ES
1531 9TH ST.
1541 9TH ST.
1551 9TH ST.
1481 9TH ST.
1471 9TH ST.
1 ST
OR
Y10
03 J
ON
ES
ST.
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
07 J
ON
ES
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y10
11JO
NES
DW
ELLI
NG
2 ST
OR
Y10
15 J
ON
ES
DW
ELLI
NG
1 ST
OR
Y14
80 1
0TH
ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1476 10TH
DWELLING2 STORY
1472 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1468 10TH
DWELLING1 STORY
1464 10TH
DWELLING1 STORY
1460 10TH ST.DWELLING1 STORY
1463 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1467 10TH ST.
DWELLING2 STORY
1471 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1475 10TH ST.
DWELLING1 STORY
1479 10TH
DWELLING1 STORY
1483 10TH
DWELLING1 STORY
1487 10THRETAIL/APARTMENT
2 STORY1464 SAN PABLO
DWELLING2 STORY
1462 SAN PABLO
DWELLING1 STORY
1460 SAN PABLO
DWELLING1 STORY
1456 SAN PABLOAVE.
MARTIAL ARTS STUDIO2 STORY
1450 SAN PABLO AVE.
FURNITURE STORE1 STORY
1450 SAN PABLO AVE.
GAS
STA
TIO
N15
80S
AN P
ABLO
Figure 2Project Site Map
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
N
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
6
Description of Project
The project would demolish the existing building on the site to construct a mixed-use
building with the following two main components:
The largest portion of the building would be approximately 175,000 square feet
and have three to four floors of residential above a two-floor concrete podium (one
floor at ground level and one floor below ground). The podium would have
approximately 11,000 square feet of ground floor retail and/or restaurant space,
and 148 residential parking spaces (143 for apartments and five for townhomes)
and 25 commercial parking spaces. Above the podium would be 159 dwelling
units
The smaller, westernmost portion of the building would be made up of 11 three-
story townhomes of approximately 16,500 square feet, with six units having
internal parking spaces.
In total, the project would have a surface footprint of approximately 74,429 square feet
with the following breakdown:
Mixed-use portion: 49,296 square feet with 100 percent coverage. The building
would be 62 feet at the roofline.
Townhomes: 25,133 square feet with 70 percent coverage. The building would be
32 feet tall at the roofline.
Table 1 summarizes the proposed project, and Figures 3 through 9 depict the project site
and the project’s proposed building plans.
In general, the project consists of two main portions as described below, herein referred
to as the “mixed-use portion” and “townhomes”:
Mixed-use portion – A two-story concrete podium makes up the ground level and
underground level of the mixed-use portion. The ground level includes
approximately 11,000 square feet of retail space primarily fronting onto San Pablo
Street, but also wrapping around the corner to provide retail frontage along Jones
Street. Along Jones Street would also be entrances to the main lobby, a secure bike
parking area, service entrances, and the entry to the residential car parking
garage. The main lobby would have access to internal stairs and two elevators; a
residential entry and lobby located on the south side of the building would have
access to internal stairs and one elevator. The remainder of the ground floor of
this portion would consist of parking for residential and commercial uses. The
underground level of the podium would be for the remainder of the residential
parking. Access to the commercial parking area would be on San Pablo Avenue.
This portion of the building lies in the C-W zoning area, with the exception of 28
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
7
TABLE 1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
Description Amount
Lot Area
Mixed-use 49,296 sf (1.13 acres)
Townhomes 25,133 sf (0.58 acres)
Total 74,429 sf (1.71 acres)
Lot Coverage
Mixed-use 49,296 sf (100% lot cover)
Townhomes 17,570 sf (70% lot cover)
Total 66,866 sf (90% lot cover)
Floor Area Ratio
Mixed-use 3.55
Townhomes 0.9
Building Height
Mixed-use 62 ft
Townhomes 32 ft
Number of Stories
Mixed-use 5 stories
Townhomes 3 stories
Number of Dwelling Units
Mixed-use 48 studios; 47 1-bedrooms;
64 2-bedrooms = 159 total
Townhomes 11 townhomes
Total Open Space
Mixed-use 21,289 sf (podium courtyards, roof decks, and balconies)
Townhomes 4,403 sf (balconies and yards)
Number of Parking Spaces
Mixed-use Commercial 25 spaces (2 per 1,000 sf retail; 1 per 300 sf restaurant)
Mixed-use Residential 143 spaces (0.9 per unit)
Townhomes 11 spaces (1 per unit)
Number of Bicycle Parking Spaces
Commercial 6 spaces (1 per 2,000 sf of non-residential space)
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
8
TABLE 1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
Description Amount
Total Residential 184 spaces (1.08 per unit)
Floor Area Breakdown
Mixed-use
Amenities 4,488 sf
Bicycle storage and repair 1,423 sf
Circulation 20,577 sf
Commercial 10,904 sf
Lobby 1,750 sf
Residential 130,622 sf
Service 5,531 sf
Townhomes
Amenities 4,488 sf
Parking 1,200 sf
Residential 16,495 sf
Service 3,301 sf
Notes: sf = square feet; ft = feet
Source: 1500 San Pablo Avenue Plan Set, Pyatok, December 2015
Figure 3Perspectives
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
SAN PABLO AVE. - SOUTHEAST CORNER
PROPOSEDEXISTING
SAN PABLO AVE. SOUTHEAST CORNER RETAIL
CORNER - SAN PABLO AVE. & CEDAR ST
Level 217' - 0"
Level 327' - 0"
Level 437' - 0"
Level 547' - 0"
Top Plate56' - 0"
T/O Parapet (MaxHeight)62' - 0"
Level 12' - 8"
1A4.01
6'-0
"9'
-0"
10'-
0"10
'-0"
10'-
0"14
'-4"
2'-8
"
59'-
4"
6'-0
"
13.5" ROOF STRUCTURE +16.5" ROOF CRICKET +42" OSHA RAIL
ELEVATOR OVER-RUNSTCLS
BFC
AW
ASABD PMDMA MA
MT MR
MS
STC STC
STC
STC
BFCNOTE: LEVEL ELEVATIONS BASED OFF OFAVERAGE GRADE IN C-W ZONE
AVERAGE GRADE IN C-W ZONE:0' - 0" (35'-4" ABOVE SEA LEVEL)
MG(DASHED)
0 8 124
MGD
SOLAR DOMESTIC HOTWATER PANELS,TYP.
1A5.01
ELEVATOR OVER-RUN
STAIR TOWERSTAIR TOWER
TH Level 1-3' - 4"
Level 217' - 0"
Level 327' - 0"
Level 437' - 0"
Level 547' - 0"
Top Plate56' - 0"
T/O Parapet (MaxHeight)
62' - 0"
Level 12' - 8"
HEI
GH
TAB
OVE
AVG
.C-W
GR
ADE,
ATBL
DG
BEYO
ND
62'-
0"
59'-
4"
2A4.01
TH Level 26' - 4"
TH Level 316' - 0"
31'-
4"
MAX
BLD
GH
EIG
HT
ATLO
WES
TG
RAD
EIN
C-W
ZON
E
64'-
7"
0 8 124
9'-8
"9'
-8"
12'-
0"
9'-0
"14
'-4"
10'-
0"10
'-0"
10'-
0"9'
-0"
6'-0
"
ZONING BOUNDARY LINES
AVERAGE GRADE IN C-W ZONE:0' - 0" (35'-4" ABOVE SEA LEVEL)
HEI
GH
TAB
OVE
AVG
.C-W
GR
ADE
ON
JON
ES
51'-
0"
LOWEST GRADE IN C-W ZONE:-2' - 7" (32'-9" ABOVE SEA LEVEL)
14'-
4"
STCLS
BFC
AW
ASAS PMDSTC MG
STC
STC
LS
MA
NOTE: LEVEL ELEVATIONS BASED OFF OF AVERAGE GRADE IN C-W ZONE
ELEVATOR OVERRUN
Basement-6' - 4"
AW
2'-8
"
2A5.01
3A5.01
STAIR TOWER
(UPPER LEVEL BEYOND)
1A3.03
3/32" = 1'-0" 2NORTH ELEVATION (JONES ST)
Figure 4East Elevation
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
TH Level 1-3' - 4"
Level 217' - 0"
Level 327' - 0"
Level 437' - 0"
Level 547' - 0"
Top Plate56' - 0"
T/O Parapet (MaxHeight)62' - 0"
Level 12' - 8"
6' -
0"
2A4.01
TH Level 26' - 4"
TH Level 316' - 0"
6'-0
"9'
-0"
10'-
0"10
'-0"
10'-
0"14
'-4"
9'-0
"
10'-
8"9'
-8"
9'-8
"
6' HIGH FENCE
6' HIGH FENCE
NEIGHBORING BLDGSIN FRONT (SHOWN
TRANSLUCENT)
GAS STATION OUTLINE
59'-
4"
LOW GRADE IN C-W ZONE:- 2' - 7" (32'-9" ABOVE SEA LEVEL)
AVG. GRADE IN C-W ZONE:0' - 0" (37'-4" ABOVE SEA LEVEL)
MAX
BLD
GH
EIG
HT
ATLO
WES
TG
RAD
EIN
C-W
ZON
E
64'-
7"
HEI
GH
TAB
OVE
AVG
C-W
GR
ADE
62'-
0"
ELEVATOR OVERRUN
13.5" ROOF STRCT +16.5" ROOF CRICKET +42" OSHA RAIL
ZONING BOUNDARY
12'-
0"
LS
LSMS
BFC
AW
AW STC MR MA
MTMR
MG
LS
STC
STCSTC
MR
NOTE: LEVEL ELEVATIONS BASED OFF OF AVERAGE GRADE IN C-W ZONE
2'-8
"
0 8 124 Basement-6' - 4"
STC
1A3.03
MR
STAIR TOWER
TH Level 1-3' - 4"
TH Level 26' - 4"
TH Level 316' - 0"
TH Level 1-3' - 4"
1A4.01
TH Level 26' - 4"
TH Level 316' - 0"
TOW
NH
OU
SEH
EIG
HT
32'-
0"M
A X
0 8 124
12'-
0"9'
-8"
9'-8
"
STCLS MR AWSTCLS STCPMD MGD
FOR ROOF DECKS
2-STORY PORTION
FOR ROOF DECKS
2-STORY PORTION
4A5.01
4A5.01
3/32" = 1'-0" 2SOUTH ELEVATION
Figure 5West Elevation
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
TRUENORTH
PROJECTNORTH
10TH
ST.
(60'
WID
E)JONES ST. (60' WIDE)
SAN
PABL
O AV
E. (1
00' W
IDE)
CEDAR ST. (60' WIDE)
30' -
0"
30' - 0"
30' -
0"
50' - 0"
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
S14°
30' 0
0 E28
0.17'
S 75° 29' 54" W 266.69'
N 75° 29' 37" E 126.00'
S 14
° 33'
55" E
277.5
4'
N 14° 30' 00" W 2.62'
S 75° 29' 45" W 141.00'
COMMERCIALGARAGEENTRY
RESIDENTIALGARAGEENTRY
SETBACK20' - 0"
10' -
2"
10' -
0 1
/2"
O.H
.3'
- 0"
SETB
ACK
10' -
0"
SETB
ACK
4' -
0"
GAS STATION1580 SAN PABLO
DWELLING2-STORY
1041 CEDAR
DWELLING2-STORY
1037 CEDAR
APARTMENT2-STORY1033/1035
CEDAR
DWELLING1-STORY
1031 CEDAR
DWELLING1-STORY
1029 CEDAR
4-STORYAPARTMENT
BUILDING
5-STORYAPARTMENT
BUILDING
5-STORY APARTMENTBUILDING
3-ST
ORY
TOW
NHOU
SES
5-STORYAPARTMENT
BUILDING
PODIUMCOURTYARD
PODIUMCOURTYARD
RESIDENT AMENITYBUILDING
O.H.1' - 7"
RIGHT-OF-WAYCENTERLINE, TYP.
ACCESSORYSTRUCTURE
1-STORY
ACCESSORYSTRUCTURE
1-STORY
ACCESSORYSTRUCTURE
1-STORY
FH
FH
FH
FH
R 100' - 0"
R 100' - 0"
40' LOADING
79' - 0" 50' - 0"
60' -
0"
Figure 6Site Plan
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
A3.021
A3.012
1A4.01
1A4.01
2A4.01
2A4.01
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
SERVICE
LOBBY
LOBBY
STAIR
ELEV.
RESIDENTIAL PARKING(BASEMENT LEVEL)
29.00' FF
29.00' FF
29.00' FF
DRIVERAMP UP
29.00' FF
PED. RAMP
PED.RAMP
TRUENORTH
PROJECTNORTH
10TH
ST.
JONES ST.
SAN
PAB
LO A
VE.
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
0 8 164
PROP
ERTY
LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROP
ERTY
LINE
SETBACK
20' - 0" FRONT
78' -
0" T
YP.
CU
RB
CU
T
18' -
0" T
YP.
PEDESTRIAN EXIT &WALKWAY
PEDESTRIAN EXIT &WALKWAY
31.70' FF
TH B
TH A
TH B
TH B
TH A
TH A
TH B
TH B
TH A
TH A
TH A
31.70' FF
31.80' FF
31.80' FF
32.10' FF
32.10' FF
32.30' FF
32.30' FF
32.50' FF
32.50' FF
32.90' FF
29.00' FF
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
PRIVATE PATIO,TYP.
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
TH SPACE
PATIO, TYP.
BALCONY ABOVE,TYP.
10' -
0"
6' H. FENCE, TYP.12' - 0" 12' - 0"
SETB
ACK
10' -
0" R
EQ'D
11' -
7"
264'
- 7"
4' -
0"
20' - 0"
20' - 0" 25' - 2" 153' - 10"
143 SPACES (C-W) +5 TH SPACES (R-1A)
1A3.03
1A3.03
MOTORCYLCES
RENEWAL DATE
L T
IC
E
NS E D A R C H
I
TE
CPETER WALLER
S A
TA
T
EO F C A L I F
O
RN
I
C-23551
SHEET:
DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:
TITLE:
JOB NUMBER:
- PRELIMINARY - Not for Construction -
REVISION SCHEDULENO. ISSUE DATE
510-465-7010
ZONI
NG D
ISTR
ICT:
C-W
& R
1-A
415-450-6797
04/30/2017
DRC ANDZAB SUBMITTAL REV.
06/24/15
DRC ANDZAB SUBMITTAL REV. DRAFT
10/22/15
DRC SUBMITTAL REV. 12/02/15
1/16" = 1'-0"
12/1/2015 2:32:59 PM
1407KM/KY
PW12/02/2015
BASEMENT/ TH LEVEL 1
A1.00
1500
SAN
PABL
OA V
E.BE
RKEL
EY, C
A 94
702
San Francisco, CA 94107
4TerraInvestments.com95 Federal Street, Suite D
1/16" = 1'-0" 1Basement / TH Ground Level
Figure 7Ground Floor - Townhomes / Basement - Mixed-Use Building
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
A3.021
A3.012
A3.011
TRUENORTH
PROJECTNORTH
10TH
ST.
JONES ST.
SAN
PAB
LO A
VE.
1A4.01
1A4.01
2A4.01
2A4.01
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
COMMERCIAL(+/- 7,700 SF)
E
E E
RESIDENTIAL PARKING(LEVEL 1)
COMMERCIALPARKING
25 TOTAL SPACES
143 SPACES (C-W) +5 TH SPACES (R-1A)
TH B
TH A
TH B
TH B
TH A
TH A
TH B
TH B
TH A
TH A
TH A
BIKES =184 TOTAL
RECYCLE/TRASH(COMM.)
(SER
VIC
E C
OR
RID
OR
)LO
BBY
RECYCLE/TRASH
(RESID.)
BIKERACK
0 8 164
PROP
ERTY
LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROP
ERTY
LINE
10' -
0"
11' -
0"
BIKE RACK
BALCONY,TYP.
COMMERCIAL(+/- 3,200 SF)
EXIT
CT.
9' -
4"
CU
RB
CU
T
20'-
0" 2'-0
"COMMERCIALGARAGEENTRY
6' HIGH FENCE6' HIGH FENCE
SIDEWALK13' - 0"
CURB CUT
20' - 0"
BIKEREPAIR
GATE
RESIDENTIALGARAGE ENTRY
1'-6
"
TURN-AROUND
BIKE RACK
(LEVEL 1.0)
(LEVEL 1.0)
RESIDENTIAL ENTRY
RESIDENTIALENTRY
37.50' FF
37.83' FF
37.75' FF
37.75' FF
38.00' FF
38.00'FF
38.00' FF
38.00' FF
DRIVERAMP DN.
RAMPDN.
38.00' FF
38.00' FF
37.75' FF
37.75' FF
RECYCLE/TRASH
SERVICE
OPEN
OPEN
PEDESTRIAN EXIT &WALKWAY
FIRE DEPT.ACCESS STAIR
20' - 0" 65' - 0" 3' - 0"
4'-0
"
20' - 0"
76'-
10"
27'-
4"15
9'-1
"14
'-3"
LEASING/ MAINLOBBY
SERVICE
6' - 0"
6'-0
"
PROJECTION2' - 0" ARCH'L
SETBACK
20' - 0"
30' - 0" 19' - 0" 22' - 0" 19' - 0" 28' - 0" 19' - 0"
1A3.03
1A3.03
49' - 4"
31' - 8"
35' - 0"
65' - 11"
25' - 2" 83' - 10" 32' - 9" 51' - 4" 53' - 6"
11'-
7"26
4'-7
"
RENEWAL DATE
L T
IC
E
NS E D A R C H
I
TE
CPETER WALLER
S A
TA
T
EO F C A L I F
O
RN
I
C-23551
SHEET:
DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:
TITLE:
JOB NUMBER:
- PRELIMINARY - Not for Construction -
REVISION SCHEDULENO. ISSUE DATE
510-465-7010
ZONI
NG D
ISTR
ICT:
C-W
& R
1-A
415-450-6797
04/30/2017
DRC ANDZAB SUBMITTAL REV.
06/24/15
DRC ANDZAB SUBMITTAL REV. DRAFT
10/22/15
DRC SUBMITTAL REV. 12/02/15
1/16" = 1'-0"
12/1/2015 2:33:04 PM
1407KM/KY
PW12/02/2015
LEVEL 1
A1.01
1500
SAN
PABL
OA V
E.BE
RKEL
EY, C
A 94
702
San Francisco, CA 94107
4TerraInvestments.com95 Federal Street, Suite D
1/16" = 1'-0" 1Level 1
Figure 8Ground Floor - Mixed-Use Building
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
A3.021
A3.012
A3.011
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
C-W
R-1A
TRUENORTH
PROJECTNORTH
10TH
ST.
