INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE
BLOCK 1 OFFICE/RETAIL
PROJECT
Prepared for the
City of Sunnyvale
by
WAGSTAFF AND ASSOCIATES
Urban and Environmental Planners
in Association with
Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc.
Transportation Consultants
Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.
Noise Consultants
Donald Ballanti
Air Quality Management Consultant
February 2000
Table 1
BLOCK 1 OFFICE/RETAIL PROJECT--BASIC DATA
Proposed Project: Name: Block 1 Office/Retail Project1068 East Meadow Circle
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Contact: James Freitas
Telephone: (650) 493-9000
SOURCE: Wagstaff and Associates
CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION vii
1.1 Summary of the Proposed Project vii
1.2 Requested Development Approvals vii
1.3 Purpose of this Initial Study viii
1.4 Environmental Documentation Approach viii
2. SUMMARY COMPILATION: CONDITIONS FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION xi
2.1 Aesthetics xi2.2 Agricultural Resources xii
2.3 Air Quality xii
2.4 Biological Resources xii
2.5 Cultural Resources xii
2.6 Geology and Soils xiii
2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials xiii
2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality xiii
2.9 Land Use and Planning xiii
2.10 Mineral Resources xiii
2.11 Noise xiii
2.12 Population and Housing xv
2.13 Public Services xv
2.14 Recreation xvi
2.15 Transportation/Traffic xvi
2.16 Utilities and Service Systems xvii
3. INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION (CHECKLIST AND NARRATIVE) 1
3.1 Project Description 1
3.1.1 Applications 13.1.2 Project Description 1
3.1.3 Applicant 15
3.2 Environmental Impacts 16
3.2.1 Aesthetics 163.2.2 Agricultural Resources 26
3.2.3 Air Quality 27
3.2.4 Biological Resources 33
3.2.5 Cultural Resources 34
3.2.6 Geology and Soils 36
3.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 40
3.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 43
3.2.9 Land Use and Planning 47
3.2.10 Mineral Resources 55
3.2.11 Noise 56
3.2.12 Population and Housing 68
3.2.13 Public Services 69
3.2.14 Recreation 73
3.2.15 Transportation/Traffic 74
3.2.16 Utilities and Service Systems 105
3.2.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance 107
3.3 Determination 109
4. APPENDICES 111
List of Figures
1. Project Site Location 22. Project Vicinity Aerial Photograph 3
3. Proposed Project Ground Floor Plan 6
4. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 1 7
5. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 2 8
6. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 3 9
7. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 4 10
8. Proposed North and West Elevations 13
9. Proposed East Elevation and Site Section (Along Aries Way) 14
10. Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan "Gateways, Landmarks and Focal Points"
Map 17
11. Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan Area District Boundaries 50
12. Existing Land Uses in Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan Area 51
13. Central Core Redevelopment Plan Boundary 53
14. Sunnyvale Zoning Map--Central Area 54
15. Local Street Network and Project Location 80
16. Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes at Study Intersections 81
17. Project Trip Distribution Pattern 86
18. Project Trip Assignment 87
19. Background-Plus-Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes at Study Intersections 89
20. Traffic Volumes at Project Driveway and Adjacent Intersections (Project Conditions) 91
List of Tables
1. Block 1 Office/Retail Project--Basic Data ii2. Regional Vehicular Emissions, in Pounds per Day 31
3. Worst Case Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Near Selected Intersections, in Parts
Per Million 32
4. Construction Equipment Noise Level Ranges 63
5. Typical Ranges of Energy Equivalent Noise Levels, Leq in dBA, at Construction
Sites 64
6. Signalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Using Average Stopped
Vehicular Delay 77
7. Project Trip Generation Estimates 84
8. Background and Project Signalized Intersection Levels of Service 92
9. Background and Project Unsignalized Intersection Levels of Service 94
10. Cumulative Signalized Intersection Levels of Service 97
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The Mozart Development Company has submitted a proposal to the City of Sunnyvale for development of an office/retail project on an approximately 5.8-acre site located in downtown Sunnyvale. The L-shaped project site is located adjacent to two sides of the existing Town & Country Village shopping center, within the block known as "Block 1," generally bounded by Mathilda Avenue and Agena Way on the west, Evelyn Avenue on the north, Frances Street on the east, and Washington Avenue and Altair Way on the south. The site currently contains a 429-space surface parking lot immediately north of the existing shopping center.
The project would replace the existing 429-space parking area with a three-building office/retail complex--Building One, Building Two, and Building Three--providing a total of approximately 450,000 square feet of office space and approximately 10,000 square feet of ground floor retail space, along with four levels of underground parking (approximately 1,600 spaces) and 100 new surface spaces, for a total of 1,700 parking spaces. Building One would be five stories tall and located at the corner of Washington Avenue, Aries Way, and Mathilda Avenue. Building Two would be six stories tall and sited immediately north of Building One. Building Three would be six stories tall and located at the corner of Evelyn Avenue and Agena Way.
The project would also include demolition of the two-story, City of Sunnyvale-owned Hill Building, located on a 12,000-square-foot site on Block 1 immediately south and east of the L-shaped project site. The project would provide 30 surface parking spaces on the Hill Building site.
1.2 REQUESTED DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS
The applicant has requested the following City approvals to enable implementation of the project:
. Special Development Permit to allow construction of 450,000 square feet of office space, 10,000 square feet of retail space, associated subsurface and surface parking, streetscape improvements, and a public plaza;
. Tentative Subdivision Map; and
. Disposition and Development Agreement.
1.3 PURPOSE OF THIS INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study with Conditions for Negative Declaration is intended to provide the CEQA-required environmental documentation for the Block 1 retail/office project and all discretionary approvals or permits that might be required to implement the project.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION APPROACH
Based on the Initial Study Evaluation checklist and narrative for the proposed project included in section 3 herein, the City has determined that CEQA compliance for this project can be achieved through preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, under CEQA Guidelines sections 15063 (initial studies), 15070 (mitigated negative declarations), and 15385 (tiering), provided that all mitigations recommended herein--i.e., conditions for negative declaration--are incorporated into the proposed project.
1.4.1 What is A Negative Declaration?
Under CEQA, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is a statement prepared by the Lead Agency (in this case, the City of Sunnyvale) pursuant to Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines, briefly describing the reasons a proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, does not require an EIR. Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines provides for Lead Agency adoption of a "Mitigated Negative Declaration" (instead of an EIR) if (1) the project as agreed upon prior to public review of the proposed Negative Declaration has been revised to mitigate identified potentially significant effects to a point of insignificance, and (2) there is no remaining substantial evidence before the Lead Agency that the project may have a significant effect.
