The document summarizes a public scoping session for an environmental impact report for a proposed mixed-use development project in Emeryville, California. The project would demolish an existing building and develop a 54-story residential tower with 638 units, a 15-story office tower, and a 0.5-acre park. The scoping session overviewed the proposed project, the CEQA environmental review process, and areas to be analyzed in the draft EIR such as transportation, air quality, greenhouse gases, and alternatives. Attendees were invited to provide comments to help scope the draft EIR analysis.

1. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
ONNI CHRISTIE
MIXED-USE PROJECT
City of
Emeryville
Public
Scoping
Session
April 4, 2019

2. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
PRESENTATION OVERVIEW
 Provide overview of proposed project
 Review CEQA process
 Review draft EIR scope
 Review Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) metric
 Receive comments on the draft EIR scope
2

3. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
PROJECT SITE
3

4. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
PROPOSED PROJECT
 Demolish existing 1-story, 44,000-square-foot building
 Retain 7-story commercial building (Wells Fargo)
 Develop:
 54-story residential tower with 638 units
 15-story office tower
 0.5-acre park
 NOP Corrections:
 638 units (not 628)
 Units could be rental
or ownership
 15-story office tower (not 16)
 638-feet-tall residential
tower (not 683)
4

5. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
EIR INITIATION
 City determined that EIR is required
 Purpose: serve as an informational
document for public agency decision-makers
and the public
 Lead Agency: City of Emeryville
 City’s EIR Consultant: Urban Planning
Partners
 Project Sponsor: Onni Group
5

6. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
CEQA PROCESS
1. City decided to prepare an EIR and issued a Notice of
Preparation (NOP) on March 20, 2019
2. 30-day NOP/scoping comment period (March 20, 2019-April
19, 2019)
i. Scoping Session: April 4, 2019
3. Draft EIR Preparation & Publication (~Fall 2019)
4. Public Review of Draft EIR (45 days)
1. Including Planning Commission public hearing for verbal comments on
Draft EIR
5. Final EIR/Responses to Comments Preparation, Publication, &
Certification (~Early 2020)
6. Consideration of proposed project (~Spring 2020)
6

7. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
1. City sent Notice of Preparation (NOP) on March 20, 2019 to
State Clearinghouse
1. State will distribute to relevant reviewing agencies
2. In addition, City directly notified following agencies:
7
• San Francisco Bay
Conservation and
Development Commission
(BCDC)
• San Mateo County Airport
Land Use Committee
• Alameda County Airport
Land Use Commission
• AC Transit
• BART
• EBMUD
• CalTrans

8. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
SCOPE OF EIR
The NOP proposes that the EIR analysis will focus on
the following issues:
• Aesthetics (Wind and
Shade/Shadow)
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Energy
• Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
• Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
• Hydrology andWater Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Noise
• Public Services and Utilities
• Traffic and Transportation
8

9. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
SCOPE OF EIR
Effects anticipated to not be significant (with
incorporation of standard conditions of approval):
• Agricultural and Forest Resources
• Mineral Resources
• Population and Housing
• Recreation
9

10. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT?
Under CEQA, a significant effect is defined as a
substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse
change in the environment
1. Conduct impact analysis
2. Compare to established thresholds of significance
3. Determine if impact is significant
4. Identify potential mitigation measures for significant
impacts
10

11. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
TRANSPORATION IMPACT
ANALYSIS
 Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) vs. Level of
Service (LOS)
 Robert Rees, Principal, Fehr & Peers
11

12. INNOVATION BY
WhatisVMT?
12

13. INNOVATION BY
WhatisVMT?
13

14. INNOVATION BY
SB743
Mobility
Accessibility
What SB 743 Does
- Eliminates LOS/Delay as metric
to identify a significant
environmental impact
- Adds Vehicle Miles of Travel as
the metric to evaluate a projects
transportation impact
14

15. INNOVATION BY
SB743
What SB 743 Does
Not Do…
No change to general plans,
traffic impact fee programs,
State Constitution, subdivision
map act, etc.
15

16. INNOVATION BY
Guidelines
• Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
recommends VMT as the most appropriate
measure of transportation impacts
• OPR recommends that VMT should be used
everywhere in the State
• Land use projects within ½-mile of major transit
may be presumed to have a less-than-significant
transportation impact if specific project criteria is
met
• Transit, bike, and pedestrian projects should be
presumed to have a less-than-significant
transportation impact
16

17. INNOVATION BY
VMT FORECASTINGMethods
VMT = Volume x Distance or
Trips x Trip Length
• OPR guidelines offer three basic methods for
VMT quantification:
• Activity-Based Models
• Trip-Based Models
• Spreadsheet Methods
17

18. INNOVATION BY
OTHER CONSIDERATIONSMethods
• Mixed Use
Projects
• Unique Projects
• Redevelopment
Projects
18

19. INNOVATION BY
REDUCE TRIPS OR
TRIP LENGTHMitigation
• Improve transit access
• Increase access to common goods & services
• Provide affordable housing
• Improve pedestrian or bicycle network
• Orient project towards transit, pedestrian or
bicycle networks
• Provide traffic calming
• Provide bicycle parking
• Provide transit passes
• Provide car sharing
• Worksite amenities (showers, bicycle lockers)
• Develop Transportation Demand
Management Plan
19

20. INNOVATION BY
• Improve transit access
• Increase access to common goods & services
• Provide affordable housing
• Improve pedestrian or bicycle network
• Modify project design to orient towards transit, pedestrian or bicycle networks
• Provide traffic calming
• Provide bicycle parking
• Provide transit passes
REDUCE TRIPS OR
TRIP LENGTHMitigation
Project Alternatives
• Locate project in area with low
existing VMT
• Locate project near transit
• Increase project density
• Increase mix of uses within project
or project surroundings
• Increase connectivity and/or
intersection density on site
20

21. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
ALTERNATIVES
 Range of reasonable alternatives
 Feasibly attain a majority of the project
objectives
 Avoid or substantially lessen significant impacts
of the project
 No specific alternatives have been identified at
this point
21

22. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
CUMULATIVE
The EIR will address the impacts of the project
development along with other known,
approved, or reasonably foreseeable
development activity in the City and region.
22

23. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
EIR SCOPING COMMENT
PERIOD
 The 30-day comment period ends April 19, 2019
 Comments can by submitted:
 Tonight (orally or in writing)
 By email to mdesai@emeryville.org
 By mail or hand-delivered to:
Attention: Miroo Desai, Senior Planner
City of Emeryville Planning Division
1333 Park Avenue
Emeryville, CA 94608
23

24. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
NEXT STEPS
 Consultant team and City complete Draft EIR
 45-day public review and comment period
 Including Planning Commission public hearing for verbal comments on
Draft EIR
 Consultant team and City prepare responses to comments
and Final EIR
 Final EIR includes comments received on Draft EIR, responses, and any
changes to Draft EIR
 Planning Commission considers and certifies the Final EIR
 Following certification of the EIR, the Planning Commission
will consider approval of the project
24

25. URBAN
PLANNING
PARTNERS
INC.
KEY INFORMATION
NOP Comments can be sent to
Miroo Desai,AICP, Senior Planner, at:
mdesai@emeryville.org
Or:
City of Emeryville
1333 Park Avenue
Emeryville, CA 94608
25