Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board affirms categorical exemption for 317 Cortland project despite neighborhood contamination concerns; Department of Public Health to require vapor controls,
Summary
The Board of Supervisors on Sept. 25 affirmed the Planning Department's categorical exemption for a mixed-use development at 317 Cortland Street despite neighborhood soil-gas concerns tied to a former dry cleaner, and DPH required an active vapor-collection system and ongoing monitoring.
The Board of Supervisors on Sept. 25 affirmed the Planning Department's determination that a proposed three-story mixed-use building at 317 Cortland Street is categorically exempt from CEQA review, despite neighborhood concerns about volatile contamination from a former dry cleaner at 331 Cortland.
Appellants and nearby residents presented soil-gas and vapor data indicating perchloroethylene (PCE) detections in the vicinity and urged the board to deny the categorical exemption and require a full environmental review. They argued that high soil-gas concentrations and the potential for vapor migration constituted "unusual circumstances" that would preclude a categorical exemption.
The Planning Department and the Department of Public Health (DPH) described a regulatory and monitoring approach. DPH described prior removal of contaminated soil from the dry-cleaner lot, required installation of an active vapor collection system at the dry-cleaner property, and required that the proposed development at 317 Cortland include a vapor-collection layer beneath the slab. DPH staff said the case remains open under the department's voluntary cleanup authority and that DPH will require site monitoring and will not close the file until monitoring confirms safety. DPH said the collection system would allow vapor extraction for the property and that monitoring would occur at least twice a year after installation; DPH staff said they could require more monitoring if the data warrant it.
The project sponsor and legal counsel told the board the property owner had responded to DPH requests, removed contaminated soils, and had committed to install the vapor-collection system. The project sponsor agreed at the hearing to an expanded monitoring plan proposed by the appellants: quarterly vapor monitoring for two years and semiannual monitoring for a third year, to be adjusted if DPH requires a different schedule.
After discussion Supervisor Ammiano moved to affirm the categorical exemption (item 36) and to table the disapproval motion (item 37). The board approved that motion by roll call with the recorded outcome noted in the transcript. The clerk recorded the motion as approved by a roll-call vote. The transcript shows close involvement by DPH and the Regional Water Quality Control Board in reviewing the site and that DPH will continue oversight.
The board's action affirms the Planning Department's CEQA determination for this project while DPH retains regulatory authority to require monitoring and to order additional remediation if monitoring indicates further action is necessary. The transcript does not include the full project plans or the development's final building permits; those will proceed through the normal permit and inspection process under departmental oversight.