As set forth in section 15063, the intent of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration evaluation has been to consider all phases of project planning and operation to confirm and explain which aspects of the project may and which aspects may not cause a significant effect on the environment. The aspects determined to have a "potentially significant impact" on the environment have then been analyzed, and associated mitigation measures have been identified to the extent necessary to enable the applicant to mitigate any potential adverse impacts, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
1.4.2 Conditions for Negative Declaration
This Initial Study identifies a set of mitigation measures (Conditions for Mitigated Negative Declaration) that, when incorporated into the Block 1 Office/Retail Project prior to public review of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, will ensure that no foreseeable significant environmental effects would occur as a result of the project, and thus will allow City adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Such "Conditions for Negative Declaration" are compiled in section 2 herein (Mitigation Compilation--Conditions for Mitigated Negative Declaration) which follows on yellow paper, and are further identified and explained in section 3 of this document (the complete Initial Study Evaluation checklist and narrative) under the various corresponding CEQA-suggested environmental topic headings.
1.4.3 Report Format
Section 3 of this report includes all Initial Study components required by Section 15063(d) of the CEQA Guidelines (as amended January 1, 1999), including a description of the project, an identification of the project's environmental setting and effects, a discussion of ways to mitigate identified significant effects (Conditions for Mitigated Negative Declaration), and a determination of whether the project would be consistent with existing City policies and regulations.
CONDITIONS FOR MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The mitigations recommended in this Initial Study are compiled below as recommended Conditions for Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Block 1 office/retail project. Completion of all of these mitigations would be the responsibility of the applicant unless otherwise noted. A more detailed explanation of these mitigations, and associated potential project impacts without the mitigations, is provided in section 3 (the Initial Study Evaluation checklist and narrative).
2.1 Aesthetics
Mitigation V-1: Potential Adverse Visual Impact on Adjacent Portions of Block 1 and Murphy Avenue Heritage District. During the City's design review process and Special Development Permit review for the project, place particular emphasis on ensuring that the project design does the following: (1) includes features (e.g., common landscaping, street furniture, sidewalk and pavement treatments) that visually unify the project with the remainder of Block 1; and (2) is consistent with the following design guideline components of the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan:
(a) The urban design goals and policies contained on pages 5 and 6 of the "Introduction" chapter;
(b) The design guidelines within the "Urban Design" chapter (pages 17-33);
(c) The design guidelines for the North of Washington District (pages 50-55) (see guidelines summary under discussion of Impact V-1 above);
(d) The applicable design guidelines within the "General Guidelines" chapter (pages 75-84); and
(e) For proposed changes to the public right-of-way (such as streetscape modifications along the Evelyn Avenue, Washington Avenue, and Mathilda Avenue/Athena Way frontages), the "Streetscape Design Standards" (pages 97-106).
Project design consistency with these guidelines would reduce this potential for visual impact to a less-than-significant level.
2.2 Agricultural Resources
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.3 Air Quality
Mitigation AQ-1: Construction Period Air Quality Impacts. Require the project applicant to include the following dust control practices in all construction contracts:
. Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind.
. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
. Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
. Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets.
. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
In addition, require the following practices during demolition:
. Use continuous watering to control dust penetration during demolition of the structure and break-up of pavement.
. Cover all trucks hauling debris from the site.
2.4 Biological Resources
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.5 Cultural Resources
Mitigation AR-1: Potential for Adverse Impacts on Archaeological Resources. Following current City policy, if evidence of prehistoric or historic artifacts or remains is uncovered during the course of excavation or grading for the project, grading activity in the immediate area shall cease and a qualified archaeologist contacted so that appropriate mitigation programs can be developed. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level.
2.6 Geology and Soils
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation H-1: Potential Contaminated Soils Impact. Prior to project approval, require a Phase I Site Assessment for the site. Implement all measures recommended by the Phase I study, including onsite soil testing if warranted. Use the findings of this assessment to ensure compliance with all applicable existing state- and county-mandated site assessment, remediation, removal and disposal requirements for soil, surface water, and/or groundwater contamination. In particular, these include the requirements of the City of Sunnyvale, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
Compliance with the above mitigation measures would be expected to assure that possible hazardous material impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.9 Land Use and Planning
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.10 Mineral Resources
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.11 Noise
Mitigation N-1: Effects of Traffic Noise on Project Site Land Uses. As a condition of project approval, require that the applicant conduct a project-specific noise study to identify noise insulation features necessary to limit interior noise levels to 45 dBA Ldn, and incorporate these features into the project design.
Mitigation N-2: Demolition and Construction Noise. As a condition of project approval, implement the following construction period measures to reduce the construction noise impacts to a less-than-significant level:
. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with mufflers which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
. Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationery noise sources where technology exists.
. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area;
. Route all construction traffic to and from the project site via Mathilda Avenue and Evelyn Avenue. Prohibit heavy construction related truck traffic on residential streets.
. Schedule construction activities to have the least impact on nearby receptors. The construction lunch break should coincide with the prime lunch hours of the restaurants and other adjacent commercial land uses to enable the use of outdoor dining facilities or services at local commercial land uses.
. If pile driving occurs, expedite the pile driving schedule through the use of two or three pile drivers at once to reduce the amount of time taken to drive piles for a foundation. Reducing the duration of this construction activity can significantly minimize the impact to adjacent land uses;
. Evaluate noise control treatment for pile drivers. It is possible to shroud pile drivers and reduce the amount of noise emitted by 10 dBA or more;
. Pre-drill holes for piles. A technique that has been found effective in reducing the number of blows to seat a pile is to pre-drill the holes so that only a few blows are required to seat each pile. This would reduce the amount of pile driving noise exposure;
. Offer to temporarily cover the windows of Kasik Building apartments facing the Hill Building demolition site. The temporary window covers could be constructed of plywood, gypsum board, or heavy noise control blankets. This mitigation would be implemented on a unit-by-unit basis at the discretion of the occupants of the Kasik Building. Alternatively, residents could be relocated during the demolition period and the noisiest periods of construction.
. Designate a "noise disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and would require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. (The City should be responsible for designating a noise disturbance coordinator and the individual project sponsor should be responsible for posting the phone number and providing construction schedule notices).
