RES 211231 Exhibit A - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton–10x Genomics Project Environmental Checklist and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Environmental Evaluation FirstCarbon Solutions 31 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480024/ISMND/wp/21480024 10x Genomics Project Full Screencheck ISMND.docx Control Measure Project Consistency Notes: Source: Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017. Final 2017 Clean Air Plan. April 19. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and-research/plans/2017-clean-air-plan/attachment-a_-proposed- final-cap-vol-1-pdf.pdf?la=en. Accessed December 3, 2020. In summary, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable measures under the 2017 Clean Air Plan after implementing Mitigation Measure (MM) AIR-1; therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Criterion 2 after incorporation of mitigation. Criterion 3 The proposed project would not preclude extension of a transit line or bike path, nor would it propose excessive parking beyond parking requirements, or otherwise create an impediment or disruption to implementing any AQP control measures. Table 2 illustrates that the proposed project would incorporate several AQP control measures as project design features. Considering this information, the proposed project would not disrupt or hinder the implementation of any AQP control measures. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Criterion 3. Summary As addressed above, the proposed project would be consistent with all three criteria after incorporating MM AIR-1. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with the 2017 Clean Air Plan. Therefore, impacts associated with conflicting with or obstructing the 2017 Clean Air Plan's implementation would be less than significant with incorporation of MM AIR-1. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. This impact is related to the cumulative effect of a project’s regional criteria pollutant emissions. By its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact resulting from emissions generated over a large geographic region. The non- attainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the Air Basin, and this regional impact is a cumulative impact. Therefore, new development projects within the Air Basin would contribute to this impact only on a cumulative basis. And in the present case, the proposed project is the redevelopment of an existing developed site, therefore its contribution is only an incremental increase from the prior use. No single project would be sufficient in size, by itself, to result in non-attainment of regional air quality standards. Instead, a project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when evaluated in combination with past, present, and future development projects. Potential localized and regional impacts could result in exceedances of State or federal standards for nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), or CO. NOX emissions are of concern because of potential health impacts from exposure to NOX emissions during both construction and operation and as a precursor in the formation of ground-level ozone. PM10 and PM2.5 are of concern during construction because the operation of off-road construction equipment generates emissions