JONES ST.
SAN
PAB
LO A
VE.
1A4.01
1A4.01
2A4.01
2A4.01
2C
2A
2C 2D
2E2B
2A
2A 2A
2A
1B
2A
2A
1A
2D 2A
1B
1B
S
S
S
1A
1A
1A
2A
1A
1A
2D
1A
1A
1B
S
S
1B1B
CORRIDOR
CORRIDOR
CO
RRID
OR
0 8 164
PROP
ERTY
LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
PROP
ERTY
LINE
BRID
GE
TYPICALEXTERIORBALCONIES -6'D X 10'W
WINDSCREEN
ST
79' - 0" 188' - 0"
60'-
0"22
0'-2
"
277'
-6"
79' - 0" 50' - 0" 137' - 8"
2A
2A
1A
1A
1A
S
ST
1A3.03
1A3.03
RENEWAL DATE
L T
IC
E
NS E D A R C H
I
TE
CPETER WALLER
S A
TA
T
EO F C A L I F
O
RN
I
C-23551
SHEET:
DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DATE:SCALE:
TITLE:
JOB NUMBER:
- PRELIMINARY - Not for Construction -
REVISION SCHEDULENO. ISSUE DATE
510-465-7010
ZONI
NG D
ISTR
ICT:
C-W
& R
1-A
415-450-6797
04/30/2017
DRC ANDZAB SUBMITTAL REV.
06/24/15
DRC ANDZAB SUBMITTAL REV. DRAFT
10/22/15
DRC SUBMITTAL REV. 12/02/15
1/16" = 1'-0"
12/1/2015 2:33:23 PM
1407KM/KY
PW12/02/2015
LEVEL 4
A1.04
1500
SAN
PABL
OA V
E.BE
RKEL
EY, C
A 94
702
San Francisco, CA 94107
4TerraInvestments.com95 Federal Street, Suite D
1/16" = 1'-0" 1Level 4
Figure 9Typical Floorplate - Mixed-Use Building
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
16
residential parking spaces (5 for the townhomes) in the basement level and 25
residential spaces in the ground floor level, as well as the podium courtyard
directly above this area.
Above the ground floor podium level of the mixed-use portion would be three to
four levels of wood frame construction, consisting of 159 residential units,
including: studios, large studios, and one-bedroom and two-bedroom units.
Building amenities would include a gym, three roof decks, and two common
courtyards with lounges and outdoor kitchen areas with barbeques.
Townhomes – The townhomes make up the western portion of the site and would
consist of a single row of 11 units, extending the full length of the site from Jones
Street to the project boundary in the south. This portion of the building would
have a 20-foot setback from the western property line and the units would face
10th
Street. Six of the units would have their own parking spaces on the ground
floor (another five spaces for townhome residents would be in the residential
parking lot in the podium of the mixed-use portion).
Vehicular Access and Parking
The podium levels of the mixed-use portion of the building (ground floor and basement)
would provide 143 parking spaces, including four Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
spaces for the residents of the apartment building, plus five spaces for townhome
residents, and would be accessible from Jones Street. Six townhome units would have
parking in individual garages within their units, accessible from 10th
Street. Overall, the
project would provide 154 on-site residential parking spaces. The residential parking
spaces for the mixed-use portion would be provided at a ratio of 0.9 space per residential
unit and for the townhomes at a ratio of 1 space per unit.
The podium levels would also provide 25 parking spaces for commercial uses, including
two ADA spaces. These commercial parking spaces would be accessed from San Pablo
Avenue.
The project proposes to eliminate existing curb cuts (on Jones Street and San Pablo
Avenue) and construct new curb cuts (on Jones Street for garage access, and on the east
side of 10th
Street to accommodate shared driveways to some of the townhomes), which
would affect site access and on-street parking. Overall, the project would reduce on-street
parking in the vicinity by four spaces and add one on-street loading space. The loading
area would be located along Jones Street near the service entry.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
17
Bicycle Access and Parking
The proposed project is located near several streets that provide designated bicycle
facilities, including bike lanes on Delaware Street and Gilman Street, bicycle boulevards on
Virginia Street and 9th Street, as well as the off-street Ohlone Greenway.
The project would provide a bike room with 184 long-term bicycle parking spaces and a
bike maintenance and repair station for apartment residents. The bike room would be
accessed from the Jones Street residential entry. The project would also provide six bike
racks along the sidewalk (three on Jones Street and three on San Pablo Avenue) to provide
12 bicycle parking spaces for short-term use. The bike racks would be located between
tree wells, and would therefore not conflict with the pedestrian path of travel.
Pedestrian Access
Pedestrian access to the mid-rise apartment residential units would be provided through
the two proposed residential lobbies located on the Jones Street and San Pablo Avenue
frontages. Pedestrian access to the townhouses would be provided through individual
ground floor unit entrances on 10th
Street. The ground-floor commercial/retail uses would
have independent pedestrian entrances located on the building’s San Pablo Avenue
frontage.
Emergency Access
Emergency vehicle access to the project site would be provided from San Pablo Avenue,
10th
Street, and Jones Street. The project does not propose modifications to the roadway
network or major modifications (circulation patterns or design features) to streets
adjacent to the project site (Cedar Street, 10th
Street, San Pablo Avenue, or Jones
Street).Secure bicycle parking for residents is included in a dedicated bicycle parking area
of approximately 1,400 square feet on the ground floor of the mixed-use portion,
adjacent to the main lobby. It includes secure spaces for 184 bicycles and a bike repair
area. For public use, two racks for two bikes each would be located on the sidewalk along
Jones Street and one rack for two bikes would be located on the sidewalk on San Pablo
Avenue.
Landscape and Design
Along Jones Street and 10th
Street, there are several existing trees and large shrubs within
the property boundary and adjacent to the public sidewalk. These would be removed and
replaced with trees appropriate to the character and existing landscape palette in the
neighborhood. The existing street trees along San Pablo, adjacent to the site, would
remain and receive enlarged tree wells. The mixed-use portion of the building would
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
18
include landscaping on the podium-level courtyards and on the rooftop decks. A mixture
of raised planters, vegetated roof areas, decking pavers, outdoor kitchens with barbeques,
and windscreens would be provided on the podium courtyard and rooftop areas. The
townhomes would have trees and vegetation at the ground level in front of the units as
well as concrete flow-through planters for stormwater, permeable pavers for entry paths,
and permeable driveway medians.
The project is contemporary in design, utilizing a variety of materials including, but not
limited to: cement plaster; composite wood accent siding; standing seam metal accent
siding; concrete walls and columns; dark anodized aluminum windows and bifold doors;
dark anodized aluminum and glass storefront glazing at the exterior street facades; and
painted metal doors and garage doors.
Population and Employment
Based on California Department of Finance 2010 data, which identifies an average 2.17
persons per Berkeley household,1
the project generates up to 369 new residents. The
nearly 11,000 square feet of commercial space would generate approximately 37
employees.2
Utilities
On-site utilities include gas, energy, domestic water, wastewater, and storm drainage. All
on-site utilities would be designed in accordance with applicable codes and current
engineering practices. The project is not anticipated to require any significant utility or
infrastructure improvements but will pay applicable fees in accordance with the fee
schedule at the time of building permit issuance.
Project Construction
Schedule
Project construction would begin with the demolition of the existing building on the site.
Demolition would involve abating any hazards present within the building, demolishing
and removing the existing structure, and removing the existing foundation slabs and
underground utilities. The project would be constructed in the following general phases:
1
U.S. Census Bureau, 2010. Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2010 Census Summary File 1,
Table DP-1. Accessed at http://factfinder.census.gov/
2
Using a standard generation rate of 300 square feet per employee, as per the City of Berkeley’s
Downtown Specific Plan EIR, 2009, pp4–207
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
19
Demolition of existing buildings and staging: approximately 2 months.
Grading and excavation: approximately 2 months.
Construction of both buildings: approximately 16 months.
Commissioning, testing, and final inspection: approximately 2 months.
Project construction is estimated to take approximately 22 months total and is estimated
to begin in March 2017, with building occupancy planned for spring 2019.
Equipment and Staging
Typical equipment that would be used during construction would include, but is not
limited to, concrete/industrial saws, bulldozers, backhoes, graders, loaders, generators,
excavator, dump trucks, tower crane and air compressors. The project does not involve
any pile driving. All construction equipment, employee vehicles, and import material
would be staged on site or nearby.
Spoils, Debris, and Materials
Construction would require demolition and removal of the existing building and paved
features at the project site. All demolition material would be disposed of off-site.
Excavation will be required for the foundation, footings and utility services. For the
townhomes, an estimated 500 cubic yards of soil will be excavated. For the mixed-use
portion of the building, which includes an underground podium level, an estimated 7,900
cubic yards will be removed. Per the geotechnical report, existing soil will be over-
excavated to provide 24" of non-expansive material below the floor finish, resulting in
2,300 cubic yards of excavated material for removal. In total, 10,700 cubic yards of
material will be excavated.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
20
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CRITERIA
Article 19 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300 to
15333), includes a list of classes of projects that have been determined to not have a
significant effect on the environment and as a result, are exempt from review under
CEQA.
Class 32 (Infill Development)
Among the classes of projects that are exempt from CEQA review are those projects that
are specifically identified as urban infill development. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332
defines infill development (or Class 32 exemptions) as being applicable to projects
characterized as infill development meeting the following conditions:
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all
applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and
regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more
than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened
species.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to
traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The analysis presented in the following section provides substantial evidence that the
project properly qualifies for an exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as a
Class 32 urban infill development, and would not have a significant effect on the
environment.
Exceptions
Even if a project is ordinarily exempt under any of the potential categorical exemptions,
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 provides specific instances where exceptions to
otherwise applicable exemptions apply. Exceptions to a categorical exemption apply in
the following circumstances, effectively nullifying a CEQA categorical exemption:
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
21
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the
project is to be located. A project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on
the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant.
Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the
project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical
concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to
law by federal, state, or local agencies.
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the
cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over
time is significant.
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where
there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on
the environment due to unusual circumstances.
(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which
may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees,
historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway
officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to
improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative
declaration or certified EIR.
(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project
located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section
65962.5 of the Government Code.
(f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project
which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource.
The following analysis also presents substantial evidence that there are no exceptions that
apply to the project or its site, that the project would not have a significant effect on the
environment, and that the Class 32 exemption remains applicable.
City of Berkeley – Standard Conditions of Approval for All Projects
The City of Berkeley’s Zoning Officer approves Standard Conditions of Approval (SCAs) for
all projects and amends these conditions as needed. The SCAs incorporate development
policies and standards from various adopted plans, policies, and ordinances (such as the
Berkeley Municipal Code, California Building Code, and Uniform Fire Code, among others),
which have been found to substantially mitigate environmental effects.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
22
These SCAs are incorporated into projects as conditions of approval, regardless of the
determination of a project’s environmental impacts. As applicable, the SCAs are adopted
as requirements of an individual project when it is approved by the City, and are designed
to, and will, avoid or substantially reduce a project’s environmental effects.
In reviewing project applications, the City determines which SCAs apply based upon the
zoning district, community plan, and the type of permits/approvals required for the
project. Depending on the specific characteristics of the project type and/or project site,
the City will determine which SCAs apply to a specific project. Because these SCAs are
mandatory City requirements imposed on a city-wide basis, environmental analyses
assume that these SCAs will be imposed and implemented by the project, and are not
imposed as mitigation measures under CEQA.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
23
CEQA EXEMPTION CHECKLIST
The following analysis provides substantial evidence to support a conclusion that the
project qualifies for an exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as a Class 32
urban infill development, and would not have a significant effect on the environment.
Criterion Section 15332(a): General Plan and Zoning Consistency
Yes No
The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all
applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and
regulations.
General Plan
The project site is composed of a single lot with two separate zoning designations (see
Figure 2) and two separate General Plan land use designations. The eastern portion of the
site, which is adjacent to San Pablo Avenue, is designated as West Berkeley Avenue
Commercial. The West Berkeley Avenue Commercial area is typically characterized by
pedestrian-oriented commercial development and multi-family residential buildings and is
well served by public transit. Appropriate uses for Avenue Commercial include
commercial, residential, office, community service and institutional, with a maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of three (3).
The mixed-use portion of the building would be within this part of the site and would
consist of a five-story mixed-use development, with ground floor commercial space, three-
to-four floors of residential development and underground parking, consistent with the
intent of the land use designation. This portion would have a FAR of 3.55,3
which is above
the FAR of 3.0 permitted by the General Plan regulations but allowable with a density
bonus.
The western portion of site is designated as Low Medium Density Residential, or LMDR.
These areas generally consist of single family homes and small multi-family buildings of
two or three units. Appropriate uses include residential, community services, schools,
home occupations, recreational uses, and open space and institutional facilities. The plan
outlines that building intensity will range from one to ten dwelling units per net acre, not
including secondary units, and the population density will generally not exceed 22
persons per acre.
3
175,068 total gross sf / 49,296 sf lot area = 3.55
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
24
The western part of the building would be within this area and consist of a row of 11
three-story townhomes, each with two or three bedrooms. This is consistent with the
intent of the land use designation and the character of the residential component of the
neighborhood. The townhomes would have a density of just over 24 dwelling units per net
acre. The project has requested a density bonus waiver to permit the additional units.
Zoning
The project site has two applicable zoning districts. The eastern portion of the site is
adjacent to San Pablo Avenue and is zoned West Berkeley District Commercial (C-W). The
western portion of the site is zoned Limited Two-Family Residential District (R1-A).
The intent behind the C-W zoning designation is to increase the opportunities for housing
and mixed-use developments in commercial areas to support local retailing, pedestrian-
oriented uses and the use of transit lines in a manner that is compatible with adjacent
commercial, residential, and industrial areas.
The intent of the R-1A zoning is to recognize and protect the existing pattern of low
medium density residential areas and to protect properties from unreasonable obstruction
of light and air from adjacent properties. The R-1A zone allows for a wide range of uses
supportive to its stated intent, including single-family and multi-family dwellings.
The project would demolish the existing building on the site to construct approximately
11,000 square feet of ground-level, pedestrian-oriented, active storefront retail use on San
Pablo Avenue, wrapping around the corner to provide retail frontage along Jones Street as
well. Above this would be three to four floors of residential units. Along the western
portion of the site and fronting on 10th
Street would be a row of 11 three-story
townhomes.
The project is designed to comply with all design standards and regulations of the
Planning Code, inclusive of requested density bonus waivers, as described below:
The mixed-use portion has a total of 175,296 gross square feet over an area of
49,296 square feet, giving it a floor area ratio (FAR) of 3.55. The density bonus would
allow for a FAR of 4, which is above the FAR of 3 allowed by code. There are a total of
11 townhomes, which is two more than the standard allowed by code, but allowable
under the density bonus waiver.
The standard allowable height for the mixed-use portion of the building is 50 feet. The
density bonus allows for an additional story. The mixed-use portion is proposed to
have a roofline of 60 feet and with an additional 2 feet for the parapet. This is
requested to allow for OSHA-required railing for maintenance of rooftop mechanical
equipment and the roof deck. The standard allowable height for the townhomes is 28
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
25
feet and up to 35 feet with an Administrative Use Permit. The building height for the
townhomes is proposed for 32 feet and the project is requesting an Administrative
Use Permit for the additional height.
The mixed-use portion proposes up to five above-ground stories, which is one more
story than the code maximum. The density bonus would allow for an additional story.
The townhomes are three stories in height, consistent with local requirements.
The mixed-use portion does not have any setbacks and none are required. The
townhomes are in line with the following setback requirements: 4 feet on the south
property line side, 10 feet on the Jones Street side, and 20 feet from the front
(fronting on 10th
Street).
Standard code requirement for parking for the mixed-use portion is: one space per
residential unit, two spaces for every 1,000 square feet of retail, and one space for
every 300 square feet of restaurant space. The mixed-use portion proposes the
following parking allocation: 143 total parking spaces for residential use (0.9 parking
space per residential unit)4
and 25 parking spaces for commercial uses (one space per
436 square feet of commercial space)5
. A density bonus waiver is requested for the
mixed-use portion parking requirement, both to allow the provision of less than the
required amount of parking per the Municipal Code and to allow for the provision of
spaces in the portion of the lot zoned R-1A for uses on the portion of the lot zoned
CW-1. The townhomes are provided with one parking space per unit (11 total), in
compliance with local regulations. A total of 154 spaces are provided for residential
land uses and 25 parking spaces for commercial uses.
With a minimum of 21,289 square feet of usable open space (including private open
space on each residential floor and open space on the podium and roof-top open
space) meets or exceeds the minimum usable open space requirement of 6,360
square feet.
Given these facts, the project meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(a) as
being consistent with the General Plan and applicable zoning regulations for the site.
4
143 parking spaces proposed / 153 residential units = 0.9 parking space per unit in the mixed-use
building
5
10,903 sf of commercial use / 25 parking spaces proposed = one space per 436 sf of commercial space
in the mixed-use building
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
26
Criterion Section 15332(b): Project Location, Size, and Context
Yes No
The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more
than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses
The project is located within the incorporated limits of the City of Berkeley on a site of
approximately 1.71 acres in area, and is entirely surrounded by properties developed with
urban land uses and/or paved public streets (see Figure 2). CEQA defines a qualified
urban use as, “…any residential, commercial, public institutional, transit or transportation
passenger facility, or retail use, or any combination of those uses.”6
Given these facts, the
project adheres to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(b) as a site of no more
than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
Criterion Section 15332(c): Endangered, Rare of Threatened Species
Yes No
The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
As shown at Figure 2, the project site is almost completely covered with existing buildings
and pavement, with the exception of several non-native, small trees and large shrubs on
the perimeter of the site, adjacent to the internal edge of the public sidewalk. The project
site is located in the urbanized area of Berkeley’s flatlands, which is not known to have
any special-status species or ecological communities, and which does not have any areas
designated for conservation or protection.7
Therefore, the existing vegetation on site does
not contribute to ecological communities upon which wild animals, birds, plants, fish,
amphibians, and invertebrates depend on for their conservation or protection, nor does it
contain habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. Given these facts, the project
adheres to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(c).
6
California, State of. 2016. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. California Environmental Quality
Act Statutes and Guidelines, § 21072, pp. 8
7
Berkeley, City of. 2001. Draft General Plan EIR, Chapter K: Natural Resources, pp. 227-228
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
27
Criterion Section 15332(d): Traffic
Yes No
Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic.