2.12 Population and Housing
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.13 Public Services
Mitigation PS-1: Fire and Emergency Services Impacts. Require the applicant to comply with all applicable codes, including Title 16 of the Sunnyvale Municipal Code, which includes adoption by reference of the 1997 Uniform Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Fire Code, and 1996 National Electrical Code, to ensure adequate installation of adequate sprinkler systems, water delivery systems, and other provisions. In addition, require applicant compliance with (a) detailed measures required by the Fire Services Division (FSD) during the City's plan review and permitting process, (b) the FSD onsite response procedure and training requirements, and (c) FSD Pre-Fire Survey requirements. These measures are detailed below.
(a) Plan Review and Permitting Measures. During the City of Sunnyvale's plan review and permitting process, the Fire Services Division will recommend detailed measures to be incorporated into the project for an adequate response to emergency incidents, and review them with the applicant. Project mitigation measures required by the FSD may include:
(1) provision of additional equipment (e.g., fire hose backpacks composed of 100 feet of fire hose, a wrench, and nozzle to be carried on fire apparatus);
(2) provision of an elevator in the parking garage large enough to accommodate a gurney;
(3) provision of private security personnel at the project site; and
(4) other building construction fire safety provisions.
(b) Response Procedures and Training. The Fire Services Division will develop a procedure and provide training to fire services personnel to respond to fire and emergencies at the project site.
(c) Pre-Fire Survey. The Fire Services Division will conduct a Pre-Fire Survey for the proposed project, analyzing and mapping such features as access points, locations of hazardous materials, emergency exits, and water supply.
The above mitigation measure would reduce project-related fire service impacts to a less-than-significant level.
Mitigation PS-2: Police Services Impacts. Prior to operation of the proposed project, require approval by the Sunnyvale Police Services Division of a project security plan that includes, but is not limited to, details regarding onsite private security personnel (if included), other onsite personnel provisions, onsite video surveillance (if included), and an onsite security lighting plan.
Implementation of this measure would reduce project-related police services impacts to a less-than-significant level.
2.14 Recreation
No potentially significant impacts identified; no mitigations necessary.
2.15 Transportation/Traffic
Mitigation T-1: Cumulative Impacts on Mathilda Avenue/Washington Avenue Intersection. Require the project applicant to contribute a fair share of the cost of the City of Sunnyvale's planned improvement project at this intersection. The improvement project, which is planned but not fully funded, would widen the westbound approach of this intersection to provide two left-turn lanes, one through lane, and one right-turn lane. With these lane additions, intersection operations under Cumulative Conditions would be improved to LOS D during the PM peak hour. Operations during the AM peak hour would also be improved but would still be LOS D, an acceptable operating level based on the City's standard. No additional mitigation is required.
Mitigation T-2: Cumulative Impacts on Sunnyvale-Saratoga/Remington Drive Intersection. Require the project applicant to contribute a fair share of the cost of the addition of a northbound right-turn lane at this intersection. (The addition of exclusive northbound and southbound right-turn lanes would be required to improve intersection operations to LOS D during both peak hours. The addition of a northbound right-turn lane at this intersection is identified in the City of Sunnyvale General Plan. The addition of a southbound right-turn lane is not feasible.)
Mitigation T-3: Cumulative Impacts on El Camino Real/Remington Drive Intersection. Require the project applicant to contribute a fair share of the cost to add a second westbound left-turn lane at this intersection. The addition of a second westbound left-turn lane at this intersection would improve PM peak-hour operations to LOS D. This intersection modification is identified in the City of Sunnyvale General Plan.
Mitigation T-4: Obstructed View at Agena Way/Evelyn Avenue Intersection. Post "No Right Turn on Red" signs so that vehicles turning right from Agena Way onto Evelyn Avenue would proceed only with a green signal indication, when the oncoming vehicles are stopped.
Mitigation T-5: Potential Conflict with Policies Regarding Bicycle Access. Require the project applicant to incorporate support facilities for bicycles (e.g., bike racks for retail patrons and bicycle lockers and showers for office and retail employees) into the proposed project design.
2.16 Utilities and Service Systems
Mitigation U-1: Sewer Service Impact. The project sponsor shall construct the proposed sanitary sewer lines identified in the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan that run adjacent to the site. The facilities shall be designed in accordance with the general requirements of the Specific Plan. Detailed engineering plans will be subject to review and approval by the Sunnyvale City Engineer.
3. INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION (CHECKLIST AND NARRATIVE)
3.1 Project Description
3.1.1 Applications: The Mozart Development Company is requesting City approval of a Special Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Disposition and Development Agreement to allow removal of an existing 429-space parking lot and construction of a new three-building office-retail project, including approximately 450,000 square feet of office space and approximately 10,000 square feet of ground floor retail space, along with four levels of underground parking (approximately 1,600 spaces) and 100 new surface parking spaces.
3.1.2 Project Description:
a. SettingThe approximately 5.8-acre, L-shaped project site is located in downtown Sunnyvale, adjacent to two sides of the existing Town & Country Village shopping center, within the block known as "Block 1," generally bounded by Mathilda Avenue and Agena Way on the west, Evelyn Avenue on the north, Frances Street on the east, and Washington Avenue and Altair Way on the south.
(1) Regional Location. Sunnyvale is located in central Santa Clara County, bounded by the cities of Mountain View and Los Altos to the west, the city of Cupertino to the south, the cities of Santa Clara and San Jose to the east, and San Francisco Bay lands located within the San Jose city limits to the north.
(2) Local Setting. As illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 (Project Site Location and Project Vicinity Aerial Photograph), the proposed project is located on an L-shaped site in downtown Sunnyvale south of Evelyn Avenue and the Caltrain right-of-way, west of the City's Murphy Avenue Heritage District, contiguous to the west and north edges of the existing Town & Country Village shopping center, and directly north of the existing Sunnyvale Town Center Mall.
Figure 1. Project Site Location.
Figure 2. Project Vicinity Aerial Photograph.
Surrounding land uses consist of the adjacent and nearby shopping centers, and other commercial, office, and residential uses. The project site is bounded on the south by the Town & Country Village shopping center; and on the west by Mathilda Avenue and, on the opposite side of Mathilda Avenue, mixed commercial and residential uses; on the north by Evelyn Avenue and, on the opposite side of Evelyn Avenue, the Caltrain Depot; and on the east by the Kasik Building (which contains ground floor retail and 20 residential apartments), the Town & Country Village shopping center, Frances Street and, on the opposite side of Frances Street, one-to-two-story retail uses in the City's Murphy Station Landmark District.
(3) Site Access. Regional access to the project site is provided by four freeways: U.S. 101 to the north, Interstate 280 (I-280) to the south, State Route 85 (SR 85) to the west, and SR 237 to the north. Additional regional access is provided by El Camino Real (State Route 82) to the south; Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road (Sunnyvale Avenue), a north-south roadway east of the project site; and Mathilda Avenue, a north-south roadway that forms the western boundary of the site.
