75C - PH MORTIMER MIXED USE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4th and Mortimer CEQA Addendum October 12, 2020 Page 9 of 15 significance threshold for airborne cancer risk of 10 per million. Even if the Project uses modern "CARB-compliant" materials, Mr. Offermann concludes that formaldehyde will create a cancer risk more than ten times above the CEQA significance threshold. Offermann Comment, p. 3. Mr. Offermann concludes that this significant environmental impact should be analyzed in an EIR and mitigation measures should be imposed to reduce the risk of formaldehyde exposure. Mr. Offermann concludes that this significant environmental impact should be analyzed in an EIR and mitigation measures should be imposed to reduce the risk of formaldehyde exposure. Id., pp. 4. Mr. Offermann identifies mitigation measures that are available to reduce these significant health risks, including the installation of air filters and a requirement that the applicant use only composite wood materials (e.g. hardwood plywood, medium density fiberboard, particleboard) for all interior finish systems that are made with CARB approved no -added formaldehyde (NAF) resins or ultra -low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins in the buildings' interiors. Offermann Comments, pp. 11-12 The City has a duty to investigate issues relating to a project's potential environmental impacts, especially those issues raised by an expert's comments. See Cty. Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v. Cty. of Kern, (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1597-98 ("under CEQA, the lead agency bears a burden to investigate potential environmental impacts"). In addition to assessing the Project's potential health impacts to residents and workers, Mr. Offermann identifies the investigatory path that the City should be following in developing an EIR to more precisely evaluate the Project's future formaldehyde emissions and establishing mitigation measures that reduce the cancer risk below the SCAQMD level. Offermann Comments, pp. 5-9. Such an analysis would be similar in form to the air quality modeling and traffic modeling typically conducted as part of a CEQA review. The failure to address the project's formaldehyde emissions is contrary to the California Supreme Court's decision in California Building Industry Ass'n v. Bay Area Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 386 ("CBIA"). At issue in CBIA was whether the Air District could enact CEQA guidelines that advised lead agencies that they must analyze the impacts of adjacent environmental conditions on a project. The Supreme Court held that CEQA does not generally require lead agencies to consider the environment's effects on a project. CBIA, 62 Cal.4th at 800-801. However, to the extent a project may exacerbate existing adverse environmental conditions at or near a project site, those would still have to be considered pursuant to CEQA. Id. at 801 ("CEQA calls upon an agency to evaluate existing conditions in order to assess whether a project could exacerbate hazards that are already present"). In so holding, the Court expressly held that CEQA's statutory language required lead agencies to disclose and analyze "impacts on a project's users or residents that arise from the project's effects on the environment." Id. at 800 (emphasis added).) The carcinogenic formaldehyde emissions identified by Mr. Offermann are not an existing environmental condition. Those emissions to the air will be from the Project. Residents will be users of the residential units, and employees will be users of the hotel and offices. Currently, there is presumably little if any formaldehyde emissions at the site. 75C-28