As discussed in detail below, the project would not result in any significant traffic or
transportation-related impacts. The proposed project would generate 21 new AM peak
hour trips and 48 new PM peak hour trips, and would not result in any project-level or
cumulative impacts. Thus, there is no exception to the Class 32 exemption relative to
traffic or transportation criteria.
Intersection Level of Service
The traffic impact analysis prepared for the project complies with the City of Berkeley
Guidelines for Development of Traffic Impact Reports8
and the Caltrans Guide for the
Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Both AM and PM peak hour conditions were
evaluated for the following scenarios:
Existing Conditions: this scenario represents the existing conditions of the
transportation system, corresponding to when the traffic counts were collected
at study intersections in December 2014.
Existing Plus Project Conditions: this scenario adds the net new project trips to
the Existing Condition scenario.
Cumulative without Conditions: this scenario represents the year 2040
conditions without the project.
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions: this scenario represents the year 2040
conditions with the project.
Traffic operations were evaluated at the following six intersections (locations where the
project is most likely to have potential impacts):
1. San Pablo Avenue and University Avenue (signal);
2. San Pablo Avenue and Cedar Street/Hopkins Street (signal);
3. San Pablo Avenue and Jones Street (two-way, stop control);
4. San Pablo Avenue and Gilman Street (signal);
5. 6th Street and University Avenue (signal); and
6. 6th Street and Jones Street (two-way, stop control).
Intersections were analyzed according to the Highway Capacity Manual (2000 HCM)
methodology, which uses quantitative measures of traffic conditions (turning movement
8
Guidelines for Development of Traffic Impact Reports, City of Berkeley, September 2005.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
28
volumes, signal timing information, roadway geometric configurations) to determine
capacity, average delay, and other operational performance measures at an intersection,
of which the most widely used is the Level of Service (LOS). LOS provides a qualitative
description of the performance of an intersection based on average delay per vehicle. See
Appendix A for detailed outputs of the intersection analyses performed.
For signalized intersections, intersection LOS and delay are reported as an average across
all movements and approaches. For unsignalized intersections, intersection LOS and delay
are reported for the both the intersection as an average and the worst stop-controlled
approach. Intersection LOS ranges from LOS A, which indicates free flow or excellent
conditions with short delays, to LOS F, which indicates congested or overloaded
conditions with extremely long delays.
The following presents the City of Berkeley’s significance thresholds for signalized and
unsignalized intersections, as documented in the City of Berkeley Guidelines for
Development of Traffic Impact Reports:
Signalized Intersections:
If an intersection operating at LOS A, B, C, or D deteriorates to LOS E with an
added average intersection delay of 2 seconds.
If an intersection operating at LOS E continues to operate at LOS E with an added
average intersection delay of 3 seconds.
If an intersection operating at LOS E deteriorates to LOS F with an added average
delay of 3 seconds.
If an intersection operating at LOS F continues to operate at LOS F with an added
average intersection delay of 3 seconds and an increase in the V/C ratio by 0.01.
Unsignalized Intersection:
If a movement operating at LOS F continues to operate at LOS F, the peak hour
signal warrant is met, and a minimum of 10 vehicles are added to the LOS F
movement.
Existing Conditions
Traffic counts, including motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian counts, were collected at
each of the study intersections for the AM peak hour (7:00 to 9:00 a.m.) and the PM peak
hour (4:00 PM to 6:00 p.m.) on December 18, 2014 (driveway counts at the existing site
were conducted on October 1, 2015). Study intersections were evaluated for the peak one
hour of each peak period, which corresponds to 8:00 a.m. and 4:45 p.m. Based on the
volumes of these peak hours and the roadway configurations, the Level of Service (LOS) at
the study intersections was calculated using the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
methodologies.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
29
Table 2 presents the existing LOS for all six study intersections. The four signalized
intersections currently operate at LOS D or C in the AM and PM peak hours, while the stop-
controlled approaches of the unsignalized intersections operate at LOS B or C.
TABLE 2 EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Intersection Controla
Peak
Hour Delayb
LOSb
San Pablo Ave/University Ave Signal
AM 40.9 D
PM 51.5 D
San Pablo Ave/Cedar St-Hopkins St Signal
AM 25.8 C
PM 40.3 D
San Pablo Ave/Jones St Two-way Stop
AM 0.6 (13.3) A (B)
PM 0.8 (22.2) A (C)
San Pablo Ave/Gilman St Signal
AM 44.7 D
PM 45.9 D
6th St/University Ave Signal
AM 35.6 D
PM 39.9 D
6th St/Jones St Two-way Stop
AM 1.1 (13.5) A (B)
PM 1.4 (20.2) A (C)
a
Signal = signalized intersection; Two-way Stop = unsignalized intersection that is controlled by stop signs on
two approaches.
b
Delay and LOS presented as average intersection for signalized intersections and as average intersection (worst
stop-controlled approach) for two-way stop-controlled intersections.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016.
Project-Generated Traffic
In order to estimate the amount of vehicular traffic the project would add to the local
roadway network, the West Berkeley Trip Generation Tool was updated to reflect the latest
rates in the 9th
Edition of the International Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual.
Table 3 presents the proposed land use and its resulting trip generation. The subtotal in
Table 3 reflects both passerby and modal reductions (modal reductions match those
documented in the West Berkeley Trip Generation Tool). Existing driveway counts were
collected during the AM and PM peak hours to determine the number of trips the existing
site generates. These existing trips were subtracted from the subtotal, resulting in net
new trips. These trip reductions (passerby, modal, and existing) are consistent with the
allowed trip generation reductions documented in the City of Berkeley Guidelines for
Development of Traffic Impact Reports. The proposed land use would generate 21 new AM
peak hour trips and 48 new PM peak hour trips.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
30
TABLE 3 AUTOMOBILE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
Land Use Unitsa
ITE
Code
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Mid-rise Apartment 159 DU 223b
9 19 28 21 16 37
Townhouse 11 DU 230c
1 2 3 2 1 3
General Commercial 8.9 KSF 820d
2 2 4 8 9 17
Quality Restaurant 2 KSF 931e
1 0 1 5 2 7
Subtotal 13 23 36 36 28 64
Existing Trips f
11 4 15 6 10 16
Net New Trips
(Adjusted Project – Existing Trips) 2 19 21 30 18 48
a
DU = Dwelling Units, KSF = 1,000 square feet.
b
ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 223 (Mid-rise Apartment):
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.30*(X) (31% in, 69% out)
PM Peak Hour: T = 0.39*(X) (58% in, 42% out)
Passerby Reduction: 0%
Modal Reduction: 38% c
ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 230 (Townhouse):
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.44*(X) (17% in, 83% out)
PM Peak Hour: T = 0.52*(X) (67% in, 33% out)
Passerby Reduction: 0%
Modal Reduction: 38% d ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 820 (General Commercial):
Daily: 89.95
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.96*(X) (62% in, 38% out)
PM Peak Hour: T = 3.71*(X) (48% in, 52% out)
Passerby Reduction: 34%
Modal Reduction: 18% e
ITE Trip Generation (9th Edition) land use category 932 (Quality Restaurant):
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.81*(X) (82% in, 18% out)
PM Peak Hour: T = 7.49*(X) (67% in, 33% out)
Passerby Reduction: 44%
Modal Reduction: 18% f
Existing driveway counts collected on October 1, 2015
Source: Fehr and Peers, 2016, ITE Trip Generation Manual (9th
Edition)
Trip generation by travel mode was also generated, as presented in Table 4. Trips by
mode were calculated based off the mode shares documented in the West Berkeley
Circulation Master Plan.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
31
TABLE 4 TRIP GENERATION BY TRAVEL MODE
Mode Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour
Automobilea
36 64
Transit 11 15
Bike 6 9
Walk 8 13
Other 3 3
Total Trips 64 104
Total Person Trips 77 134
a
Automobile trips represent total project generated trips. Table 3 presents total net new trips in the AM and PM
peak hour (i.e., with trips associated with the existing land uses to be demolished removed).
Source: West Berkeley Circulation Master Plan, Fehr & Peers.
Congestion Management Program Evaluation
The Alameda County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires assessment of
impacts to regional roadways for projects that would generate more than 100 net new PM
peak hour automobile trips. As shown in Table 3, the project would generate less than
100 net new PM peak hour automobile trips, and does not require a CMP evaluation.
Existing Plus Project Intersection Analysis
The intersection operation results for Existing and Existing Plus Project conditions are
presented in Table 5. With the addition of the project traffic, the LOS for each of the study
intersections would not degrade in either the AM or the PM peak hour. Signalized
intersections would experience an increase in average vehicle delay of no more than
2 seconds. Unsignalized intersections would experience an increase in delay for the stop-
controlled approaches of no more than 1 second.
Since the LOS would not degrade for any of the study intersections and all intersections
operate at LOS D or better, the project would not cause a significant impact under Existing
Plus Project conditions.
Cumulative Conditions
Year 2040 Cumulative traffic volumes were developed from the Alameda County
Transportation Commission’s (ACTC) travel demand model. Vehicle delay and LOS results
were determined for the Cumulative Without Project and Cumulative Plus Project
conditions based on the ACTC forecasts for the six intersections evaluated. The ACTC
Year 2040 model includes planned changes to the roadway network and land use
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
32
TABLE 5 EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Intersection Controla
Peak
Hour
Existingb
Existing
Plus Projectb
Significant
Impact?
Delay
LOS
V/C Delay
LOS
V/C
San Pablo
Ave/
University Ave
Signal
AM 40.9 D 0.85
41.2 D 0.85
No
PM 51.5 D 0.88
52.0 D 0.88
No
San Pablo
Ave/ Cedar
St-Hopkins St
Signal
AM 25.8 C 0.89
26.2 C 0.90
No
PM 40.3 D 0.94
42.3 D 0.94
No
San Pablo
Ave/ Jones St
Two-way
Stop
AM 0.6
(13.3) A (B)
- 0.7
(12.8) A (B)
- No
PM 0.8
(22.2) A (C)
- 1.1
(21.9) A (C)
- No
San Pablo
Ave/ Gilman
St
Signal
AM 44.7 D 0.95
44.7 D 0.95
No
PM 45.9 D 0.96
46.6 D 0.97
No
6th
St/University
Ave
Signal
AM 35.6 D 0.86
35.6 D 0.86
No
PM 39.9 D 0.92
39.9 D 0.92
No
6th St/Jones
St
Two-way
Stop
AM 1.1
(13.5) A (B)
- 1.3
(13.6) A (B)
- No
PM 1.4
(20.2) A (C)
- 1.5
(20.7) B (C)
- No
a
Signal = signalized intersection; Two-way Stop = unsignalized intersection that is controlled by stop signs on
two approaches.
b
Delay and LOS presented as average intersection for signalized intersections and as average intersection (worst
stop-controlled approach) for two-way stop-controlled intersections.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016
development consistent with the West Berkeley Land Use Plan. Table 6 presents the LOS
results for both conditions, and compares them against Berkeley’s significance criteria.
While the project would increase delay at signalized intersections anticipated to operate at
LOS E or LOS F in 2040, it is estimated that the project would not increase average
intersection delay by three or more seconds for any of the signalized intersections in
either the AM or PM peak hours.
For unsignalized intersections to trigger a significant impact, the project must add ten
vehicles to a movement operating at LOS F and meet peak hour signal warrants. In the PM
peak hour, the project is expected to generate ten trips for the eastbound movement at
San Pablo Avenue/Jones Street, which would trigger the 10 vehicle threshold. However,
this intersection would not meet peak hour signal warrants. Therefore, significant effect is
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
33
TABLE 6 FUTURE AND FUTURE PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Intersection Controla
Peak
Hour
Cumulative Without
Projectb
Cumulative Plus
Projectb
Significant
Impact? Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS V/C
San Pablo
Ave/
University Ave
Signal
AM 59.7 E 1.01 60.2 E 1.01 No
PM 100.6 F 1.15 100.9 F 1.15 No
San Pablo
Ave/ Cedar
St-Hopkins St
Signal
AM 51.1 D 1.10 52.3 D 1.11 No
PM 82.4 F 1.21 84.0 F 1.22 No
San Pablo
Ave/ Jones St
Two-way
Stop
AM 1.0
(18.3)
A
(C) -
1.1
(18.3)
A
(C) - No
PM 10.5
(>200) C (F) -
>10.5
(>200)c
≥B
(F)c
- Nod
San Pablo
Ave/ Gilman
St
Signal
AM 106.4 F 1.25 106.2 F 1.25 No
PM 126.2 F 1.30 127.5 F 1.31 No
6th St/
University Ave Signal
AM 57.7 E 1.19 57.7 E 1.19 No
PM 82.9 F 1.32 82.7 F 1.32 No
6th St/ Jones
St
Two-way
Stop
AM 1.5
(15.6)
A
(C) -
1.6
(15.6)
A
(C) - No
PM 3.0
(36.9) C (E) -
3.1
(38.3) C (E) - No
a
Signal = signalized intersection; Two-way Stop = unsignalized intersection that is controlled by stop signs on
two approaches.
b
Delay and LOS presented as average intersection for signalized intersections and as average intersection (worst
stop-controlled approach) for two-way stop-controlled intersections. Volume-to Capacity (V/C) ratio is not
expressed for unsignalized intersections.
c
Average intersection delay cannot be expressed as westbound capacity is estimated as zero.
d
It is estimated that the peak hour signal warrant would not be met.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2016 (See Appendix B)
not triggered at any of the study intersections in either the 2040 AM or PM peak hours for
the proposed land use.
Transit Travel Time
The project site is served by several local AC Transit bus routes along San Pablo Avenue.
Traffic generated by the project would not result in a noticeable increase in congestion
along this corridor, and the project would have a very minor effect on transit service
within the area. The estimated increase in travel time would be within the variability in
travel time already experienced by each bus on these corridors, and would constitute a
less-than-significant impact.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
34
Pedestrian, Bicycle and Vehicle Safety
Existing pedestrian activity adjacent to the proposed residential garage on Jones Street
and townhouse driveways on 10th
Street is minimal, with fewer than ten pedestrians
observed using these sidewalks during the peak hours. As such, there would be sufficient
capacity available to accommodate the expected incremental increase in pedestrian traffic
on sidewalks surrounding the project site. Pedestrian travel would continue to occur
without major impedances or safety problems with the projected traffic volumes on the
adjacent streets. However, there is a potential for conflict between project-generated
vehicular traffic entering and exiting the building’s residential and commercial/retail
garages and pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk on the west side of San Pablo
Avenue and the south side of Jones Street, adjacent to the project site. Recognizing this
issue, the following improvement measure is proposed to minimize any potential (but less
than significant) effects on pedestrian conditions arising from project-generated vehicle
traffic:
Improvement Measure 1: Install appropriate signage and striping at all garage
exit points to alert vehicles exiting the project site to the presence of pedestrians,
and install sight distance improvement measures to provide better visibility
between pedestrians and motorists at the garage exits. Improvements shall be
approved by City of Berkeley Public Works Traffic Engineering.
The project would have a less than significant impact on pedestrian operations and
facilities with this measure.
The project site is located near existing bicycle facilities (e.g., Hopkins Street, 9th Street,
Virginia Street, and Gilman Street) and is within convenient biking distance of downtown.
As shown in Table 4, the project would generate six bicycle trips during the weekday AM
peak hour and nine bicycle trips during the weekday PM peak hour. Project-related bicycle
trips would be spread over multiple routes and project-generated bicycle trips would not
adversely affect overall bicycle circulation in the area or the operations of adjacent bicycle
facilities. Bicycle travel would continue to occur without major impedances or safety
problems with the projected bicycle and vehicular traffic volumes on nearby streets.
Bicycle travel would continue to occur without major impedances or safety problems with
the projected bicycle and vehicular traffic volumes on nearby streets under Year 2040
Cumulative conditions. Therefore, the project would have a less-than-significant impact on
bicycle operations under both Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project
conditions.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
35
Conflicts with Transportation Policy
The City of Berkeley’s General Plan Transportation Element, as well as the City’s Complete
Streets Implementation Plan, states a strong preference for encouraging the use of non-
automobile transportation modes, such as transit, bicycling, and walking.
The project would encourage the use of non-automobile transportation modes
by providing residential and commercial uses in a walkable and bikeable urban
environment, with nearby transit service.
The project is consistent with both the City’s Pedestrian Master Plan and Bicycle
Master Plan by not making major modifications to existing pedestrian or bicycle
facilities in the surrounding areas, and would not adversely affect installation of
future facilities.
The project would provide 184 long-term bicycle parking spaces in a secure
room directly off the lobby.
The project would not conflict with adopted City policies, plans, or programs regarding
public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, and the impact would be less-than-
significant.
Parking and Transportation Demand Management
While development of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to
traffic conditions under Existing Plus Project conditions or Cumulative Plus Project
conditions, the following improvement measure has been proposed to reduce traffic
generated by the proposed project and minimize any potential parking shortfall.
Improvement Measure 2: The project sponsor will establish a parking and transportation
demand management (PTDM) program for building tenants and employees, in an effort to
expand the mix of travel alternatives available. Specific components of the PTDM program
would be determined in coordination with the City of Berkeley:
Pay car share application fees, membership fees, and monthly dues for all
participating residents;
Offer transit pass subsidies;
Charge separately for residential parking spaces;
Do not include any free parking for commercial tenants or their employees;
Offer residents and employees pre-tax transit benefits via payroll deduction or
other means;
Inform residents and employees of the program and post information
continuously;
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
36
Submit an annual statement indicating that they have offered the program and
have clearly communicated the program’s availability and number of
participating employees;
Encourage enrollment by all qualifying employees in the Alameda County
Guaranteed Ride Home program and submit an annual statement indicating
number of participating employees;
Install transit kiosks/bulletin boards in lobbies, lounges, break rooms and other
common areas and update regularly;
Hire transportation benefits coordinators who will gather and provide
information regarding transit and other alternative transportation to residents
and commercial tenants and their employees; and
Install real-time garage occupancy and wayfinding sign at garage entry, with
vehicle detection capability and enabled for future connection to the Downtown
Parking Information Guidance system.
Changes in Air Traffic Patterns
The Oakland International Airport is located about 12 miles south of the project site. The
project would increase density and increase building heights at the project site. However,
building heights are not expected to interfere with current flight patterns of Oakland
International Airport or other nearby airports. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in changes in air traffic patterns. This would be a less-than-significant impact, and
no mitigation measures would be required.
Criterion Section 15332(d): Noise
Yes No
Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to noise.