Local access to the site is provided by Washington Avenue, Evelyn Avenue, and Agena Way, which adjoin the project site.
Transit service in the project site vicinity is provided by the Valley Transit Authority (VTA), which serves a bus stop on Frances Avenue just east of the project site, and by Caltrain, which maintains a train depot immediately north of the project site.
b. Site History and Planning Context
(1) Current Land Use Designations. The Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan designates the project site for Mixed Use Hotel Office Theater Restaurant uses. The Sunnyvale Zoning Ordinance designates the site within the DSP (Downtown Specific Plan) district. The project site is also located within the City's Downtown Parking District.
(2) Redevelopment Plan. In 1975, the City of Sunnyvale adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Core, which since then has provided for a combination of redevelopment actions in the downtown Sunnyvale area under California Community Redevelopment Law, including land assembly, clearance, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and conservation activities. The project site is located within this redevelopment area boundary.
In 1993, the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Core was amended concurrent with the adoption of the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan, which calls for mixed-use development on the project site.
c. Site Conditions
The approximately 5.8-acre, L-shaped project site is flat and currently contains surface parking. This parking area, which contains a total of approximately 429 parking spaces, serves the Town & Country Village shopping center, which occupies most of the remainder of Block 1.
As shown on Figure 3, the Town & Country Village shopping center is comprised of a complex of six separate, large-footprint, one- and two-story buildings housing restaurants, retail shops, service businesses, and some office uses, separated by a system of small internal streets. A seventh building adjacent to the project site (the Kasik Building) houses ground floor retail and 20 residential apartments. One additional building, the two-story, City of Sunnyvale-owned Hill Building, is located on a 12,000-square-foot site south and east of the project site and contains offices and warehouse uses. Landscaping (trees) and angled or parallel parking lines most of the internal streets on Block 1.
d. Proposed Project
Table 1 on the inside front cover of this report presents basic data summarizing the proposed Block 1 office/retail project. Figure 3 shows the proposed project ground floor plan, and Figures 4 through 7 illustrate the four proposed levels of underground parking.
Figure 3. Proposed Project Ground Floor Plan.
Figure 4. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 1.
Figure 5. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 2.
Figure 6. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 3.
Figure 7. Proposed Project Underground Parking--Level 4.
(1) Proposed Office/Retail Buildings. The project proposes construction of three buildings that would occupy four acres along the Agena Way/Mathilda Avenue frontage of Block 1 (see Figure 3):
. Building One, which would be five stories tall and located at the corner of Washington Avenue, Aries Way, and Mathilda Avenue;
. Building Two, which would be six stories tall and sited immediately north of Building One; and
. Building Three, which would be six stories tall and located at the corner of Evelyn Avenue and Agena Way. Building Three would be a T-shaped building that would extend to the proposed public plaza area. The building would have ground floor retail with offices above (on Floors 2 through 6).
The three buildings would provide a total of approximately 450,000 square feet of office space and approximately 10,000 square feet of ground floor retail space.
(2) Public Open Space Plaza. The project would provide an approximately 80,000-square-foot (1.8-acre) public open space plaza east of the proposed buildings, at the southwest corner of the Evelyn Avenue/Frances Street intersection. A pedestrian promenade would connect the open space plaza to the building complex (See Figure 3). The plaza would be designed separately from the office development and would be constructed by the City of Sunnyvale.
(3) Proposed Parking. The project would displace the existing surface parking lots on the site, eliminating approximately 429 existing parking spaces. The project would contain four levels of underground parking beneath the three buildings (see Figures 4 through 7). Approximately 306,000 cubic yards of soil would be excavated and hauled offsite to allow construction of the proposed underground parking garage. The garage would contain approximately 1,600 parking spaces, consisting of 1,350 spaces for office use and 250 spaces for public parking. Of the 1,350 office use spaces, 350 would be available for public use during evenings and weekends. The project would also provide approximately 100 surface parking spaces immediately south and east of the public open space plaza. Of this 100-space total, approximately 30 spaces would be provided on the site of the Hill Building, which would be demolished as part of the project (see (6) below).
(4) Vehicular Access. Vehicular access to the project parking garage would be provided via four ramps: one on Agena Way, one on Evelyn Avenue, one on Aries Way, and one at the intersection of Altair Way and Taaffe Street. Off-street loading areas would also be provided at two locations off Agena Way.
(5) Proposed Building Design. Figures 8 through 9 illustrate proposed project building elevations. As shown in Figure 8, the project buildings would create a solid five- to six-story building frontage along Mathilda Avenue (west elevation), with ground floor retail space and office uses on the upper floors. Building entrances and ground floor retail space would also be provided on the north side of the buildings (see Figure 8). As shown on Figure 9, the project buildings would also provide ground floor retail and main building entrances on the east (Aries Way) frontage, opening up onto the existing Town & Country Village shopping center and the proposed pedestrian promenade leading to the proposed open space plaza.
(6) Demolition of Hill Building. The project would include demolition of the two-story, City of Sunnyvale-owned Hill Building, located on a 12,000-square-foot site on Block 1 immediately south and east of the project site (see Figure 2). The project would provide 30 surface parking spaces on the Hill Building site.
(7) Project Phasing. According to the project applicant, phasing of project construction would depend on leasing of the proposed new retail and office space. The applicant anticipates that demolition of the adjacent Hill Building and construction of project Building One would occur first. Building Two would be constructed last, after the proposed underground parking to be installed.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
3. Applicant:
Name: Mozart Development Company Address: 1068 East Meadow CirclePalo Alto, CA 94303
3.2 Environmental Impacts
The purpose of this evaluation is to identify any potential significant adverse environmental effects associated with the proposed project, and to identify any mitigation measures necessary to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The analysis has been prepared by an independent environmental consultant based on: (1) review of project and related information provided by the City; and (2) independent evaluation. The analysis format incorporates the list of questions included in the City's normal Initial Study environmental checklist form, which has been derived from the latest CEQA Guidelines, and provides for one of the following answer choices for each impact issue: NO IMPACT, LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT UNLESS MITIGATION INCORPORATED, or POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT. Each answer is followed by an explanatory narrative.
When this Initial Study proposes one or more mitigation measures for an identified impact, these mitigation measure(s) are intended to reduce the identified impact to a "less than significant" level.
