11A Public Hearings - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Environmental Checklist Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Consistency Checklist Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 65 construction, and properly disposed of at an off-site disposal facility. In addition, the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels, lubricants, and solvents during project construction would be conducted in accordance with applicable state and federal laws, such as the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the California Hazardous Materials Management Act, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 22. Therefore, project construction would not expose workers or the environment to contamination or toxic substances. The project would involve demolition of buildings that, due to their age, may contain asbestos- containing materials (ACM) and/or lead-based paint. The existing buildings were constructed circa 1940. Structures built before the 1970s typically used ACMs in their construction. Demolition of the existing structures could result in health hazard impacts to workers if not remediated prior to construction activities. However, demolition and construction activities would be required to adhere to BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2, which governs the proper handling and disposal of ACM for demolition, renovation, and manufacturing activities in the Bay Area, and California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) regulations regarding lead-based materials. The California Code of Regulations, Section 1532.1, requires testing, monitoring, containment, and disposal of lead-based materials, such that exposure levels do not exceed CalOSHA standards. The DTSC has classified PCBs as a hazardous waste when concentrations exceed 50 parts per million in non-liquids, and the DTSC requires that materials containing those concentrations of PCBs be transported and disposed of as hazardous waste. Implementation of General Plan Policy EH-5.7 focused on ensuring the safe and proper handling of hazardous building materials during building renovation or demolition would further reduce impacts. With implementation of appropriate General Plan policies and required compliance with COA HAZ-1 and COA HAZ-2, impacts related to the accidental release of hazardous materials stored on-site into the environment would be less than significant. c.Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? The nearest school is the Montessori School at Washington Avenue, located approximately 0.34 mile south of the project site. There are no schools within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site. During project construction, as described in criterion b above, due to the age and building materials of the structures on the project site, ACM and LBP could be removed from the project site and transported within 0.25 mile of the nearest school. However, as detailed above, applicable General Plan policies and compliance with applicable state and federal laws would reduce the risk of hazardous exposure associated with project construction. In addition, as residences would not involve the use, storage, or disposal of substantial quantities of hazardous waste as discussed under criterion a, impacts related to project operation resulting in hazardous material exposure to schools would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to hazardous materials or hazardous waste from the project site to nearby school sites would be less than significant. d.Would the project be located on a site included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The Phase I ESA included an area assessment and a review of relevant databases for known hazardous materials contamination, environmental investigations, and remediation projects on and adjacent to the project site. Appendix HAZ identified no evidence of on- or off-site recognized environmental conditions. A search of the GeoTracker database identified two leaking underground