General Information on Noise
Noise is commonly defined as unwanted sound that annoys or disturbs people and can
have an adverse psychological or physiological effect on human health. Sound is
measured in decibels (dB), which is a logarithmic scale. Decibels describe the purely
physical intensity of sound based on changes in air pressure, but they cannot accurately
describe sound as perceived by the human ear since the human ear is only capable of
hearing sound within a limited frequency range. For this reason, a frequency-dependent
weighting system is used and monitoring results are reported in A-weighted decibels
(dBA). Technical terms used to describe noise are defined in Table 7.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
37
TABLE 7 DEFINITION OF ACOUSTICAL TERMS
Term Definition
Decibel (dB)
A unit describing the amplitude of sound on a logarithmic scale. Sound
described in decibels is usually referred to as sound or noise “level.” This
unit is not used in this analysis because it includes frequencies that the
human ear cannot detect.
Vibration Decibel (VdB) A unit describing the amplitude of vibration on a logarithmic scale.
Frequency (Hz) The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and
below atmospheric pressure.
A-Weighted Sound Level
(dBA)
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter
using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes
the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a
manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates
well with subjective reactions to noise. All sound levels in this report are
A-weighted.
Equivalent Noise Level
(Leq)
The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period. For
this CEQA evaluation, Leq refers to a one-hour period unless otherwise
stated.
Community Noise
Equivalent Level (CNEL)
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after
addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7 to 10 p.m. and after addition
of 10 decibels to sound levels during the night between 10 p.m. and 7
a.m..
Day/Night Noise Level
(Ldn)
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after
addition of 10 decibels to levels measured during the night between 10
p.m. and 7 a.m..
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or
existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Peak Particle Velocity
(PPV) The maximum instantaneous peak of a vibration signal.
Root Mean Square (RMS)
Velocity The average of the squared amplitude of a vibration signal.
It should be noted that because decibels are based on a logarithmic scale, they cannot be
added or subtracted in the usual arithmetical way. For instance, if one noise source emits
a sound level of 90 dBA, and a second source is placed beside the first and also emits a
sound level of 90 dBA, the combined sound level is 93 dBA, not 180 dBA. When the
difference between two co-located sources of noise is 10 dBA or more, the higher noise
source dominates and the lower noise source makes no perceptible difference in what
people can hear or measure. For example, if the noise level is 95 dBA, and another noise
source is added that produces 80 dBA noise, the noise level will still be 95 dBA.
In an unconfined space, such as outdoors, noise attenuates with distance according to the
inverse square law. Noise levels at a known distance from point sources are reduced by at
least 6 dBA for every doubling of that distance over hard surfaces, such as asphalt, and
7.5 dBA for every doubling of that distance over soft surfaces, such as undeveloped land.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
38
Noise levels at a known distance from line sources, such as the noise from high-volume
roadways, decrease at a rate of at least 3 dBA for every doubling of the distance over hard
surfaces and 4.5 dBA over soft surfaces. A greater decrease in noise levels can result from
the presence of intervening structures or buffers.
A typical method for determining a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is by
comparing it to existing conditions. The following describes the general effects of noise
on people:9
A change of 1 dBA cannot typically be perceived, except in carefully controlled
laboratory experiments;
A 3-dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference;
A minimum of a 5-dBA change is required before any noticeable change in community
response is expected; and
A 10-dBA change is subjectively perceived as approximately a doubling (or halving) in
loudness.
General Information on Vibration
Vibration is an oscillatory motion through a solid medium (versus noise which is an
oscillatory motion through air) in which the motion’s amplitude can be described in terms
of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Several different methods are used to quantify
vibration. Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by man-made activities attenuates
rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration. Sensitive receptors to vibration
include structures (especially older masonry structures), people (especially residents, the
elderly, and sick), and vibration-sensitive equipment. Vibration amplitudes are usually
expressed as either peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (RMS) velocity.
The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. PPV is
appropriate for evaluating potential damage to buildings, but it is not suitable for
evaluating human response to vibration because it takes the human body time to respond
to vibration signals. The response of the human body to vibration is dependent on the
average amplitude of a vibration. The RMS of a signal is the average of the squared
amplitude of the signal and is more appropriate for evaluating human response to
vibration. PPV and RMS are normally described in units of inches per second (in/sec), and
RMS is also often described in vibration decibels (VdB).
9
Salter, Charles M., 1998. Acoustics – Architecture, Engineering, the Environment, William Stout
Publishers.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
39
Regulatory Framework
State
Section 5.507 of California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11 (also called California
2013 Green Building Standards) Code specifies that buildings containing non-residential
uses (e.g., retail spaces and offices) that are exposed to exterior noise levels at or above
65 dBA Leq or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) shall maintain interior noise level
below 50 dBA Leq in occupied areas during any hour of operation. An acoustical analysis
documenting compliance with this interior sound level is required. Although the 2013
California Building Code does not specify an interior noise standard for residential uses,
the 2010 California Building Code restricted interior noise levels attributable to exterior
noise sources to 45 dBA Ldn or CNEL for dwellings other than detached single-family
dwellings, and this restriction is incorporated in the City of Berkeley Standard Conditions
of Approval (SCAs), described below.
Sections 46000 to 46080 of the California Health and Safety Code codify the California
Noise Control Act (CNCA) of 1973. This act established the Office of Noise Control under
the California Department of Health Services. The CNCA requires that the Office of Noise
Control adopt, in coordination with the Office of Planning and Research, guidelines for the
preparation and content of noise elements for general plans. The most recent guidelines
are contained in General Plan Guidelines, published by the California Office of Planning
and Research in 2003.10
The document provides land use compatibility guidelines for
cities and counties to use in their general plans in order to reduce conflicts between land
use and noise. These land use compatibility guidelines are referenced in the City of
Berkeley General Plan and are presented in Figure 10 below.
General Plan
The City of Berkeley General Plan Environmental Management Element 11
establishes
policies and actions intended to protect the community from excessive noise levels. The
policies and actions applicable to the project are presented below:
Policy EM-43 Noise Reduction: Reduce significant noise levels and minimize new sources of
noise.
Action A: Increase enforcement of the Noise Ordinance to reduce noise impacts.
Policy EM-44: Noise Prevention and Elimination: Protect public health and welfare by
eliminating existing noise problems where feasible and by preventing significant future
degradation of the acoustic environment.
Action A: Incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions.
10
California Office of Planning and Research, 2003. General Plan Guidelines.
11
City of Berkeley, 2003a. General Plan – Environmental Management Element.
Figure 10Noise Land Use Compatibility Matrix
City of Berkeley, 2016
1500 San Pablo Avenue Project
Source: California O�ce of Planning and Research, 2003. General Plan Guidelines. Figure 2.
Land Use Category
Residential - Low DensitySingle Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes
Residential - Multi-Family
Transient Lodging - Motels, Hotels
Schools, Libraries,Churches, Hospitals,Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, ConcertHalls, Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, OutdoorSpectator Sports
Playgrounds,Neighorhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemetaries
O�ce Buildings, BusinessCommercial & Professional
Industrial, Manufacturing,Utiliies, Agriculture
Community Noise ExposureL or CNEL, dB
INTERPRETATION
Normally AcceptableSpeci�ed land use is satisfactory,based upon the assumption that anybuildings involved are of normalconventional construction, withoutany special noise insulationrequirements.
Conditionally AcceptableNew construction or developmentshould be undertaken only after adetailed analysis of the noise reductionrequirements is made and needed noise insulation features included inthe design. Conventional constructionbut with closed windows and fresh airsupply systems or air conditioning will normally su�ce.
Normally UnacceptableNew construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development doesproceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Normally UnacceptableNew construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
55 60 65 70 8075dn
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
41
Action B: Ensure the effective enforcement of City, State, and Federal noise levels by
appropriate City departments.
Policy EM-45 Traffic Noise: Work with local and regional agencies to reduce local and
regional traffic, which is the single largest source of unacceptable noise in the city.
Action A: Encourage neighborhood traffic calming strategies that cause motorists to
slow down and decrease noise levels in all residential areas. (Also see
Transportation Policy T-20.)
Action C: Minimize potential transportation noise through proper design of street
circulation, coordination of routing, and other traffic control measures.
Policy EM-46 Noise Mitigation: Require operational limitations and all feasible noise
buffering for new uses that generate significant noise impacts near residential, institutional,
or recreational uses.
Action A: Promote use of noise insulation materials in new construction and major
rehabilitation.
Policy EM-47 Land Use Compatibility: Ensure that noise-sensitive uses, including, but not
limited to, residences, child-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes, are protected from
detrimental noise.
Action A: Noise-sensitive development proposals should be reviewed with respect to
the Land Use Compatibility Guidelines below (refer to Figure 10).
If the noise level is within the "normally acceptable" level, noise exposure would be
acceptable for the intended land use. Development may occur without requiring an
evaluation of the noise environment unless the use could generate noise impacts on
adjacent uses.
If the noise level is within the "conditionally acceptable" level, noise exposure would
be conditionally acceptable; a specified land use may be permitted only after
detailed analysis of the noise environment and the project characteristics to
determine whether noise insulation or protection features are required. Such noise
insulation features may include measures to protect noise-sensitive outdoor activity
areas (e.g., at residences, schools, or parks) or may include building sound
insulation treatments such as sound-rated windows to protect interior spaces in
sensitive receptors.
If the noise level is within the "normally unacceptable" level, analysis and mitigation
are required. Development should generally not be undertaken unless adequate
noise mitigation options have been analyzed and appropriate mitigations
incorporated into the project to reduce the exposure of people to unacceptable
noise levels.
If the noise level is within the "clearly unacceptable" level, new construction or
development should not be undertaken unless all feasible noise mitigation options
have been analyzed and appropriate mitigations incorporated into the project to
reduce exposure of people to unacceptable noise levels.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
42
City of Berkeley Municipal Code
The Community Noise Ordinance (Chapter 13.40 of the Municipal Code) regulates noise
and vibration within the City of Berkeley. Chapters 13.40.050 and 13.40.060 establish
maximum permissible day and night noise levels based on the zoning district of the
property subject to the noise, rather than the property from which the noise originates.
Because the Community Noise Ordinance is based on zoning districts rather than on the
land use within an individual property, it does not recognize residential properties located
in non-residential zoning districts. If the ambient noise levels in an area are greater than
the permissible noise levels, then the maximum permissible noise level is to be adjusted
to the ambient noise level.
Construction operations occurring between the hours of 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays
and the hours of 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays are prohibited from
generating noise levels at affected properties that exceed the maximum permissible day
and night noise levels specified in Sections 13.40.050 and 13.40.060. Where technically
and economically feasible, construction operations occurring between the hours of 7 a.m.
and 7 p.m. on weekdays and the hours of 9 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekends and holidays
are prohibited from generating noise levels at affected properties that exceed the
maximum permissible day and night noise levels specified in the Section 13.40.070.B.7
(Tables 8 and 9). Furthermore, Section 13.40.070.B.7.b indicates that, where construction
noise levels have been mitigated to the extent technically and economically feasible, the
noise level is considered to be in compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance. Section
13.40.080 indicates that being technically and economically feasible means balancing
certain factors such as the number of decibels and the amount of time the offending noise
exceeds the allowed limit; the number of persons affected; and the cost of reducing the
decibels or amount of time to come into compliance with the code.
TABLE 8 MAXIMUM SOUND LEVELS FOR SHORT-TERM OPERATION (LESS THAN 10 DAYS) OF
MOBILE EQUIPMENT (DBA)
Time Period
Single- and Two-
Family Residential
Zoning Districts
Multi-Family
Residential Zoning
Districts
Commercial and
Industrial Zoning
Districts
Weekdays 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 75 80 85
Weekends 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.
and Legal Holidays 60 65 70
Source: City of Berkeley Municipal Code Section 13.40.070.B.7.b.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
43
TABLE 9 MAXIMUM SOUND LEVELS FOR LONG-TERM OPERATION (PERIOD OF 10 DAYS OR
MORE) OF STATIONARY EQUIPMENT (DBA)
Time Period
Single- and Two-
Family Residential
Zoning Districts
Multi-Family
Residential Zoning
Districts
Commercial and
Industrial Zoning
Districts
Weekdays 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 60 65 70
Weekends 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.
and Legal Holidays 50 55 60
Source: City of Berkeley Municipal Code Section 13.40.070.B.7.b.
Section 13.40.070.B.8 prohibits vibration levels that annoy or disturb two or more
“reasonable persons of normal sensitiveness” who reside in separate residences. Section
13.50.070.B.11 requires stationary machinery to be enclosed or muffled so that noise
levels in surrounding zoning districts do not exceed the thresholds specified in Sections
13.40.050 and 13.40.060 of the Community Noise Ordinance. Section 13.40.060.A.1
establishes maximum allowable interior noise levels for multi-family residences to 40 dBA
between 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., and to 45 dBA between 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. The Environmental
Health Division may issue a variance for the creation of noise that conflicts with the
standards of the Community Noise Ordinance. Section 13.40.090 describes the
procedures by which a variance may be sought and granted.
Ambient Noise and Vibration Environment
The project site is located within a limited two-family residential zoning district and a
commercial zoning district, and is surrounded by limited two-family residential and
commercial zoning districts.12
The primary noise source in the vicinity of the project site is
traffic on San Pablo Avenue, which runs north to south adjacent to the eastern border of
the project site. The City of Berkeley General Plan13
indicates that in 1995, noise levels at
the project site and its vicinity from traffic along San Pablo Avenue ranged from 70 to 75
dBA Ldn. The General Plan notes that noise levels throughout the city did not change
substantially between 1973 and 1995. This is because, although traffic volumes increased
over time, traffic speeds decreased. For the same reason, it is anticipated that noise levels
from traffic along San Pablo Avenue have remained similar from 1995 to the present. A
change in noise levels would only be expected to occur along San Pablo Avenue if there was a
substantial change in land use, which could change the primary sources of noise in the
project vicinity or substantially alter the number or types of vehicles along San Pablo Avenue.
12
City of Berkeley, 1999. Land Use Zoning Districts as of March 20, 2014. Adopted March 18.
13
City of Berkeley, 2003a. Op. cit.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
44
This analysis assumes that noise levels at the project site and surrounding areas have not
changed substantially since 1995 because (1) noise levels in the City of Berkeley have
historically shown little variation over time14
; (2) land use and the primary sources of noise
in the project vicinity (as described above) have not changed substantially since 1995;15, 16
and (3) although hybrid and electric vehicles have come to be used more frequently since
1995 and are known to be quieter, noise from both automobiles and city buses is dominated
by tire/pavement noise17
, and therefore the increasing use of hybrid and electric vehicles is
not anticipated to alter traffic noise along San Pablo Avenue.
There are no sources of ambient vibration at the project site or its vicinity.
Project Construction Noise
Construction is expected to occur over a period of roughly 22 months and would
temporarily increase noise levels in the vicinity of the project site. Construction noise
levels would vary day-to-day, depending on the number and condition of the equipment
being used, the type and duration of activity being performed, the distance between the
noise source and the receptor, and the presence or absence of barrier between the noise
source and receptor. Demolition and grading are typically the noisiest phases of
construction, and would occur over the course of 4 months. The later phases of
construction include activities that are typically quieter and that occur within the building
under construction, thereby providing a barrier for noise between the construction activity
and any nearby receptors. Pile driving can generate extreme levels of noise, but no pile
driving would occur during construction of the proposed project. Table 10 shows typical
noise levels associated with various types of construction equipment that may be used
during each phase of construction. Based on the additive properties of noise, the
combined noise levels of the two noisiest pieces of equipment would range from up to 81
dBA at 50 feet during the completion of architectural coatings to up to 88 dBA at 50 feet
during grading (Table 10).18
14
Ibid.
15
City of Berkeley, 2003b. General Plan, Land Use Element.
16
City of Berkeley, 1999. Op. cit.
17
Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-
1003-06). Section 2-7. 18
A general assessment of construction noise should include the two noisiest pieces of equipment
expected to be used in each construction phase, per the Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit
Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-06).
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
45
TABLE 10 TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT (DBA) AND A GENERAL
ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRUCTION NOISE
Construction
Phase
(Estimated
Duration)
Equipment
Amount
Noise Level at 50
Feet
Addition of
two noisiest
pieces of
equipment
at 50 Feet3
Staging and
Demolition
(2 months)
Concrete/Industrial Saws1
1 76
86 Rubber Tired Dozers1
1 85
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes1
3 80
Grading
(2 months)
Graders1
1 85
88 Rubber Tired Dozers1
1 85
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes1
1 80
Building
Construction
(15 months)
Cranes1
1 83
85
Generator Sets1
1 81
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes1
1 80
Welders2
3 73
Architectural
Coatings
(3 months)
Air Compressors1
1 81 81
Source:
1. Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-06).
2. FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook, 2010.
3. A general assessment of construction noise should include the two noisiest pieces of equipment expected to
be used in each construction phase, per the Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration
Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-06)].
Note:
The duration of construction phases and types of construction equipment were conservatively estimated for the
project using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) (see Air Quality Section and Appendix D).
The nearest receptors to the project site are three accessory residential structures as near
as 1 foot south of the project site. A two-story apartment is located approximately 15 feet
south of the project site and four residences are also located approximately 50 feet south
of the project site. The other receptors to the project site are residential and commercial
buildings across the streets surrounding the project site. There are residential buildings
located approximately 50 feet west of the project site across 9th
Street and 50 feet north
of the project site across Jones Street. Several commercial buildings are located
approximately 85 feet across San Pablo Avenue, including auto shops, pet stores and
retail stores. A gas station is located adjacent to the project site, which is not considered
as a sensitive noise receptor because neither noise-sensitive people nor noise-sensitive
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
46
activities would be located at a gas station. Noise levels at 1 foot, 15 feet, 50 feet, and 85
feet are presented in Table 11, representing the addition of two noisiest pieces of
equipment during each phase, to characterize the noise impact from the proposed project
at different receptors.
TABLE 11 CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS AT DIFFERENT DISTANCES
Construction Phase 1 Ft
(residential)
15 Ft
(residential)
50 Ft
(residential)
85 Ft
(commercial)
Demolition 128 99 86 80
Grading 130 101 88 82
Building Construction 127 98 85 79
Architectural Coatings 123 94 81 75
Long-term Stationary
Equipment Standards
(daytime)
60 60 70 60
Note:
Based on reference noise levels at 50 feet (derived from Table XII-4), the following propagation adjustment was
applied to estimate noise levels at 1 foot, 15 feet, and 85 feet.
dBA2
= dBA1
+ 10 Log10
(D1
/D2
)2.5
Where:
dBA1
is the reference noise level at a specified distance (in this case 50 feet).
dBA2
is the calculated noise level.