3.2.1 Aesthetics
. Would the project:a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Answer: LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Explanation:
(1) Existing Views of Project Site. Existing short-range views of the project site (in the Block 1 area) from surrounding streets include views of the existing onsite surface parking and the adjacent one-story Town & Country Village shopping center. These and other existing views of and through the project site have not been cited as special views in the City of Sunnyvale General Plan Community Development Element, Community Design Subelement, or in the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan, and do not otherwise constitute significant "scenic vistas."(2) View Corridors and Gateways. The Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan identifies Mathilda Avenue, which adjoins the western edge of the project site, as a "primary view corridor" that affects the image of the downtown. As illustrated on Figure 10 ("Gateways,
Figure 10. Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan "Gateways, Landmarks & Focal Points" Map.
Landmarks, & Focal Points" map), the Downtown Specific Plan also identifies the base of the Mathilda Avenue bridge (railroad overcrossing) immediately west of the project site as a "primary gateway" (indicated by the "A" symbol on Figure 10). To strengthen Mathilda Avenue as a view corridor, the Downtown Specific Plan recommends locating a major gateway feature at the Washington Avenue retail corridor (i.e., the Washington Avenue/Mathilda Avenue intersection). The plan identifies the Washington Avenue retail corridor as a "minor view corridor."
The Downtown Specific Plan also designates a "district gateway" (indicated by the "B" symbol on Figure 10) in the northcentral portion of Block 1 (in the approximate center of the project site). The plan indicates that "these gateways are to signify the entrance into commercial/retail or civic center districts."
(3) Existing Visual Character of Mathilda Avenue View Corridor. Mathilda Avenue, which adjoins the western boundary of the project site, is Sunnyvale's main central thoroughfare, connecting US 101 and I-280. The street has developed a strip commercial thoroughfare visual character that obscures and detracts from the desired visual identity of the adjacent "downtown" precinct. The street is characterized by a wide variety of land uses, lot sizes, building facades, building heights, and frontage treatments. Building types include single-family detached houses, multi-family residential buildings, office buildings, restaurant structures, and banks and savings and loan buildings. Building heights range from one to four stories; lot sizes range from approximately 0.15 acre to 1.8 acres; and building setbacks range from 0 to 25 feet.
(4) Existing Visual Character of Washington Avenue View Corridor. The visual character of the Washington Avenue corridor, which adjoins the southern boundary of the project site, is dominated by two features: the Town & Country Village shopping center (located within Block 1) and the designated Murphy Avenue Heritage District further to the east.
The Town & Country Village shopping center complex consists of an array of early 1960s, one-story, Mission-style commercial storefront structures containing small retail shops, restaurants, personal services (beauty and nail parlors, etc.), and vacant storefronts, separated by diagonal parking drives, plus an apartment building, post office, and other offices. The original Town & Country Village buildings are one-story Mission-style wood and stucco structures with Spanish tile roofs. Other buildings in the area range from one to three stories in height. Landscaping along the Town & Country Village edges is sporadic, ranging from dense landscaping with large street trees along some street segments to a total absence of landscaping along others.
The one-block-long Murphy Avenue Heritage District is Sunnyvale's historic commercial district and original "Main Street," and a principal downtown identity element. The original, intimate scale and pedestrian character of the Murphy Avenue streetscape, including its many historic "Main Street" building facades, have been recognized and preserved, and have recently been upgraded by the City with special paving, light fixtures, street furniture, and landscaping. In addition, some of the historic building facades in the district are currently being privately renovated.
(5) Project Impacts. The existing surface parking lots on the project site do not contribute significantly to the Mathilda Avenue "primary view corridor" or the Washington Avenue "minor view corridor" designated by the Downtown Specific Plan. The site also does not provide the "primary gateway" or "district gateway" design features recommended by the plan.
Construction of the proposed project would establish a five- to six-story building edge along Agena Way/Mathilda Avenue, thereby strengthening the downtown image along the Mathilda Avenue view corridor. The project would also contribute ground-floor retail space to the Washington Avenue retail corridor identified by the Downtown Specific Plan. The proposed public open space plaza would provide opportunities for establishing the "district gateway" feature recommended by the plan.
These aspects of the project would produce dramatic, positive changes in the visual character of the Mathilda Avenue and Washington Avenue streetscapes by adding visual interest and establishing a stronger "downtown" image along these view corridors. The project would also assist in implementing the following related action statements of the City of Sunnyvale General Plan Community Development Element, Community Design Subelement:
. Strengthen the downtown as a visual as well as functional focus of Sunnyvale. (Action Statement 2.5A.3f)
. Consider design features that help locate the downtown district and emphasize the roadways and intersections leading downtown. (Action Statement 2.5A.3g)
. Encourage distinctive projects at major nodes which have a coherent spatial relationship and create dynamic spaces at these intersections. (Action Statement 2.5A.3h)
The overall effect of the project on Downtown Specific Plan-identified view corridors and gateways would therefore represent a beneficial aesthetic impact of the project.
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Answer:
Explanation:
Please refer to items 3.2.4.e and 3.2.5.a below. The project site currently contains surface parking lots. Vegetation is limited to introduced parking lot landscaping (trees and shrubs) and street trees. The site does not contain any designated scenic resources. The adjacent Hill Building, which would be demolished as part of the project, is not considered a historically significant building (see item 3.2.5.a below).
