Item 27 - Appeal Application Nos. 2020-03 and 2020-04 - Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development

Home Browse Search

Central Pointe Mixed -Use Development Project November 9, 2020 Page 9 of 14 the Project -related emissions, existing, existing and projected future emissions from local PM2.5 sources upon the outdoor air concentrations at the Project site. Id. No analysis has been conducted of the significant cumulative health impacts that will result to residents and employees at the Project. 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., p. 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 in the buildings' interiors. Id., p. 12. Mr. Offermann relies in part on the study by Singer et al. published in 2020 to calculate of the Projects emissions. This study analyzed the indoor concentrations of formaldehyde for homes built between 2011 and 2015, and since only Phase 2 composite wood products were permitted for sale after July 2012, most of the homes in the Singer study were constructed with CARB Phase 2 compliant materials. See id., p. 3. The Singer study shows that homes built after 2009 with CARB Phase 2 Formaldehyde ATCM materials had lower indoor formaldehyde concentrations of 22.4 pg/m3 (18.2 ppb) as compared to a median of 36 pg/m3 found in the 2007 California New Home Study. See id. While these buildings had a lower median formaldehyde concentration and cancer risk, the median lifetime cancer risk for homes built with CARB Phase 2 compliant composite wood products still greatly exceeded the OEHHA 10 in a million cancer risk threshold. Id. Mr. Offermann relies in part on the indoor formaldehyde concentrations determined in the 2020 Singer study to conclude that the Project will have similar indoor concentrations of formaldehyde as observed in the Singer study and exceed the CEQA significance threshold for airborne cancer risk because the building materials and furnishings commonly found in homes that release formaldehyde are also found in multi -family residential buildings and commercial buildings. The 2020 Singer study and resulting finding that a project's compliance with CARB Phase 2 compliant materials is not enough to get a project below the cancer risk threshold is new information that was not previously available of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the 2007 MEMU EIR or the 2018 MEMU SEIR were certified as complete, showing that the Project will have a significant health risk impact from its indoor air quality not discussed in the MEMU EIR. Therefore, the City must prepare a subsequent EIR for the Project. 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.AppAth 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 Projects' future formaldehyde emissions and establishing mitigation measures that reduce the cancer risk below the