D1
is the reference distance (in this case 50 feet).
D2
is the distance from the equipment to the receiver.
(Source of the equation: Department of Transportation, California. 1998. Technical Noise Supplement. pp. 28)
The Community Noise Ordinance regulates stationary equipment for long-term operation
(10 days or more) and mobile equipment for short-term operation (less than 10 days).
Because construction would last more than 10 days, the short-term mobile equipment
requirements would not apply. In this analysis, the long-term stationary equipment
standards (daytime) are conservatively applied to each type of equipment. Table 11
indicates that noise levels during construction have the potential to exceed both the 60
dBA standard for two-family residential zoning districts and the 70 dBA standard for
commercial zoning districts. It should be noted that a typical building facade with
windows closed provides a noise level reduction of approximately 25 dBA,19
and therefore
interior noise levels would be substantially lower than exterior noise levels. Although the
generated noise levels could result in the exposure of the nearby residential and
19
Salter, Charles M., 1998. Op. cit.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
47
commercial receptors to excessive noise, the implementation of the City of Berkeley’s
SCAs would reduce construction period noise:
Standard Conditions of Approval (SCA)
The following SCAs will be applicable to the project during its construction period.
SCA-13: Construction Noise Management - Public Notice Required. At least two
weeks prior to initiating any construction activities at the site, the applicant shall
provide notice to businesses and residents within 500 feet of the project site,
including (1) project description, (2) description of construction activities, (3) daily
construction schedule (i.e., time of day) and expected duration (number of months),
(4) the name and phone number of the Noise Management Individual for the project,
(5) commitment to notify neighbors at least four days in advance of authorized
extended work hours and the reason for extended hours, (6) that construction work
is about to commence, and (7) designate a “construction liaison” that would be
responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The
liaison would determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early,
bad muffler) and institute reasonable measures to correct the problem. A copy of
such notice and methodology for distributing the notice shall be provided in advance
to the City for review and approval.
SCA-14: Construction Noise Reduction Program. The applicant shall develop a site
specific noise reduction program prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant to
reduce construction noise impacts to the maximum extent feasible, subject to
review and approval of the Zoning Officer. The noise reduction program shall
include the time limits for construction listed above, as measures needed to ensure
that construction complies with Berkeley Municipal Code Section 13.40.070. The
noise reduction program should include, but shall not be limited to, the following
available controls to reduce construction noise levels as low as practical:
Construction equipment should be well maintained and used judiciously to
be as quiet as practical.
Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers, which
are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources
where technology exists. Select hydraulically or electrically powered
equipment and avoid pneumatically powered equipment where feasible.
Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from
sensitive receptors when adjoining construction sites. Construct temporary
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
48
noise barriers or partial enclosures to acoustically shield such equipment
where feasible.
Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines.
Construct solid plywood fences around construction sites adjacent to
operational business, residences or other noise-sensitive land uses where the
noise control plan analysis determines that a barrier would be effective at
reducing noise.
Erect temporary noise control blanket barriers, if necessary, along building
facades facing construction sites. This mitigation would only be necessary if
conflicts occurred which were irresolvable by proper scheduling. Noise
control blanket barriers can be rented and quickly erected.
Route construction related traffic along major roadways and away from
sensitive receptors where feasible.
SCA-17: Construction Phases. The applicant shall provide the Zoning Officer with a
schedule of major construction phases with start dates and expected duration, a
description of the activities and anticipated noise levels of each phase, and the
name(s) and phone number(s) of the individual(s) directly supervising each phase.
The Zoning Officer or his/her designee shall have the authority to require an on-site
meeting with these individuals as necessary to ensure compliance with these
conditions. The applicant shall notify the Zoning Officer of any changes to this
schedule as soon as possible.
SCA-31: Construction Meeting. The applicant shall request of the Zoning Officer an
on-site meeting with City staff and key parties involved in the early phases of
construction (e.g., applicant, general contractor, foundation subcontractors) to
review these conditions and the construction schedule. The general contractor or
applicant shall ensure that all subcontractors involved in subsequent phases of
construction aware of the conditions of approval.
SCA-37: Construction Hours. Construction activity shall be limited to between the
hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Monday through Friday, and between 9:00 AM and
4:00 PM on Saturday. No construction-related activity shall occur on Sunday or any
Federal Holiday. It is recognized that certain construction activities, such as the
placement of concrete, must be performed in a continuous manner and may require
an extension of these work hours. Prior to initiating any activity that might require a
longer period, the developer must notify the Zoning Officer and request an
exception for a finite period of time. If the Zoning Officer approves the request, then
two weeks prior to the expanded schedule, the developer shall notify businesses and
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
49
residents within 500 feet of the project site describing the expanded construction
hours. A copy of such notice and methodology for distributing the notice shall be
provided in advance to the City for review and approval. The project shall not be
allowed more than 15 extended working days.
SCA-39: Project Construction Website. The applicant shall establish a project
construction website with the following information clearly accessible and updated
monthly or more frequently as changes warrant:
Contact information (i.e. “hotline” phone number and email address) for the
project construction manager.
Calendar and schedule of daily/weekly/monthly construction activities.
The final Conditions of Approval, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, Transportation Construction Plan, Construction Noise Reduction
Program, and any other reports or programs related to construction noise, air
quality, and traffic.
SCA-40: Extreme Construction Noise. Construction activities that may generate
extreme noise (noise greater than 90 dBA) at nearby sensitive receptors should be
limited to the hours between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Any work
that may generate extreme noise at nearby sensitive receptors outside of these
hours, or that needs to occur on a Saturday, must first go through the approval and
notification process described in SCA-37. Additionally, if complaints regarding noise
are received from occupants of buildings potentially exposed to extreme noise
during project construction, the noise liaison shall implement noise monitoring, if
appropriate and feasible, to determine and document whether the measures
instituted to correct the problem are effective. The results of any noise monitoring
conducted, as well as a description of the noise reduction measures implemented,
shall be provided to the Zoning Officer for review.
SCA-13 would notify businesses and residents within 500 feet of project details and
construction schedule, would allow them to voice noise complaints, and would require the
complaints to be promptly addressed. In this way, sources of potentially disruptive
construction noise could be quickly controlled or eliminated.
SCA-14 requires that the project applicant implement a noise reduction program,
prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant, which addresses noise attenuation
measures for equipment and tools to the maximum extent feasible. Due to the proximity
of the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site, the noise attenuation measures may
include the erection of a Sound Transmission Class (STC) rated wall, rather than a plywood
wall around the project site. An STC rating roughly equals the decibel reduction in noise
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
50
volume that a wall, window, or door can provide.20
The implementation of the noise
reduction program minimizes the noise generated by the use of both mobile and
stationary construction equipment and ensures quieter periods for adjacent businesses
and residents, so that they are not exposed to the highest levels of construction noise for
long periods of time. The implementation of this measure also ensures that project
construction is consistent with the Community Noise Ordinance requirement to reduce
construction noise to the maximum extent feasible.
SCA-17 ensures the construction schedule and anticipated noise levels are overseen by
the Zoning Officer. This requirement prevents the project from performing construction
activities beyond the scheduled times and ensures noise levels during different phases of
construction are anticipated before the project begins, thereby providing an opportunity
for the City to address potential noise issues prior to the start of any given phase.
SCA-31 ensures the applicant, contractor, and subcontractors are made aware of, and/or
have a chance to review, all of the SCAs prior to the start of construction.
SCA-37 provides reasonable limits on the days and hours of construction to avoid
generating noise when it would be most objectionable to neighboring residences. This
limitation prevents the disturbance of sleep for a majority of residents located close to the
project site. This SCA also requires any extension of these work hours to be approved in
advance by the Zoning Officer and requires businesses and residents within 500 feet of
the project site to be notified of such an extension. The requirement for Zoning Officer’s
approval prevents the project proponent from unnecessarily performing work outside of
allowable work hours, and allows businesses and residents to voice their concern about
longer work hours so that an impact to them can be avoided.
SCA-39 ensures the disclosure of the project details to the public and provides a hotline
phone number, so that the public is knowledgeable about construction activities and
requirements related to construction noise, and can quickly report deviances from the
requirements or any unanticipated noise problems.
SCA-40 provides more restricted limit on the days and hours of potential extreme
construction noise to prevent the disturbance of residences within 15 feet of the project
site (as indicated in Table 11, there are receptors that could be exposed to extreme noise
(greater than 90 dBA). This SCA also ensures the compliance of SCA-37 to require pre-
approval of any extension of work that may cause extreme noise. Furthermore, noise
20
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, undated. Noise Notebook, Chapter 4
Supplement, Sound Transmission Class Guidance.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
51
monitoring shall be implemented if appropriate and feasible to address complaints
regarding extreme noise. In this way, extreme construction noise could be mitigated to
the extent technically and economically feasible.
The implementation of these required SCAs would ensure that construction noise levels
would be mitigated to the extent technically and economically feasible, that the public,
contractor, and subcontractors are made aware of the noise reduction requirements
specific to the proposed project, and that the public is able to voice complaints and
concerns about construction noise. In addition, since the project site and its vicinity is an
established, urbanized area, periodic exposure to construction-related noise and vibration
effects are existing conditions. So as exposures to both ongoing and periodic operational
urbanized noise sources which include regional highways, police and emergency vehicle
sirens, and other urban uses. Therefore, with the implementation of the required SCAs,
the potential of the proposed project to generate excessive noise during construction that
would violate the City of Berkeley Community Noise Ordinance is less than significant.
Ground-borne Vibration
Construction activities can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on
the equipment, activity, and relative proximity to sensitive receptors. The vibration levels
for construction equipment that could be used at the project site are summarized in Table
12. Although the table provides one vibration level for each piece of equipment, it should
be noted that there is considerable variation in reported ground vibration levels from
construction activities, primarily due to variation in soil characteristics. Since vibration
effects are typically limited to land uses that are very close to the site, vibration levels are
only calculated at 1 foot and 15 feet based on the reference levels at 25 feet.
Tables 13 and 14 summarize the vibration criteria to prevent disturbance of occupants
and to prevent damage to structures, respectively. In this analysis, the “Infrequent Events”
criterion is applied to construction equipment.
Based on the estimated construction equipment generated vibration levels in Table 12,
construction-generated vibration levels may be as high as 94 RMS VdB at the residential
area located within 15 feet of construction activities and as high as 129 RMS VdB at the
residential area located within 1 foot of construction activities when the equipment is at
its nearest point, which could exceed the 80 RMS VdB Infrequent Events threshold (Table
13). In order to maintain vibration levels from the use of construction equipment at or
below 80 RMS VdB disturbance threshold, construction equipment would need to be
located approximately 45 feet from the receptor. The center of the project site is located
approximately 135 feet north of the nearest receptor; and therefore equipment operating
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
52
TABLE 12 VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment
PPV at 25
Ft (in/sec)
PPV at 15
Ft (in/sec)
PPV at 1 Ft
(in/sec)
RMS at 25
Ft (VdB)
RMS at 15
Ft (VdB)
RMS at 1 Ft
(VdB)
Large bulldozer 0.089 0.191 11.125
87 94 129
Loaded trucks 0.076 0.164 9.500
86 93 128
Small bulldozer 0.003 0.006 0.375
58 65 100
Source of PPV and RMS vibration levels at 25 feet: Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-06).
Notes: Based on vibration levels at 25 feet, the following propagation adjustment was applied to estimate PPV
vibration levels at 1foot and 15 feet assuming:
PPV2 = PPV1 x (D1/D2)1.5
Where:
PPV1 is the reference vibration level at a specified distance.
PPV2 is the calculated vibration level.
D1 is the reference distance (in this case 25 feet).
D2 is the distance from the equipment to the receiver.
Based on vibration levels at 25 feet, the following propagation adjustment was applied to estimate RMS vibration
levels at 1foot and 15 feet assuming:
RMS2 = RMS1 – 30 Log10
(D2/D1)
Where:
RMS1is the reference vibration level at a specified distance.
RMS2 is the calculated vibration level.
D1 is the reference distance (in this case 25 feet).
D2 is the distance from the equipment to the receiver.
(Source of the equations: Federal Transit Administration, Chapter 12, 2006)
TABLE 13 VIBRATION CRITERIA TO PREVENT DISTURBANCE – RMS (VDB)
Land Use Category Frequent Events 1
Occasional Events 2
Infrequent Events 3
Residences and buildings
where people normally sleep 72 75 80
Source: Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-
06).
Notes:
1 = More than 70 vibration events of the same kind per day or vibration generated by a long freight train.
2 = Between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same kind per day.
3 = Fewer than 30 vibration events of the same kind per day.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
53
TABLE 14 VIBRATION CRITERIA TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO STRUCTURES
Building Category
PPV
(in/sec)
RMS
(VdB)
Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102
Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98
Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90
Source: Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-
06).
across the majority of the project site does not have the potential to disturb nearby
residents. Although the screening level analysis shows that the mobile equipment used in
the proposed project has the potential to disturb residences, rubber tired vehicles (which
would be used in the proposed project) are generally unlikely to cause vibration impacts
except in unusual situation such as when project site is located near buildings containing
vibration-sensitive equipment or near historical buildings, which is not the case in this
project.21
In addition, implementation of the following SCAs will lessen the impacts of
exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration during the
construction period:
Standard Conditions of Approval (SCA)
The following SCAs will be applicable to the project during its construction period.
SCA-13: Construction Noise Management - Public Notice Required (see above).
SCA-14: Construction Noise Reduction Program (see above).
SCA-37: Construction Hours (see above)
SCA-39: Project Construction Website (see above).
SCA-40: Extreme Construction Noise. (see above)
SCAs #14 and #39 ensure the disclosure of the project details and enable the public to
readily voice their complaints, so that any potentially disruptive construction vibration can
21
Federal Transit Administration, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (FTA-VA-90-1003-
06)
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
54
be quickly controlled or eliminated. SCA-14 requires mufflers for all internal combustion
engine-driven equipment and requires stationary noise-generating equipment to be
located as far as possible from sensitive receptors, thereby reducing the potential
exposure of nearby receptors to vibration impacts caused by airborne noise. SCA-37
provides reasonable limits on the days and hours of construction to avoid generating
vibration when it would be objectionable to neighboring residences. This limitation
prevents the disturbance of sleep for a majority of residents located close to the project
site. SCA-40 limits extreme construction noise to more restricted hours to prevent the
generation of the vibration caused by airborne noise from the noisiest potential
equipment.
Since the construction of the proposed project would be temporary, the implementation of
the SCAs would reduce the potential for construction generated vibration to disturb
occupants of adjacent buildings to a less-than-significant level.
Since the nearest neighboring residential structures are as near as 1 foot south of the
project site, vibration levels could exceed the 0.2 PPV in/sec threshold (Table 14) to cause
damage to buildings. The following SCA would minimize potential adverse vibration
effects from project-related construction activities:
SCA-15: Damage Due to Construction Vibration. The project applicant shall submit
screening level analysis prior to, or concurrent with demolition building permit. If a
screening level analysis shows that the project has the potential to result in damage
to structures, a structural engineer or other appropriate professional shall be
retained to prepare a vibration impact assessment (assessment). The assessment
shall take into account project specific information such as the composition of the
structures, location of the various types of equipment used during each phase of the
project, as well as the soil characteristics in the project area, in order to determine
whether project construction may cause damage to any of the structures identified
as potentially impacted in the screening level analysis. If the assessment finds that
the project may cause damage to nearby structures, the structural engineer or other
appropriate professional shall recommend design means and methods of
construction that to avoid the potential damage, if feasible. The assessment and its
recommendations shall be reviewed and approved by the Building and Safety
Division and the Zoning Officer. If there are no feasible design means and methods
to eliminate the potential for damage, the structural engineer or other appropriate
professional shall undertake an existing conditions study (study) of any structures
(or, in case of large buildings, of the portions of the structures) that may experience
damage. The study will establish the baseline condition of these structures,
including, but not limited to, the location and extent of any visible cracks or spalls.
The study shall include written descriptions and photographs. The study shall be
reviewed and approved by the Building and Safety Division and the Zoning Officer
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
55
prior to issuance of a grading permit. Upon completion of the project, the structures
(or, in case of large buildings, of the portions of the structures) previously inspected
will be resurveyed, and any new cracks or other changes shall be compared to pre-
construction conditions and a determination shall be made as to whether the
proposed project caused the damage. The findings shall be submitted to the
Building and Safety Division and the Zoning Officer for review. If it is determined
that project construction has resulted in damage to the structure, the damage shall
be repaired to the pre-existing condition by the project sponsor, provided that the
property owner approves of the repair.
Since this screening level analysis indicates that vibration damage to structures is a
concern, SCA-15 would require a vibration impact assessment to be prepared by an
appropriate professional. The assessment would include recommended feasible methods
of construction to avoid the potential damage, and would require investigation of the
structures before and after construction to determine whether damage has occurred or
shall be repaired. In this way, structures that are vulnerable to construction activities
could be followed with attention during the construction, the potential impact of the
construction activities on the structures could be investigated thoroughly, and the
potential damage could be repaired in a timely manner. Therefore, the implementation of
the SCA would reduce the potential of construction-generated vibration to cause damage
to adjacent buildings to a less-than-significant level.
Operational Noise
The primary noise generation from the long-term operation of the project would occur as
a result of the use of mechanical heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems
and from increased vehicular traffic on area roads. The building HVAC systems are
required to be enclosed or muffled so that noise from the HVAC systems do not exceed
the thresholds of 55 dBA during daytime and 45 dBA during nighttime at surrounding
residential properties, and do not exceed 65 dBA during daytime and 60 dBA nighttime at
surrounding commercial properties, as specified in Section 13.40.050 of the Municipal
Code.22
Given the existing high ambient noise levels at the project site (70 to 75 dBA Ldn),
the noise generated by the muffled or enclosed exhaust and HVAC systems at the project
site would be at least 10 dBA lower than existing conditions at surrounding residential
properties, and, based on the additive properties of noise described above, would make
no perceptible difference in what people can hear or measure. Noise generated by the
muffled or enclosed HVAC systems would be at least 5 dBA lower than existing conditions
at surrounding commercial properties. This would potentially increase noise by 1.2 dBA,
22
City of Berkeley Municipal Code Section 13.40.070.B.11.b.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
56
which is below the increase of 3 dBA that is needed before a change in noise levels is
perceivable. Therefore, the impact of noise generated by the muffled or enclosed HVAC
systems at the project site on surrounding residential and commercial properties would
be less than significant.