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Answer:
Impact V-1:
Potential Adverse Visual Impact on Adjacent Portions of Block 1 and Murphy Avenue Heritage District. The proposed building height, scale, and appearance of the five- to six-story project buildings could be perceived as incompatible with existing low intensity (one- to two-story) development in the adjacent portions of Block 1 (i.e., the Town & Country Village shopping center) and the Murphy Avenue Heritage District further to the west. If the specific design details of the proposed buildings, public open space plaza, and other components of the project, such as its streetscape features (landscaping, sidewalk paving, etc.) are inconsistent with the design guidelines set forth in the Downtown Specific Plan for the Block 1/North of Washington area, the project could fail to achieve Specific Plan goals for the area, resulting in a potentially significant adverse visual impact.Explanation:
The Downtown Specific Plan notes that "building architecture within the North of Washington District will be strongly influenced by the first buildings planned and constructed within this block." The plan contains building design guidelines for the Block 1/North of Washington area as well as recommendations for open space plazas and pedestrian linkages to integrate development on Block 1 with existing and future development elsewhere in the downtown. Key provisions relating to the proposed project are summarized below.(1) Design Guidelines. The Downtown Specific Plan sets forth design guidelines for the "North of Washington District." Key provisions applicable to the project as proposed include the following:
Minimum Lot Size/Building Setbacks/Maximum Building Height:
. Building massing and forms should step down from the highest structures at a maximum of 125 feet (9 office stories) progressively reducing in height to 36 feet (3 retail stories) at Murphy Avenue. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 50)
. The overall FAR in the North of Washington District (all buildings and gross land area) is 1.42. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 50)
Roof Treatment:
. Roof forms shall follow similar lines and support building massing and height transition from Mathilda Avenue to Murphy Avenue. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 50)
Building Facade Treatment:
. Buildings along Evelyn Avenue must have pedestrian orientation with clear entries and decorative plaza treatments toward the central plaza...Landscaped screening of loading and service areas is required. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 51)
. Along Washington Avenue building fronts should present a ground floor active retail presence, maximizing storefront window-shopping opportunities. Outdoor cafes and outdoor retail activities shall be encouraged...Night lighting along Washington Avenue should be lively... (Downtown Specific Plan, page 51)
. The Mathilda Avenue frontage of Block 1 must respect the gateway treatments at the south end of the bridge and the entrance to Washington Avenue. Plaza treatment and office building entries on Mathilda should provide clear entrances to buildings with rich masonry ground floor treatments indicative of the landmark status of these buildings. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 53)
. No reflective glass, exterior wall shall be used for commercial buildings in this area. Masonry materials with strong vertical articulation (as opposed to strip horizontal window treatment) shall be used to convey quality building materials and permanence typical of Class A landmark office buildings. First floor horizontal building lines should be continuous from building to building (e.g., reveals, cornice treatments, or other horizontal treatments signifying the delineation between the first and second floor). Vertical organization of window widths shall be proportional from floor to floor and building to building in a well-organized geometric symmetry. Building colors shall follow a coordinated palette without clashing in contrast and hue. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 53)
Building Materials and Colors:
. Rich masonry materials, precast concrete or fiberglass reinforced concrete panels, and dryvit or enriched stucco treatment incorporating significant architectural relief are recommended for building exterior materials. At ground floor levels, rich masonry materials such as granite, limestone and marble should be used on office, hotel, and residential buildings, particularly at building entrances. The palette of paving materials used in the first major building should be carried throughout all exterior building ground floor spaces where plazas, walkways and other hardscaped areas are planned. Building colors should complement one another. Earth tones, greys, pink granite, and off-white colors should be the palette for building exteriors. Glass used at building exteriors should be non reflective and tinted only to the extent that is required for energy efficiency. Strip or ribbon glass window treatments should be avoided. Multi-storied buildings should express strong vertical and horizontal lines, rather than a "layered cake" visual appearance. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 53)
Landscaping/Open Space Plazas:
. Buildings in this area should take maximum advantage of the open space opportunities afforded by the Main Plaza...Buildings at the ground floor should incorporate indoor/outdoor uses such as sidewalk cafes, outdoor plazas with fountains, artwork and colorful planting, and outdoor landscaping which affords shade in a formal landscaping scheme coordinated with overall landscaping design for the central plaza. Relationships between activities surrounding the Main Plaza...should focus on maximizing activity in this central square. The pedestrian atmosphere should be enhanced to the greatest degree possible, making this the most pleasant outdoor space in the downtown. Building entries and lobbies should be clear and attractive, opening up to the plaza and green in an inviting fashion, using large areas of clear glass, rich masonry materials, and strong architectural detailing at the ground floor level. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 54)
Parking & Access:
. Access to this district shall be from limited collection points along Washington and Evelyn Streets, and from Mathilda/Aries Avenue. No curb cuts shall be located nearer than 150 feet from the start of curb return on the street side where access is taken. Service and loading areas shall be separated from automobile traffic to the greatest extent practicable, and shall be effectively screened from public view from surrounding streets. (Downtown Specific Plan, page 55)
The project is generally consistent with the above Downtown Specific Plan guidelines for building setbacks and height, although the proposed five- to six-story building massing does not "step down" to the adjacent one-story Town & Country Village buildings, and the project roof treatments are not similar to these adjoining buildings (see proposed building elevations illustrated on Figures 8 and 9).
The project is generally consistent with guidelines regarding landscaping/open space plazas and access. Building facade treatments, building materials, and colors have not yet been finalized.
Project consistency with all of the above guidelines would need to be confirmed through the City's design review process.
(2) Open Space Plaza. The Downtown Specific Plan (Figure 3-1, "Urban Design Plan") designates a "Main Plaza" in the northeastern portion of Block 1, in the eastern portion of the project site. The plan indicates that the Main Plaza is a "prime location for public art." The project provides for an open space plaza in the approximate location designated by the Downtown Specific Plan. Details regarding the plaza design and public art features have not yet been developed.
(3) Pedestrian Linkages. The Downtown Specific Plan (Figure 3-5, "Pedestrian Circulation and Paving") designates a "Pedestrian Lane" extending in a north/south direction through Block 1 (including the project site), leading to the designated open space plaza. The "Pedestrian Lane" is designated for paving that "reinforces existing downtown paving materials with a unique pattern" and creates the "most distinctive of all downtown patterns." The plan also designates the Mathilda Avenue/Agena Way, Evelyn Avenue, and Washington Avenue frontages of the Block 1 area for paving that "reinforces existing downtown paving materials," "establishes a paving pattern that differs from Murphy Street/Pedestrian Lane," and "connects to overall paving network." Paving materials and other streetscape details are not yet specified on the proposed project plans.
Mitigation V-1:
Potential Adverse Visual Impact on Adjacent Portions of Block 1 and Murphy Avenue Heritage District. During the City's design review process and Special Development Permit review for the project, place particular emphasis on ensuring that the project design does the following: (1) includes features (e.g., common landscaping, street furniture, sidewalk and pavement treatments) that visually unify the project with the remainder of Block 1; and (2) is consistent with the following design guideline components of the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan:(a) The urban design goals and policies contained on pages 5 and 6 of the "Introduction" chapter;
(b) The design guidelines within the "Urban Design" chapter (pages 17-33);
(c) The design guidelines for the North of Washington District (pages 50-55) (see guidelines summary under discussion of Impact V-1 above);
(d) The applicable design guidelines within the "General Guidelines" chapter (pages 75-84); and
(e) For proposed changes to the public right-of-way (such as streetscape modifications along the Evelyn Avenue, Washington Avenue, and Mathilda Avenue/Athena Way frontages), the "Streetscape Design Standards" (pages 97-106).
Project design consistency with these guidelines would reduce this potential for visual impact to a less-than-significant level.
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project would be expected to have nighttime exterior illumination features, including exterior building illumination, peripheral exterior lighting (open space plaza, parking and loading areas, access drives, landscaped areas), and illuminated signage. These illumination features would be visible at night from the surrounding driving routes (Evelyn Avenue, Washington Avenue, Mathilda Avenue) and from the residential area west of the project site.Project exterior lighting features would be introduced in a downtown area that is already highly urbanized with an abundance of existing lights. Therefore, as experienced from the south and east (the commercialized area of downtown Sunnyvale), the project exterior lighting features would not be expected to have conspicuous and adverse light and glare impacts. The adjacent residential neighborhood to the west may be vulnerable to the effects of added project-related light and glare; however, the impact on this area, which is located across Mathilda Avenue 150 feet or more west of the project site, is not expected to be significant.
The project would be required to comply with existing lighting controls set forth in Sunnyvale Municipal Code section 19.42.050, which states that "lights, spotlights, floodlights, reflectors, and other means of illumination shall be shielded or equipped with special lenses in such a manner as to prevent any glare or direct illumination on any public street or other property." Through their review of the Special Development Permit for the project, the Planning Commission (advisory body) and City Council (approving body) would ensure project compliance with this code section. Compliance would ensure that potential light and glare impacts would remain less-than-significant.
3.2.2 Agricultural Resources
. Would the project:a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Answer: NO IMPACT
Explanation:
The project site is an urban infill site with no current agricultural uses. It is designated for urban use in the City's general plan, Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan, and zoning ordinance.b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Answer:
Explanation:
See item 3.2.2.a above.c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Answer:
Explanation:
See item 3.2.2.a above.3.2.3 Air Quality
. Would the project:a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Answer: NO IMPACT
Explanation:
The San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin is currently classified as "non-attainment" for ozone (state and federal ambient standards) and PM10 (state ambient standard). While air quality plans exist for ozone, none exists (or is currently required) for PM10 (particulate matter, 10 micron). The Draft San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan for the 1-Hour National Ozone Standard is the current ozone air quality plan required under the federal Clean Air Act. The state-mandated regional air quality plan is the Bay Area '97 Clean Air Plan. These plans identify mobile source controls, stationary source controls and transportation control measures to be implemented in the region to attain the state and federal ozone standards within the Bay Area Air Basin.The project would not conflict with any of the growth assumptions made in the preparation of these plans nor obstruct implementation of any of the proposed control measures contained in these plans.
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Answer:
Impact AQ-1:
Construction Period Air Quality Impacts. The proposed demolition of the existing Hill Building and project construction activities would generate exhaust emissions from vehicles/equipment and fugitive particulate matter emissions that would affect local air quality. This impact is potentially significant, but normally mitigatible.Explanation:
The proposed demolition of the existing Hill Building is a construction activity with a high potential for creating air pollutants for a short period of time. In addition to the dust created during demolition, substantial dust emissions could be created as debris is loaded into trucks for disposal. The potential for temporary nuisance is heightened by the proximity of the residences within the adjacent Kasik Building.Construction activities would affect local air quality for a period of months at a time, causing a temporary increase in particulate dust and other pollutants. Dust emission during periods of construction would increase particulate concentrations at nearby retail, office, and residential areas.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA Guidelines provide thresholds of significance for air quality impacts. The BAAQMD significance thresholds for construction dust impacts are based on the appropriateness of construction dust controls. The BAAQMD guidelines provide feasible control measures for construction emissions of PM10. If the appropriate construction controls are to be implemented, then air pollutant emissions for construction activities would be considered less-than-significant.
Mitigation AQ-1:
Construction Period Air Quality Impacts. Require the project applicant to include the following dust control practices in all construction contracts:. Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.
. Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the wind.
. Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
. Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) all paved access road, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.
. Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets.
. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
In addition, require the following practices during demolition:
. Use dust-proof chutes whenever possible for loading construction debris onto trucks.
. Use continuous watering to control dust penetration during demolition of the structure and break-up of pavement.
. Cover all trucks hauling debris from the site.
c. 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 (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Answer:
Explanation:
Development of the project would attract new regional vehicle trips that would create regional air emissions. The URBEMIS-7G program was used to calculate emissions from all trips to or from the project site with and without the proposed project. Table 2 lists daily emissions associated with project vehicle use. Pollutants shown include reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) (two precursors of ozone) and PM10 (particulate matter, 10 micron).The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has established thresholds of significance for regional pollutants. A project is considered to have a significant regional air quality impact if it would result in an emissions increase of 80 pounds per day for ROG, NOx (both ozone precursors) or PM10. As shown in Table 2, project emissions are below the BAAQMD thresholds for all three pollutants, so project impacts on regional air quality would be less-than-significant.
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Answer:
Explanation:
Project-generated traffic would modify traffic volumes on the local street network, changing carbon monoxide levels along roadways used by project traffic. Concentrations of this pollutant are related to the levels of traffic and congestion along streets and at intersections.A screening form of the CALINE-4 computer simulation model was applied to six intersections near the project site. The intersections were selected on the basis of highest average delay. Table 3 shows the results of the CALINE-4 modeling for the selected intersections. Concentrations are shown for three scenarios:
. Existing Plus Background Development; and
. Existing Plus Background Development Plus Project .
The concentrations listed in Table 3 are to be compared to the state and federal ambient one-hour air quality standards of 20 parts per million (PPM) and 35 PPM, respectively. Predicted eight-hour concentrations in Table 3 are to be compared to the state and federal eight-hour standards of nine PPM.
Due to the gradual decline in emission rates for vehicles, concentrations in 2004 (the assumed year of project buildout) are predicted to be lower than current concentrations, despite increased traffic. Project-generated traffic would increase concentrations by up
Table 2
REGIONAL VEHICULAR EMISSIONS, IN POUNDS PER DAY
ROG NOx PM10
Emissions from Project-Generated 51.0 78.3 29.3
Traffic
BAAQMD Thresholds 80.0 80.0 80.0
SOURCE: Donald Ballanti
ROG = reactive organic gases
NOx = oxides of nitrogen
PM10 = particulate matter, 10 micron
Table 3
WORST CASE CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS NEAR SELECTED
INTERSECTIONS, IN PARTS PER MILLION
Existing
Existing plus plus Background
Existing (2000) Background (2004) plus Project (2004)
Intersection 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour
El Camino Real/Wolfe 11.0 7.7 9.6 6.7 10.2 7.1
Road
El Camino Real/Remington 10.8 7.6 9.3 6.5 9.4 6.5
Drive
El Camino Real/Mathilda 11.8 8.2 11.3 7.9 12.0 8.4
Avenue
Fremont Avenue/Sunnyvale- 10.1 7.1 8.7 6.1 8.9 6.2
Saratoga Road
I-280 SB Ramps/De Anza 10.7 7.5 8.8 6.2 8.8 6.2
Boulevard
El Camino Real/Sunnyvale- 9.1 6.4 7.6 5.3 8.0 5.6
Saratoga Road
Most Stringent Standard 20.0 9.0 20.0 9.0 20.0 9.0
SOURCE: Donald Ballanti
to 0.7 PPM, but concentrations for all scenarios would remain below the state and federal ambient air quality standards. Impacts of project-generated traffic on local carbon monoxide concentrations are therefore considered to be less-than-significant.