Due to the additive properties of noise, traffic volumes must nearly double for a
perceptible increase in traffic generated noise levels to occur. Peak hour (evening)
intersection turning data from the traffic study23
to evaluate where traffic volumes are
expected to experience the greatest increase as a result of operation of the proposed
project. The percent increase in traffic volumes was found to range from 0 to 3 percent,
with the exceptions of Jones Street west of San Pablo Avenue, where traffic volumes as a
result of operation of the proposed project are expected to increase by 43 percent. The
Existing and Existing Plus Project traffic volumes and predicted traffic noise for this
roadway segment are summarized in Table 15 below. Traffic noise is expected to increase
by about 1.5 dBA Leq. As this is the roadway segment with the greatest predicted increase
in traffic, traffic noise increases along other roadway segments would be less than 1.5
dBA Leq. This is below the increase of 3 dBA that is needed before a change in noise
levels is perceivable. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project would not
result in a significant increase in traffic noise along local area roadways.
TABLE 15 EXISTING AND EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND PREDICTED TRAFFIC
NOISE
Roadway
Segment
Existing
Traffic
Volume (PM
peak hour
number of
vehicles)
Existing Plus
Project
Traffic
Volume (PM
peak hour
number of
vehicles)
Existing
Traffic Noise
(dBA Leq at
50 feet from
centerline of
outermost
lane)
Existing Plus
Project
Traffic Noise
(dBA Leq at
50 feet from
centerline of
outermost
lane)
Estimated
Increase in
Noise (dBA
Leq)
Jones Street
west of San
Pablo Avenue
56 80 47.0 48.5 1.5
Note: Traffic noise model outputs are included in Appendix C.
Noise Exposure During Construction and Operation
Construction workers could be exposed to excessive noise from the heavy equipment
used during construction of the proposed project (Table 10). However, noise exposure of
23
AECOM, 2015. 1500 San Pablo Avenue Final Transportation Impact Study. June 17.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
57
construction workers is regulated by the California Division of Occupational Safety and
Health (Cal/OSHA). Title 8, Subchapter 7, Group 15, Article 105 of the California Code of
Regulations (Control of Noise Exposure) sets noise exposure limits for workers, and
requires employers who have workers that may be exposed to noise levels above these
limits to establish a hearing conservation program, make hearing protectors available, and
keep records of employee noise exposure measurements. The construction contractor for
the proposed project would be subject to these regulations, and compliance with these
Cal/OSHA regulations will ensure that the potential of construction workers to be exposed
to excessive noise is less than significant.
The ambient noise levels at the project site range from 70 to 75 dBA Ldn.24
This noise
environment encompasses the “normally unacceptable” community noise exposure levels
for multi-family residential developments and the “conditionally acceptable” community
noise exposure levels for commercial development (Figure 10). According to Policy EM-47
of the City of Berkeley General Plan, projects exposed to a normally unacceptable noise
level are required to analyze and incorporate appropriate mitigations into the project to
reduce the exposure of people to unacceptable noise levels. Projects exposed to
conditionally acceptable noise levels are required to conduct a detailed analysis of the
noise environment and the project characteristics to determine whether noise insulation
or protection features are required.
Standard Conditions of Approval (SCA)
The following SCA will be applicable to occupant noise exposure during the proposed
project operation period.
SCA-16: Interior Noise Levels. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant
shall submit a report to the Building and Safety Division and the Zoning Officer by a
qualified acoustic engineer certifying that the interior residential portions of the
project will achieve interior noise levels of no more than 45 dBA Ldn (40 dBA
evening and 45 dBA daytime). If the adopted Building Code imposes a more
restrictive standard for interior noise levels, the report shall certify compliance with
this standard.
SCA-16 requires noise reduction measures to be incorporated into building design based
upon the recommendations of a qualified acoustical engineer. The noise reduction
measures would be required to reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA Ldn in residential
spaces, in compliance with SCA-16; and to 50 dBA Leq in commercial spaces, in
compliance with the California Building Code. Sound-rated windows, exterior doors (such
24
City of Berkeley, 2003a. Op. cit.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
58
as balcony doors), and exterior walls are commonly used to control interior noise from
exterior sources. As discussed above, an STC rating roughly equals the decibel reduction
in noise volume that a wall, window, or door can provide. Given that the ambient noise
environment at the project site currently ranges from about 70 to 75 dBA Ldn, the use of
sound-rated windows, exterior doors, and exterior walls with STC ratings ranging from
about STC 25 to about STC 30 would need to be used in order to reduce interior noise
levels from exterior sources to about 45 dBA Ldn, thereby satisfying the interior noise
standards for both residential and commercial spaces. The noise control measures are
required to be submitted to the Building Safety Division and the Zoning Officer for review
and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Compliance with SCA-16 would
therefore reduce the potential of future residents of the proposed development to be
exposed to noise in excess of standards to a less-than-significant level.
Criterion Section 15332(d): Air Quality
Yes No
Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to air
quality.
The project is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which is under the
jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). In June 2010, the
BAAQMD adopted thresholds of significance to assist lead agencies in the evaluation and
mitigation of air quality impacts under CEQA. The BAAQMD’s thresholds, which were
incorporated into the 2010 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines,25
established levels at which
emissions of ozone precursors (reactive organic gases [ROG] and nitrogen oxides [NOx]),
particulate matter (PM), local carbon monoxide (CO), and toxic air contaminants (TACs)
would cause significant air quality impacts. There are two fractions of PM emissions that
are regulated based on aerodynamic resistance diameters equal to or less than 10
microns (PM10) and 2.5 microns (PM2.5).
The 2010 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines were challenged, and the Alameda County Superior
Court ordered the BAAQMD to set aside its recommended thresholds of significance until
it complied with CEQA requirements. In view of the court’s order, the BAAQMD updated
the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines in 2012 to exclude the recommended thresholds of
significance. However, since the adoption process and scientific soundness of the
thresholds have not been challenged, the BAAQMD’s thresholds that relate to the analysis
of the project's impacts on the environment are used in this CEQA analysis in conjunction
with the updated 2012 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines.26
25
BAAQMD, 2010. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. May.
26
BAAQMD, 2012a. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. May.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
59
To assess potential air quality impacts relative to the BAAQMD’s thresholds, emissions of
ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 were estimated for the project’s construction and
operational phases. The BAAQMD recommends using the most current version of the
California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) to estimate construction and operational
emissions of criteria pollutants for a proposed project. CalEEMod utilizes widely accepted
models for emission estimates combined with appropriate default data for a variety of
land use projects that can be used if site-specific information is not available. The primary
input data used to estimate emissions associated with each of the project’s land use types
are summarized in Table 16. A copy of the CalEEMod report for the project, which
summarizes the input parameters, assumptions, and findings, is included in Appendix D.
Construction-Phase Criteria Pollutant 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 can potentially contribute to existing
violations of ambient air quality standards in the SFBAAB. Emissions during project
construction were estimated using the CalEEMod input parameters summarized in Table
16 and the following information:
Site preparation (i.e., vegetation removal) was not included in the analysis because
the project site is devoid of vegetation.
An estimated 2,010 tons of debris from demolition of the existing building and
parking lot was assumed to estimate emissions from off-road construction
equipment and waste hauling trips during demolition.
The concentrations of volatile-organic compounds (VOCs) in architectural coatings
were reduced from 250 grams per liter (g/L) to 150 g/L based on the regulatory
requirements for non-flat high-gloss coatings described in BAAQMD Regulation 8,
Rule 3: Architectural Coatings.
TABLE 16 SUMMARY OF LAND-USE INPUT PARAMETERS FOR CALEEMOD
Project Land-Use Type CalEEMod Land-Use Type Square Feet
Apartments Apartments Mid Rise 143,815
Townhouses Condo/Townhouse 21,311
Parking Garage Enclosed Parking Structure 69,272
Restaurant Quality Restaurant 2,000
Retail Regional Shopping Center
8,900
Notes: The total dwelling units = 170
The total lot acreage = 1.71
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
60
Based on the size and type of development, CalEEMod estimated that project construction
would require about 244 working days. The average daily emissions of ozone precursors
and exhaust PM10 and PM2.5 were estimated over that time period and are compared to
the BAAQMD’s thresholds in Table17. The emissions for ROG, NOx, and exhaust PM10
and PM2.5 were below the BAAQMD’s thresholds and, therefore, would have a less-than-
significant impact on ambient air quality standards.
TABLE 17 SUMMARY OF CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
ROG NOx Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5
Units lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day
Emissions 21 22 1.2 1.2
BAAQMD's Thresholds 54 54 82 54
Notes: lb/day = pounds per day
Source: CalEEMod (Appendix D)
The BAAQMD does not have any quantitative threshold values for fugitive dust PM2.5 and
PM10 emissions from earth-moving activities; however, the BAAQMD considers
implementation of best management practices for fugitive dust controls during
construction sufficient to reduce related air quality impacts to a less-than-significant level.
The City of Berkeley has incorporated the BAAQMD’s recommended best management
practices for fugitive dust controls into their Standard Conditions of Approval (SCAs).
Compliance with SCA-43 would ensure that the project’s impact related to emissions of
fugitive dust during construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Standard Condition of Approval
SCA-43. Public Works - Implement BAAQMD-Recommended Measures during
Construction. For all proposed projects, BAAQMD recommends implementing all the
Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, listed below to meet the best management
practices threshold for fugitive dust:
All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas,
and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
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.
All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
61
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.
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.
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.
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.
Operational-Phase Criteria Pollutant Emissions
During project operation, emissions of ozone precursors and exhaust PM10 and PM2.5
can 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. Emissions during project operations
were estimated using the CalEEMod input parameters summarized in Table 18 and the
following information:
The average weekday vehicle trip rates were adjusted for each land-use type based
on the findings of the transportation analysis for the project.27
The concentrations of VOCs in architectural coatings were reduced from 250 g/L
to 150 g/L based on the regulatory requirements for non-flat high-gloss coatings
described in BAAQMD Regulation 8, Rule 3: Architectural Coatings.
The estimated average annual and daily emissions of ozone precursors and exhaust PM10
and PM2.5 during the operational phase of the project are compared to the BAAQMD’s
Thresholds in Table 18. The estimated emissions for ROG, NOx, and exhaust PM10 and
PM2.5 were below the BAAQMD’s thresholds and, therefore, would have a less-than-
significant impact on air quality standards.
27
Fehr and Peers, 2016. Personal communication between Bill Burton from Fehr and Peers and Hayley Cox
from Urban Planning Partners. January 4.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
62
TABLE 18 SUMMARY OF CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS DURING PROJECT OPERATION
Emissions Scenario ROG NOx
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 ROG NOx
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5
Units ton/yr ton/yr ton/yr ton/yr lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day
Emissions 1.8 1.1 0.03 0.03 10 6.2 0.15 0.15
BAAQMD's Thresholds 10 10 15 10 54 54 82 54
Notes: ton/yr = tons per year; lb/day = pounds per day
Source: CalEEMod (Appendix D)
Carbon Monoxide
The occurrence of localized CO concentrations, also known as “hotspots,” can impact
sensitive receptors in local communities. The source of local CO emissions is often
associated with heavy traffic congestion, which most frequently occur at signalized
intersections of high-volume roadways. According to the 2010 CEQA Air Quality
Guidelines, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact to localized
CO concentrations if the following screening criteria are met:
The project is consistent with an applicable Congestion Management Program
(CMP) established by the County Congestion Management Agency for designated
roads or highways, regional transportation plans, and local congestion
management agency plans.
The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to
more than 44,000 vehicles per hour.
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 (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, natural or
urban street canyon, below-grade roadway).
The Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) serves as the County Congestion
Management Agency. The ACTC updates the County’s CMP every two years to assess,
monitor, and improve the performance of the County’s multimodal transportation system
and strengthen the integration of transportation and land use planning. The current 2015
CMP requires an analysis of any project that is expected to generate more than 100
afternoon-peak-hour vehicle trips. The proposed project is expected to generate 44
afternoon-peak-hour vehicle trips during the weekdays. Since the project would generate
less than 100 afternoon-peak-hour vehicle trips, the project is consistent with the current
CMP.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
63
The intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Cedar Street southeast of the project site is the
most heavily congested intersection in the project vicinity. The daily traffic volume on San
Pablo Avenue near the Cedar Street intersection was about 18,900 in 2010.28
The hourly
traffic volumes near the San Pablo Avenue and Cedar Street intersection would be
substantially less than the daily traffic volumes. Therefore, additional traffic from the
project (44 or less trips per hour29
) would not increase traffic volumes at the intersection
to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour. Furthermore, vertical and/or horizontal mixing is
not substantially limited at intersections near the project site (e.g., no tunnels, parking
garages, bridge underpasses, natural or urban street canyons, or below-grade roadways).
Since the project meets the BAAQMD screening criteria, the project would have a less-
than-significant air quality impact on nearby sensitive receptors related to local CO
concentrations.
Generation of Toxic Air Contaminants
The BAAQMD recommends evaluating potential impacts of project TAC emissions to
sensitive receptors located within 1,000 feet of a project.30
Based on the BAAQMD’s
thresholds, significant impacts to sensitive receptors would include an incremental
increase of ten cancer cases per million people, an acute or chronic non-cancer Hazard
Index (HI) greater than 1.0, or ambient PM2.5 concentration greater than an annual
average of 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).
The project operations would not be expected to emit substantial amounts of TACs that
would significantly affect nearby sensitive receptors. However, TACs would be generated
on-site during project construction. TAC emissions during construction are primarily
diesel particulate matter (DPM) from heavy-duty diesel vehicles and equipment. The
closest sensitive receptors to the project include residential areas located immediately
south, west, and north of the project site.
In accordance with the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA),31
concentrations of PM10 were used as a basis for calculating health risks associated with
DPM. The annual average concentrations of PM10 (DPM) and PM2.5 concentrations were
estimated within 1,000 feet of the project site using the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST3) air dispersion model. The input
28
ACTC, 2014. Countywide Travel Demand Model; Model Vehicle Volumes.
http://www.alamedactc.org/app_pages/view/8079. Accessed on January 5. 2015. Updated July 2014.
29
Fehr and Peers, 2015. Memorandum: 1500 San Pablo – Updated Cumulative Analysis. October 28.
30
BAAQMD, 2012a. op. cit.
31
OEHHA, 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk
Assessments. February.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
64
parameters and assumptions used for estimating on-site emission rates are included in
Appendix D. Since the BAAQMD has not provided guidance describing how to model the
dispersion of PM10 (DPM) emissions from a construction site, modeling was performed in
accordance with guidance from the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District. The dispersion of PM10 (DPM) and PM2.5 emissions were modeled using multiple
volume sources32
on the project site. The release height for each volume source was
assumed to be 5 meters (16.4 feet), which represents the mid-range of the expected
plume rise from frequently used construction equipment during daytime atmospheric
conditions. Daily emissions from construction equipment were assumed to occur over an
8 hour period between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. between Monday and Friday.33
A grid of receptors spaced 10 meters (32.8 feet) apart with receptor heights of 1.8 meters
(5.9 feet) were used to represent people at ground level in nearby residential areas.34
The
ISCST3 model input parameters included one year of BAAQMD meteorological data from
the Oakland STP station located about 3.2 miles south of the project site. The input
parameters and results of the ISCST3 model are included in Appendix D.
In accordance with guidance from the BAAQMD35
and OEHHA,36
a screening-level health
risk assessment (HRA) was conducted to calculate the incremental increase in cancer risk
and chronic HI to sensitive receptors from on-site DPM emissions during construction. The
acute HI for DPM was not calculated because an acute reference exposure level has not
been approved by OEHHA and California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the BAAQMD
does not recommend analysis of acute non-cancer health hazards from construction
activity. The annual average concentration of DPM at the maximally exposed individual
resident (MEIR)37
was used to conservatively assess potential health risks to nearby
sensitive receptors.
The cancer risk and chronic HI from on-site DPM emissions were assessed for children
under the age of 2, who represent the most sensitive individuals to adverse air quality
conditions that would likely be present at a nearby residence based on OEHHA’s age-
sensitivity factors for cancer risk. The high-end (95th percentile) daily breathing rate
32
The source of construction emissions can be modeled as a point, area, or volume source, each of which
uses different input parameters and assumptions about the air pollutant release characteristics.
33
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 2009. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in
Sacramento County. Revised June 2015.
34
Ibid.
35
BAAQMD, 2011a. Recommended Methods for Screening and Modeling Local Risks and Hazards. May.
36
OEHHA, 2015. op. cit.
37
A resident that may be located at the receptor location where the highest exposure to TACs emitted
from a given source or project is predicted.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
65
estimated by OEHHA for a child under the age of 2 (1,090 liters per kilogram per day)38
was assumed for the HRA. It was assumed that the child receptor would be continuously
exposed to annual average concentrations of DPM over the entire duration of project
construction. The input parameters and results of the HRA are included in Appendix D.
Annual average concentrations of DPM and PM2.5 at the MEIR from the project’s
construction emissions and associated health risks are summarized and compared to the
BAAQMD’s thresholds in Table14. The estimated chronic HI for DPM from construction
emissions was below the BAAQMD’s threshold; however, the estimated excess cancer risk
and annual average PM2.5 concentration from unmitigated construction emissions were
above the BAAQMD’s Thresholds. Therefore, the project must implement DPM control
measures described under SCA-32. As shown in Table 19, implementation of the DPM
control measures under SCA-32 would reduce the cancer risk and annual average PM2.5
concentration by about 88 percent to levels below the BAAQMD’s thresholds. Therefore,
compliance with SCA-32 would ensure that the project’s impact related to emissions of
DPM and PM2.5 during construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
TABLE 19 SUMMARY OF THE HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR DPM AND PM2.5
EMISSIONS DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Emissions Scenario
Diesel Particulate Matter Exhaust PM2.5
Annual
Average
Concentration
Child <2
Excess
Cancer Risk
Chronic
Hazard
Index
Annual Average
Concentration
Units (µg/m3
) (106
)-1
--- (µg/m3
)
Emissions without SCA-32 0.42 55 0.08 0.41
Emissions with SCA-32 0.05 6.6 0.01 0.05
BAAQMD's Thresholds NA 10 1 0.3
Notes: µg/m3
= micrograms per cubic meter; NA = not applicable
Bold font and shading indicates that the value exceeds the BAAQMD’s Threshold.
In accordance with SCA-32, the emissions of ROG, NOx, and exhaust PM10 and PM2.5 were reduced by
requiring off-road construction equipment to be equipped with CARB certified Tier 2 engines or higher engines
and the most effective Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies.
Source: CalEEMod (Appendix D)
38
OEHHA, 2015. op. cit.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
66
Standard Conditions of Approval
SCA-32. Air Quality - Diesel Particulate Matter Controls during Construction. All
off-road construction equipment used for projects with construction lasting more
than 2 months shall comply with one of the following measures:
1. The project applicant shall prepare a health risk assessment that demonstrates
the project’s on-site emissions of diesel particulate matter during construction
will not exceed health risk screening criteria after a screening-level health risk
assessment is conducted in accordance with current guidance from BAAQMD
and OEHHA. The health risk assessment shall be submitted to the Public Works
Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. All construction equipment shall be equipped with Tier 2 or higher engines and
the most effective Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies (VDECS) available
for the engine type (Tier 4 engines automatically meet this requirement) as
certified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The equipment shall be
properly maintained and tuned in accordance with manufacturer specifications.
In addition, a Construction Emissions Minimization Plan (Emissions Plan) shall
be prepared that includes the following:
An equipment inventory summarizing the type of off-road equipment
required for each phase of construction, including the equipment
manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year,
engine certification (tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number.
For all VDECS, the equipment inventory shall also include the
technology type, serial number, make, model, manufacturer, CARB
verification number level, and installation date.
A Certification Statement that the Contractor agrees to comply fully
with the Emissions Plan and acknowledges that a significant violation of
the Emissions Plan shall constitute a material breach of contract.
The Emissions Plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for
review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
Exposure to Toxic Air Contaminants
Future residents on the project site could be exposed to existing sources of TAC
emissions. While CEQA does not require the analysis or mitigation of potential effects the
existing environment may have on a project (with certain exceptions), an analysis of the
potential effects existing TAC sources may have on the future receptors at the project site
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
67
was performed to provide information to the public and decision-makers. The City of
Berkeley approved the use of the BAAQMD’s cumulative thresholds for evaluating the
potential health effects on future project receptors from existing TAC sources.
The BAAQMD recommends using their online screening tools to evaluate TAC emissions
from stationary and mobile sources within 1,000 feet of a new receptor (i.e., the project
site). The screening tools provide conservative estimates of how much existing TAC
sources would contribute to cancer risk, HI, and/or PM2.5 concentrations in a community.
As summarized in Table20, sources of TAC emissions identified near the project site
included two gas stations and vehicle exhaust along San Pablo Avenue. Screening values
for the gas stations were determined using the BAAQMD’s Stationary Source Screening
Analysis Tool39
and the screen values were refined for stations located more than 20
meters (66 feet) away using the BAAQMD’s Gasoline Dispensing Facility Distance Multiplier
Tool.40
Screening values for San Pablo Avenue, which is located 20 feet east of the project
site, were linearly interpolated from screening tables provided in the BAAQMD’s Highway
Screening Analysis Tool.41
TABLE 20 SUMMARY OF RISKS AND HAZARDS FROM NEARBY TAC SOURCES
Plant ID Name Location
Cancer Risk
(10-6)
Chronic
Hazard
Index
PM2.5
(µg/m3)
G6992 San Pablo Mini Mart 1580 San Pablo Ave 39 0.058 ---
G91 Xtra Oil Company 1399 San Pablo Ave 0.35 A
0.001 ---
NA San Pablo Avenue 20 feet east 4.6 0.005 0.05
Cumulative Risks and Hazards: 44 0.06 0.05
Cumulative Thresholds: 100 10 0.8
Notes: µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; NA = not available.
The 20-foot elevation exposure table (second floor exposures) was referenced to assess impacts from
San Pablo Avenue.
A
Value adjusted using the BAAQMD’s Gasoline Dispensing Facility Distance Multiplier Tool.
Source: BAAQMD,2016. Tools and Methodology. Accessed April 12. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-
climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/ceqa-tools.
39
BAAQMD, 2012b. Stationary Source Screening Analysis Tool. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-
climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/ceqa-tools. Accessed December 8, 2015.
40
BAAQMD, 2012c. Gasoline Dispensing Facility Distance Multiplier Tool. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-
and-climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/ceqa-tools. Accessed December 8, 2015.
41
BAAQMD, 2011b. Highway Screening Analysis Tool. http://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-
climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/ceqa-tools. Accessed December 8, 2015.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
68
Based on the screening-level analysis of nearby TAC sources, the cumulative increase in
cancer risk, chronic HI, and PM2.5 concentrations at the project site from existing TAC
sources are compared to the BAAQMD’s cumulative thresholds in Table 20. The
cumulative health risks to future receptors on the project site were below the BAAQMD’s
cumulative thresholds and, therefore, existing TAC sources would have a less-than-
significant impact on the project.
Odors
Typical odor sources are generally associated with municipal, industrial, or agricultural
land uses, such as wastewater treatment plants, landfills, confined animal facilities,
composting stations, food manufacturing plants, refineries, and chemical plants. The
occurrence and severity of odor impacts depend on the nature, frequency, and intensity of
the source, the wind speed and direction, and the sensitivity of receptors. As a mixed-use
development, the project would not be expected to generate significant odors. Land uses
surrounding the project site include mixed residential and commercial land uses, which
would also not be expected to generate significant odors. Therefore, project impacts
related to odors would be less than significant.
Criterion Section 15332(d): Water Quality
Yes No
Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to
water quality.
The project site is located within the Schoolhouse Creek Watershed, which drains much of
the northwestern portion of Berkeley into San Francisco Bay (the Bay).42
Stormwater runoff
from the proposed project would drain through an underground culvert into the
Schoolhouse Creek, which drains through another underground culvert beneath Virginia
Street and discharges into the Bay approximately 4,000 feet southwest of the project site.
Since the project would reduce the amount of existing impervious surface on the project
site, the project would not be expected to substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface water runoff. Furthermore, the quality of surface water runoff from the project site
would be regulated under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Program, which is enforced locally by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control
Board (Regional Water Board) and the City’s SCAs. Compliance with existing stormwater
control regulations and the City’s SCAs would ensure that the project would not result in
any significant effects relating to water quality; therefore, the project would be consistent
42
Berkeley, City of, 2009. City of Berkeley Drainage Map. January 22.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
69
with the requirement of the Class 32 exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section
153332(d) that the project would not result in impacts to water quality. Potential water
quality concerns associated with the project site are discussed further, below.
Groundwater Conservation
The proposed project would connect to the East Bay Municipal Utility District water system
and would not use groundwater at the site. In accordance with SCA-25, the project has
prepared and will implement the recommended water efficient landscaping measures
described in the Bay-Friendly Basics Landscape Checklist. Furthermore, the project would
reduce the amount of existing impervious surface on the project site, which would
increase the amount of local groundwater recharge.
Standard Conditions of Approval
SCA-25: Water Efficient Landscaping. Applicant shall provide an updated Bay-
Friendly Basics Landscape Checklist that includes detailed notes of any measures
that will not be fully met at the project. Landscape improvements shall be consistent
with the current versions of the State’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO)
and the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s Section 31: Water Efficiency
Requirements.
Stormwater Runoff
Since the proposed project would involve construction activities that would disturb over
1-acre of soil, the project would be required to comply with the NPDES General Permit for
Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activity
(Construction General Permit [CGP]). Under the CGP, preparation of a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the site would be required. The SWPPP would include
Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent the degradation of stormwater quality,
including operating procedures and practice to control site runoff, measures to reduce the
risk of spills or leaks from reaching the receiving waters, and procedures to address minor
spills of hazardous materials.
Stormwater runoff during the operational phase of the proposed project would be subject
to Low Impact Design measures in Provision C.3 of to the NPDES Municipal Regional
Permit (MRP) under Regional Water Board Order R2-2015-0049. These measures include
source control, site design, and treatment requirements to reduce the amount of
stormwater runoff and improve the quality of the stormwater runoff.
Project implementation of the control measures for stormwater runoff required under the
CGP and MRP during construction and operation, respectively, are also enforced by the
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
70
City of Berkeley under SCA-41 and SCA-42. Compliance with SCA-42 and SCA-43 and
existing regulations would ensure that the project’s potential impact related to water
quality would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Standard Conditions of Approval
SCA-41: Stormwater Requirements. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance
with the requirements of the City’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit as described in BMC Section 17.20. The following conditions apply:
A. The project plans shall identify and show site-specific Best Management Practices
(BMPs) appropriate to activities conducted on-site to limit to the maximum extent
practicable the discharge of pollutants to the City's storm drainage system,
regardless of season or weather conditions.
B. Trash enclosures and/or recycling area(s) shall be covered; no other area shall
drain onto this area. Drains in any wash or process area shall not discharge to
the storm drain system; these drains should connect to the sanitary sewer.
Applicant shall contact the City of Berkeley and EBMUD for specific connection
and discharge requirements. Discharges to the sanitary sewer are subject to the
review, approval and conditions of the City of Berkeley and EBMUD.
C. Landscaping shall be designed with efficient irrigation to reduce runoff, promote
surface infiltration and minimize the use of fertilizers and pesticides that
contribute to stormwater pollution. Where feasible, landscaping should be
designed and operated to treat runoff. When and where possible, xeriscape and
drought tolerant plants shall be incorporated into new development plans.
D. Design, location and maintenance requirements and schedules for any
stormwater quality treatment structural controls shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Works for review with respect to reasonable adequacy of
the controls. The review does not relieve the property owner of the responsibility
for complying with BMC Chapter 17.20 and future revisions to the City's overall
stormwater quality ordinances. This review shall be shall be conducted prior to
the issuance of a Building Permit.
E. All paved outdoor storage areas must be designed to reduce/limit the potential
for runoff to contact pollutants.
F. All on-site storm drain inlets/catch basins must be cleaned at least once a year
immediately prior to the rainy season. The property owner shall be responsible
for all costs associated with proper operation and maintenance of all storm
drainage facilities (pipelines, inlets, catch basins, outlets, etc.) associated with
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
71
the project, unless the City accepts such facilities by Council action. Additional
cleaning may be required by City of Berkeley Public Works Engineering Dept.
G. All private or public projects that create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or
more of impervious surface must comply with Provision C.3 of the Alameda
County NPDES permit and must incorporate stormwater controls to enhance
water quality. Permit submittals shall include a Stormwater Requirement
Checklist and detailed information showing how the proposed project will meet
Provision C.3 stormwater requirements, including a) Site design measures to
reduce impervious surfaces, promote infiltration, and reduce water quality
impacts; b) Source Control Measures to keep pollutants out of stormwater
runoff; c) Stormwater treatment measures that are hydraulically sized to remove
pollutants from stormwater; d) an O & M (Operations and Maintenance)
agreement for all stormwater treatment devices and installations; and e)
Engineering calculations for all stormwater devices (both mechanical and
biological).
H. All on-site storm drain inlets must be labeled “No Dumping – Drains to Bay” or
equivalent using methods approved by the City.
I. Most washing and/or steam cleaning must be done at an appropriately equipped
facility that drains to the sanitary sewer. Any outdoor washing or pressure
washing must be managed in such a way that there is no discharge or soaps or
other pollutants to the storm drain. Sanitary connections are subject to the
review, approval and conditions of the sanitary district with jurisdiction for
receiving the discharge.
J. All loading areas must be designated to minimize “run-on” or runoff from the
area. Accumulated waste water that may contribute to the pollution of
stormwater must be drained to the sanitary sewer or intercepted and pretreated
prior to discharge to the storm drain system. The property owner shall ensure
that BMPs are implemented to prevent potential stormwater pollution. These
BMPs shall include, but are not limited to, a regular program of sweeping, litter
control and spill cleanup.
K. Restaurants, where deemed appropriate, must be designed with a contained area
for cleaning mats, equipment and containers. This contained wash area shall be
covered or designed to prevent run-on or run-off from the area. The area shall
not discharge to the storm drains; wash waters should drain to the sanitary
sewer, or collected for ultimate disposal to the sanitary sewer. Employees shall
be instructed and signs posted indicating that all washing activities shall be
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
72
conducted in this area. Sanitary connections are subject to the review, approval
and conditions of the waste water treatment plant receiving the discharge.
L. Sidewalks and parking lots shall be swept regularly to prevent the accumulation
of litter and debris. If pressure washed, debris must be trapped and collected to
prevent entry to the storm drain system. If any cleaning agent or degreaser is
used, wash water shall not discharge to the storm drains; wash waters should be
collected and discharged to the sanitary sewer. Discharges to the sanitary sewer
are subject to the review, approval and conditions of the sanitary district with
jurisdiction for receiving the discharge.
M. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors and sub-contractors
are aware of and implement all stormwater quality control measures. Failure to
comply with the approved construction BMPs shall result in the issuance of
correction notices, citations, or a project stop work order.
SCA-42: Public Works - Construction. Construction activities that involve one or
more acres of land disturbance must comply with the State-wide general permit
requiring owner to (1) notify the State; (2) prepare and implement a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); and (3) monitor the effectiveness of the plan.
Additional information may be found online at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov. As part of
the permit submittal, the Public Works Department will need a) a copy of the “Notice
of Intent” filed with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)/Division of
Water Quality; b) the Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number issued by the
SWRCB for the project; c) a copy of the SWPPP prepared for each phase of the
project; and d) the name of the individual who will be responsible for monitoring the
site for compliance to the approved SWPPP.
Groundwater Dewatering
Project construction activities may require temporary dewatering that could disturb
residual groundwater contamination beneath the project site. Long-term dewatering will
not be required for the proposed subsurface garage. As discussed under Criterion
15300.2(e) (Hazardous Waste Sites), the project will be required to prepare and
implement a Soil and Groundwater Management Plan approved by the TMD in
accordance with SCA-30. Compliance with SCA-30 would ensure that the project’s
potential impact related to residual soil groundwater contamination would be reduced
to a less-than-significant level.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
73
EXCEPTIONS TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS CHECKLIST
In addition to investigating the applicability of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32),
this CEQA document also assesses whether any of the exceptions to qualifying for the
Class 32 categorical exemption for an Infill Project are present. The following analysis
compares the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 (Exceptions) to the project
Criterion 15300.2(a): Location
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project due to its location in
a particularly sensitive environment, such that the project may impact an
environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely
mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies?
This possible exception applies only to CEQA exemptions under Classes 3, 4, 5, 6 or 11.
Since the project qualifies as a Class 32 Urban Infill exemption, this criterion is not
applicable. However, there are no environmental resources of hazardous or critical
concern that are designated, precisely mapped or officially adopted in the vicinity of the
project site, or that could be adversely affected by the project.
Criterion 15300.2(b): Cumulative Impact
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project due to significant
cumulative impacts of successive projects of the same type and in the same place,
over time?
General Plan and Housing Element
The City of Berkeley completed an update of the General Plan 2015-2023 Housing Element
(HE) in February 2015. The HE includes the City’s current land use strategies, policies, and
priorities for Berkeley's development and enhancement during an eight-year period. The
Initial Study and Negative Declaration certified for the HE is used to simplify the task of
preparing environmental documents on later projects that occur as a result of HE
implementation. The Negative Declaration and Initial Study did not identify any impacts,
cumulative or otherwise, associated with the adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing Element
update.
As demonstrated under Criterion Section 15332(a): General Plan and Zoning Consistency
(above), the project is consistent with the development density established by existing
zoning and General Plan policies for the site, inclusive of requested density bonus
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
74
waivers, and there are no peculiar aspects, other than those evaluated herein, that would
increase the severity of any of the potential significant cumulative effects identified in the
HE Negative Declaration.
The City of Berkeley’s 2015-2023 Housing Element’s Policy LU-27 Avenue Commercial
Areas identifies San Pablo Avenue as one of the commercial districts to be maintained and
improved under the plan. Specific features identified to support this policy objective
include street-facing ground floor commercial uses, pedestrian-scale development and
infill development of vacant or underutilized property compatible with existing
development patterns. Further, the HE specifically identifies the project site as a housing
opportunity site.43
Since the project is consistent with the development assumptions for the site as provided
under the HE and associated Negative Declaration, the project’s potential contribution to
cumulatively significant effects has already been addressed in this prior CEQA document.
Therefore, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, which allows for streamlined
environmental review, this analysis needs only to consider whether there are project-
specific effects peculiar to the project or its site, and relies on the streamlining provisions
of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 to not re-consider cumulative effects.
Urban Site
The project site is located in an urban area on a site that has been previously developed
and that adjoins other existing urban uses on all sides, as described in the Project
Description, above.
Sustainable Communities Strategy
The adopted Plan Bay Area (2013) serves as the Sustainable Communities Strategy for the
Bay Area. As defined by Plan Bay Area, Priority Development Areas (PDAs) are areas where
new development will support the needs of residents and workers in a pedestrian-friendly
environment served by transit. The San Pablo Avenue District, the corridor running the
length of San Pablo Avenue from just north of Harrison Street southward to 67th
Street, is
considered a PDA and includes the eastern portion of the project site (zoned C-W). The
project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation, density, building intensity
and applicable land use policies for this area.
43
City of Berkeley, 2015. 2015-2023 Housing Element, Table A-6, p.226.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
75
Criterion 15300.2(c): Significant Effect
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project because there is a
reasonable possibility that the project will have a significant effect on the
environment due to unusual circumstances?
There are no known unusual circumstances applicable to the project or its site which may
result in a significant effect on the environment (see also the further discussion under
Criterion 2[e] regarding Hazardous Materials, below). Therefore, the exception under
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(c) does not apply to the project.
Criterion 15300.2(d): Scenic Highway
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project because project may
result in damage to scenic resources including but not limited to, trees, historic
buildings, rock outcroppings or similar resources, within a highway officially
designated as a state scenic highway?
The project site has no trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings or similar visual
resources within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The nearest
scenic highway, the Macarthur Freeway (I-580) is located approximately 5 miles south-
southwest44,
45
, and the project site is not visible from that freeway. Given these facts, the
exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(d) does not apply to the project.
Criterion 15300.2(e): Hazardous Waste Sites
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project because the
project is located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code?
The provisions of Government Code Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the
"Cortese List". The provisions require the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC),
the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the California Department of Public
44
Department of Transportation, California. 2016. Officially Designated State Scenic Highways and
Historic Parkways, Alameda County. Accessed March 25. Website:
www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm,
45
Department of Transportation, California. 2016. Route 580 – Scenic Highway. Accessed March 25.
Website: www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm,
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
76
Health (DPH),46
, and the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecyle) to submit information pertaining to sites associated with solid waste disposal,
hazardous waste disposal, leaking underground tank sites, and/or hazardous materials
releases to the Secretary of California Environmental Protection Agency(Cal/EPA). As
summarized in Table 21, the project site is not identified on any lists compiled pursuant
to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code; therefore, an exception to the Class 32
exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(e) does not apply to the project.
TABLE 21 SUMMARY OF CORTESE LIST SEARCH RESULTS FOR 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE
Government
Code Section
Responsible
Agency List Description
Project
Identified
on List?
65962.5(a)(1) DTSC List of hazardous waste facilities where DTSC have
taken or contracted for corrective action because
the owner failed to comply with an order or DTSC
determined that immediate corrective action was
necessary to abate an imminent or substantial
endangerment.
No
65962.5(a)(2) DTSC List of all land designated as hazardous waste
property or border zone property.
No
65962.5 (a)(3) DTSC List of probable unauthorized disposal of
hazardous waste on, under or into the land which
the city, county, or state agency owns or leases. As
of 1 April 2016, DTSC has not maintained or
submitted a list of these records to Cal/EPA, but
has indicated that they plan to in the future.
No
65962.5(a)(4) DTSC List of sites where a hazardous substance release
has been confirmed by on-site sampling and a
response action is required.
No
65962.5(a)(5) DTSC List of sites in the Abandoned Site Assessment
Program. DTSC concluded the Abandoned Site
Assessment Program in the 1990’s and no longer
maintains or submits a list of these records to
Cal/EPA.
No
65962.5(b) DPH List of all public drinking water wells that contain
detectable levels of organic contaminants or
require water quality analysis. Since all required
analyses required for this list were to have been
completed by 1988, DHS no longer submits a list of
these records to Cal/EPA. In addition, DHS does not
provide the location of public drinking water wells
to the public.
No
46
Formerly the California Department of Health Services.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
77
Government
Code Section
Responsible
Agency List Description
Project
Identified
on List?
65962.5(c)(1) SWRCB List of all underground storage tanks for which an
unauthorized release report is filed. The SWRCB
provides information about “Leaking Underground
Storage Tank Cleanup Sites” in its GeoTracker
database, which includes reports filed each year
going back to fiscal year 1996/1997. According to
SWRCB, both "active" and “closed” sites are included
on the list.
No
Section
65962.5(c)(2)
SWRCB List of all solid waste disposal facilities from which
there is a migration of hazardous waste into water.
No
Section
65962.5(c)(3)
SWRCB List of sites for which either a Cease and Desist
Order or a Cleanup or Abatement Order was issued
that concerns the discharge of wastes that are
hazardous materials.
No
Section
65962.5(d)
CalRecycle Former list of solid waste disposal facilities from
which there is a known migration of hazardous
waste. Subsequent legislation (AB 1220 Solid Waste
Disposal Regulatory Reform Act of 1993)
superseded this requirement, and lists compiled
under Sections of 65962.5(c)(2) and/or(c)(3) should
capture this information.
No
While the site has not been identified on any lists compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5, previous environmental assessments and investigations have identified
hazardous building materials and residual soil and groundwater contamination on the
project site. These potential hazardous materials concerns associated with the project site
are discussed further, below.
Hazardous Building Materials
In 2005, an asbestos survey identified asbestos containing materials (ACMs) in the
existing building on the project site.47
The survey did not evaluate other potential
hazardous building materials (e.g. lead-based paint) or include a plan for removing the
ACMs. In accordance with SCA-30, the project would need to prepare an updated and
complete hazardous building materials survey as well as plans to remove and dispose of
the hazardous waste or hazardous materials prior to demolition. Compliance with SCA-30
47
Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2005a. Asbestos Survey; McNevin Cadillac Property, 1500 San Pablo Avenue,
Berkeley, California. January 11.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
78
and existing regulations would ensure that the project’s potential impact related to
hazardous building materials would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Soil and Groundwater Quality
As early as 1957, the project site was used as an automobile dealership. As summarized
in Table17, potential sources or pathways for hazardous materials releases on the project
site included storage of gasoline and waste oil, subsurface hydraulic lifts, floor drains, and
a battery storage room.48
TABLE 22 HISTORY OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE PROJECT SITE
Year Background
Mid-1980s The floor drains in the existing building were plugged with Portland cement
concrete.
1985
A 1,000-gallon gasoline underground storage tank (UST) and associated fuel
dispenser were removed from the central portion of the parking lot on the east
side of the project site under the supervision of the City of Berkeley Fire
Department (CBFD).
1986 A 550-gallon waste oil UST was replaced near the southeast corner of the
existing building on the project site.
1998
A 4,000-gallon (or possibly 6,000-gallon) gasoline UST located adjacent to and
south of the former 1,000-gallon UST was removed from the project site under
the supervision of the CBFD.
2005 The floor in the battery storage area appeared to be pitted and cracked during a
Phase I ESA site reconnaissance.
2007
A 550-gallon waste oil UST was removed near the southeast corner of the
existing building and 17 subsurface hydraulic lifts were removed from within the
existing building on the project site.
Sources: Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2005b. op. cit.
Langan Treadwell Rollo, 2015. op. cit.
In 2005, two soil and groundwater investigation investigations were performed to evaluate
the following contaminants of potential concern:
Petroleum hydrocarbons from former USTs, hydraulic lifts, and floor drains on the
project site;
48
Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2005b. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment; McNevin Cadillac Property,
1500 San Pablo Avenue, Berkeley, California. January 26.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
79
Sulfuric acid and lead from a battery storage room on the project site; and
Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) from former offsite dry cleaning operations at the Zaitlin
Property/Walker Estate located about 100 feet east and upgradient of the project
site.
The investigations determined that there is residual petroleum hydrocarbon
contamination in soil and groundwater near the former 1,000-gallon gasoline UST and
localized acidic conditions are present in the soil beneath the battery storage room.
Detectable concentrations of PCE were not reported in a groundwater sample collected
along the east boundary of the project site; therefore, PCE contamination from the Zaitlin
Property/Walker Estate has not migrated onto the project site.49
In 2008, the City of Berkeley’s Toxic Management Division (TMD) issued a No Further
Action letter for the project site based on completion of a facility closure inspection as
well as previous soil and groundwater analytical results. According to TMD’s No Further
Action letter, the residual petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in the subsurface on the
project site is most likely associated with the former gasoline USTs. TMD has recorded a
notice (flag) in the City of Berkeley building permit system to indicate that residual
petroleum hydrocarbon contamination is present on the project site and that building
permits related to the project site need to be routed through TMD for review and approval
prior to issuing building, construction or other permits.50
In March 2015, a Phase I ESA was prepared for the project site in accordance with ASTM
Practice E1527-13. The Phase I ESA did not identify any Recognized Environmental
Conditions (RECs) on the project site due to the presence or likely presence, use, or
release on the project site of hazardous substances or petroleum products. However, the
Phase I ESA did identify a controlled REC due to residual contamination from a past
release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the
satisfaction of the TMD.51
Since the proposed project is a mixed-use development located in an Environmental
Management Area, an updated Phase I ESA report will need to be submitted to the TMD
for review in accordance with SCA-30. Based on review of the updated Phase I ESA, the
TMD may require a Phase II site investigation to further evaluate the quality of soil and/or
groundwater for reuse. In addition, the project will be required to prepare and implement
49
Krazan & Associates, Inc., 2005c. Summary of Resulting and Findings; Additional Soil and Groundwater
Assessment, McNevin Cadillac, 1500 San Pablo Avenue, Berkeley, California. November 4.
50
Langan Treadwell Rollo, 2015. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment; 1500 San Pablo Avenue,
Berkeley, California. March 12.
51
Langan Treadwell Rollo, 2015. op. cit.
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
80
a Soil and Groundwater Management Plan approved by the TMD that describes how to
manage potential residual contamination in the soil and groundwater on the project site
during construction activities (e.g., temporary dewatering). Long-term dewatering will not
be required for the proposed subsurface garage. Compliance with SCA-30 would ensure
that the project’s potential impact related to residual soil and groundwater contamination
would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Standard Conditions of Approval
SCA-30: Toxics. The applicant shall contact the Toxics Management Division (TMD)
at 2120 Milvia, 3rd Floor or (510) 981-7470 to determine which of the following
environmental documents are required and timing for their submittal:
1. Phase I & Phase II Environmental Site Assessments (latest ASTM 1527-13)
A recent Phase I ESA (less than 6 months old*) shall be submitted to TMD for
developments for:
a. All new commercial, industrial and mixed use developments and all large
improvement projects.
b. All new residential buildings with 5 or more dwelling units located in the
Environmental Management Area (or EMA).
EMA is available online at: http://www.cityofberkeley.info/
uploadedFiles/IT/Level_3_-_General/ema.pdf
Phase II ESA is required to evaluate Recognized Environmental Conditions
(REC) identified in the Phase I or other RECs identified by TMD staff.
The TMD may require a third party toxicologist to review human or
ecological health risks that may be identified. The applicant may apply to
the appropriate state, regional or county cleanup agency to evaluate the
risks.
* If the Phase I is over 6 months old, it will require a new site
reconnaissance and interviews. If the facility was subject to regulation
under Title 15 of the Berkeley Municipal Code since the last Phase I was
conducted, a new records review must be performed.
2. Soil and Groundwater Management Plan
A Soil and Groundwater Management Plan (SGMP) shall be submitted to TMD
for all non-residential projects, and residential or mixed-use projects with
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
81
five or more dwelling units, that: (1) are in the Environmental Management
Area (EMA) and (2) propose any excavations deeper than 5 feet below grade.
The SGMP shall be site specific and identify procedures for soil and
groundwater management including identification of pollutants and disposal
methods. The SGMP will identify permits required and comply with all
applicable local, state and regional requirements.
The SGMP shall require notification to TMD of any hazardous materials found
in soils and groundwater during development. The SGMP will provide
guidance on managing odors during excavation. The SGMP will provide the
name and phone number of the individual responsible for implementing the
SGMP and post the name and phone number for the person responding to
community questions and complaints.
TMD may impose additional conditions as deemed necessary. All
requirements of the approved SGMP shall be deemed conditions of approval
of this Use Permit.
3. Building Materials Survey
Prior to approving any permit for partial or complete demolition and
renovation activities involving the removal of 20 square or lineal feet of
interior or exterior walls, a building materials survey shall be conducted by a
qualified professional. The survey shall include, but not be limited to,
identification of any lead-based paint, asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyl
(PCB) containing equipment, hydraulic fluids in elevators or lifts, refrigeration
systems, treated wood and mercury containing devices (including fluorescent
light bulbs and mercury switches). The Survey shall include plans on
hazardous waste or hazardous materials removal, reuse or disposal
procedures to be implemented that fully comply state hazardous waste
generator requirements (22 California Code of Regulations 66260 et seq).
The Survey becomes a condition of any building or demolition permit for the
project. Documentation evidencing disposal of hazardous waste in
compliance with the survey shall be submitted to TMD within 30 days of the
completion of the demolition. If asbestos is identified, Bay Area Air Quality
Management District Regulation 11-2-401.3 a notification must be made and
the J number must be made available to the City of Berkeley Permit Service
Center.
4. Hazardous Materials Business Plan
A Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) in compliance with BMC Section
15.12.040 shall be submitted electronically at http://cers.calepa.ca.gov/
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
82
within 30 days if on-site hazardous materials exceed BMC 15.20.040. HMBP
requirement can be found at http://ci.berkeley.ca.us/hmr/
Criterion 15300.2(f): Historical Resources
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project because the project
may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource?
Historic Resources
An assessment of the historic significance of the existing building was prepared by
Preservation Architecture and was submitted as part of the project application.52
The City
of Berkeley’s Landmarks Preservation Committee reviewed the application on June 4,
2015, and conditionally approved the demolition permit associated with the application.
As described in this assessment, East Bay architect Paul H. Hammarberg designed the
existing building at 1500 San Pablo Avenue. Mr. Hammarberg was a graduate of the
University of California at Berkeley’s school of architecture in 1933 and is known to have
designed several mid-century residences. The firm of Hammarberg and Herman, which he
formed with partner Arthur C. Herman in 1961, designed a variety of Bay Area shopping
centers, apartment buildings, and residences. None of Hammarberg’s works, including the
auto sales showroom at 1500 San Pablo Avenue, are considered works of architectural or
historical importance.
The building was constructed for the Shepard Cadillac Co. by F.P. Lathrop Construction
Company in 1957. Shepard maintained ownership and occupancy of the dealership until
McNevin Cadillac took control of the property in 1967. McNevin closed their operations in
2006 but retained ownership of the building until 2008. Hammarberg designed the
Modernist edifice as an automobile showroom. The portion of the building that was not
dedicated showroom space, the service structure, was a steel structure finished with a
rough masonry curtain. The site, by design, contained ample parking, which was an
important feature for a mid-century dealership on a busy thoroughfare. The low exterior
planters, original signage, and exterior lighting are no longer present. A masonry-clad
structure was added to the south side of the showroom in 1980. The addition filled the
inside corner between the showroom and the service structure, diminishing the glass
pavilion to a 3-sided, attached, and no longer transparent structure.
52
Preservation Architecture, 2014. 1500 San Pablo Avenue, Berkeley, Historic Resources Evaluation.
December.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
83
The building was evaluated by Mark Hulbert of Preservation Architecture in 2008 (rev.
2014). In addition to recording the building’s physical features, the Historic Resources
Evaluation presented a historic context for the property and evaluated the property in
light of the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and
the City of Berkeley Landmarks and Structures of Merit per the City of Berkeley Landmarks
Preservation Ordinance.
The property reflects changing land values and the resulting shift in land use that saw
commercial interests like auto dealerships move from more central locations to secondary
locations such as San Pablo Avenue. Despite this association with a general trend, the
dealership was not part of an auto-oriented row to which it could be considered a
contributor, nor does the building now relate to other local areas where there may be an
auto dealership context. No events or people important to history are associated with the
building and Hammarberg’s works have been described as “earnest yet standard
architectural efforts.” This building, in particular, does not convey modern architectural
importance. Additionally, no directly or indirectly associated city or regional planning and
economic development patterns are of identifiable import to this resource. Finally, this
individual property does not fit into any significant pattern with respect to its
neighborhood.
Hulbert’s analysis concluded that the building at 1500 San Pablo Avenue does not meet
any of the criteria for listing in the CRHR (Criterion 1-4) and that it does not meet
eligibility requirements for listing as a City of Berkeley Landmark or Structure of Merit. In
March 2016, WSA architectural historian, Aimee Arrigoni, M.A., reviewed the Historic
Resources Evaluation of the structure prepared by Mark Hulbert of Preservation
Architecture (2008, rev. December 2014) and concurs with the findings therein.
As a result, 1500 San Pablo Avenue is not considered a historic resource under CEQA and
therefore there would not be any impacts to historic resources if the building were
demolished to accommodate new construction on the site.
Given these facts, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(d) regarding
impacts to an historic building does not apply to the project.
Archaeological Resources
No archaeological research, investigations or database searches have been conducted for
the property. The project site is located within an urbanized portion of the city, has been
previously disturbed by development, and is surrounded by other urban development. As
a result, archeological resources are not anticipated to be encountered with
implementation of the proposed project. Implementation of the following SCAs would
ensure that any resources that may be discovered are recovered and that appropriate
1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT APRIL 2016
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
84
procedures are followed in the event of accidental discovery to minimize potential risk of
impact on archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level.
Standard Conditions of Approval
SCA-33: Archaeological Resources (Ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or
construction). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5(f), “provisions for historical or
unique archaeological resources accidentally discovered during construction” should be
instituted. Therefore, in the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural
resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities, all work within 50 feet of the
resources shall be halted and the project applicant and/or lead agency shall consult with a
qualified archaeologist or paleontologist to assess the significance of the find.
a. If any find is determined to be significant, representatives of the project
proponent and/or lead agency and the qualified archaeologist would meet to
determine the appropriate avoidance measures or other appropriate measure,
with the ultimate determination to be made by the City of Berkeley. All
significant cultural materials recovered shall be subject to scientific analysis,
professional museum curation, and a report prepared by the qualified
archaeologist according to current professional standards.
b. In considering any suggested measure proposed by the consulting archaeologist
in order to mitigate impacts to historical resources or unique archaeological
resources, the project applicant shall determine whether avoidance is necessary
and feasible in light of factors such as the nature of the find, project design,
costs, and other considerations.
c. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data
recovery) shall be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site
while measure for historical resources or unique archaeological resources is
carried out.
d. If an archaeological artifact or feature be discovered on-site during project
construction, all activities within a 50-foot radius of the find would be halted
until the findings can be fully investigated by a qualified archaeologist to
evaluate the find and assess the significance of the find according to the CEQA
definition of a historical or unique archaeological resource.
e. If the deposit is determined to be significant, the project applicant and the
qualified archaeologist shall meet to determine the appropriate avoidance
measures or other appropriate measure, subject to approval by the City of
Berkeley, which shall assure implementation of appropriate measure measures
recommended by the archaeologist. Should archaeologically-significant materials
be recovered, the qualified archaeologist shall recommend appropriate analysis
and treatment, and shall prepare a report on the findings for submittal to the
Northwest Information Center.
APRIL 2016 1500 SAN PABLO AVENUE PROJECT
CLASS 32 CEQA EXEMPTION
85
SCA-35: Human Remains (Ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or
construction). In the event that human skeletal remains are uncovered at the project
site during construction or ground-breaking activities, all work shall immediately
halt and the Alameda County Coroner shall be contacted to evaluate the remains,
and following the procedures and protocols pursuant to Section 15064.5 (e)(1) of
the CEQA Guidelines. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are Native
American, the City shall contact the California Native American Heritage Commission
(NAHC), pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code,
and all excavation and site preparation activities shall cease within a 50-foot radius
of the find until appropriate arrangements are made. If the agencies determine that
avoidance is not feasible, then an alternative plan shall be prepared with specific
steps and timeframe required to resume construction activities. Monitoring, data
recovery, determination of significance and avoidance measures (if applicable) shall
be completed expeditiously.
SCA-36: Paleontological Resources (Ongoing throughout demolition, grading,
and/or construction). In the event of an unanticipated discovery of a paleontological
resource during construction, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be
temporarily halted or diverted until the discovery is examined by a qualified
paleontologist (per Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards [SVP 1995,1996]).
The qualified paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed, evaluate the
potential resource, and assess the significance of the find. The paleontologist shall
notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed
before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find. If the City
determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an
excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the project on the qualities that make the
resource important, and such plan shall be implemented. The plan shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
With required implementation of these SCAs, potential adverse effect on as-yet
undiscovered historic resources will be less than significant, and the exception under
CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(e) does not apply.
Criterion 15300.2: Other Potential Effects
Yes No
Is there an exception to the Class 32 exemption for the project because the project
may result in substantial adverse impacts other than those discussed above?
Based on City of Berkeley threshold criteria, no additional substantial adverse impacts
beyond those discussed above are anticipated.