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Answer:
Explanation:
During project construction, various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on the site would create odors. These odors are not likely to be noticeable beyond the project boundaries, however. The proposed project office and retail uses are not likely to create objectionable odors.3.2.4 Biological Resources
. Would the project:a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Answer: NO IMPACT
Explanation:
The project site and the adjacent Hill Building site are level, urbanized and largely paved, with vegetation limited to introduced parking lot landscaping (trees and shrubs) and street trees. No plant or animal species of special concern are known to exist on the site or in the project vicinity. Onsite habitat conditions do not resemble those that are required to support any "special status" species (i.e., species listed by the state or federal government as threatened or endangered). Therefore, the project would not be anticipated to have an adverse impact on such species.b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site and the adjacent Hill Building site are level, paved, and developed and contains no natural water source or sensitive natural area.c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Answer:
Explanation:
See section 3.2.4.b above.d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site and the adjacent Hill Building site contain no natural water body, are surrounded by urbanized land, and are not connected to any wildlife areas. Therefore, the project area's value as a wildlife corridor or dispersal area is negligible.e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site and the adjacent Hill Building site do not contain any sensitive habitats protected by the Sunnyvale General Plan or any other City documents. To the extent that any of the existing non-native trees proposed for removal exceed 38 inches in diameter at a point four feet above grade, a tree removal permit will be required, consistent with the City's municipal code.f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved, local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is in an area to which no conservation plans apply.3.2.5 Cultural Resources
. Would the project:a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
Answer: LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Explanation:
The 5.8-acre project site currently contains surface parking lots. A records search conducted at the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) revealed that federal and state inventories list no historic properties in the Block 1 area. Review of historical literature and maps on file at the CHRIS gave no indication of historic archaeological sites in the project area.The Hill Building occupies a 12,000-square-foot site immediately south and east of the project site. The project proposes demolition of the Hill Building and provision of 30 surface parking spaces on the site. The two-story, City of Sunnvyale-owned Hill Building was constructed in 1953 and currently contains offices and warehouse uses. The building is not considered historically significant and is not included on the City's list of heritage resources.
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
Answer:
Impact CR-1:
Potential for Adverse Impacts on Archaeological Resources. The project area has a high potential of containing Native American archaeological resources. Project excavation and grading could disturb artifacts or remains, resulting in a potentially significant adverse archaeological resource impact.Explanation:
Native Americans are known to have lived in the project area at the time of Euroamerican contact. Native American archaeological sites in this portion of Santa Clara County tend to be situated along historic bay margins on flat terraces. The project area is located on an open terrace near the historic bay margin. Numerous other sites are located within one-half mile of the project area in similar environments, and a burial site has been found nearby. In addition, local soils consist of quaternary alluvium that is "locally known to contain aboriginal artifacts and skeletal remains" (Helley et al., 1979). Given this environmental setting, there is a high potential for Native American archaeological sites to exist in the area.Mitigation AR-1:
Potential for Adverse Impacts on Archaeological Resources. Following current City policy, if evidence of prehistoric or historic artifacts or remains is uncovered during the course of excavation or grading for the project, grading activity in the immediate area shall cease and a qualified archaeologist contacted so that appropriate mitigation programs can be developed. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level.c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is flat without any unusual geologic features. No paleontological resources have been identified or indicated on the site or in the immediate Sunnyvale vicinity.d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Answer:
Explanation:
See section 3.2.5.b above.3.2.6 Geology and Soils
. Would the project:a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Answer: NO IMPACT
Explanation:
No verified faults are known to underlay the project site. The Hayward and Calaveras faults are located approximately 10 and 13 miles northeast of the site, respectively, and the San Andreas Fault is located approximately 7.5 miles to the southwest.ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is located between major active faults (item 3.2.6.a), and other "inferred" faults could be located in the project vicinity. Similar to urban locations throughout the Bay Area, a seismic event could seriously damage buildings on the project site and put their inhabitants at risk if the buildings are not adequately designed to withstand the effects of anticipated ground shaking intensities.These structural specification standards and requirements are periodically updated to reflect the latest seismic engineering technology, based on ongoing study of actual groundshaking events and their effects on structures throughout the world. These standards and requirements are also based on site-specific estimates of peak ground surface acceleration and seismic wave frequency (time between consecutive shock waves) expected to occur in response to a maximum credible earthquake. Project conformance with the Uniform Building Code and with all applicable City of Sunnyvale Building Division regulations would be required, and would be expected to reduce seismic ground shaking hazards to a less-than-significant impact.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Answer:
Explanation:
Seismically-induced ground failure typically includes liquefaction, differential settlement, and lateral spreading. Some interbedded medium-dense strata of sand are located on portions of the site at depths of about 15 to 20 feet below the ground surface. These materials have the potential to undergo liquefaction, if saturated, during seismic shaking. However, these sands lie above the groundwater table and are therefore not saturated. Furthermore, they would be removed during excavation for the proposed subsurface parking structure. Additional sands located at greater depths on the site are sufficiently dense that they are not expected to pose a significant potential for liquefaction.The soils on the site are generally very stiff to hard and are relatively consistent in thickness and consistency. Therefore, the potential for differential settlement is low. There are also no weak planes in the subsurface structure that would be likely to induce lateral spreading during seismic shaking.
In accordance with standard City procedures, prior to issuing a building permit for the project, the City would review the geotechnical report prepared for the project to ensure that it includes a sufficient analysis of soils conducted by a qualified engineer or geologist and, to the City's satisfaction, includes appropriate soils, foundation, and structural engineering recommendations to adequately account for any liquefiable or otherwise unstable soils underlying the site.
iv) Landslides?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site and all adjoining properties are essentially level, so there is no danger of landsliding.b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Answer:
Explanation:
Ground clearing and earthmoving on the site would expose bare soils to both wind and, during the rainy season, water erosion. However, the project site's flat terrain would reduce runoff velocities, thereby reducing erosion potential. Ground clearing and earthmoving would be required to conform with existing City of Sunnyvale grading and erosion control regulations designed to minimize soil erosion or loss of topsoil.c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is generally level, with a slight northward slope. The potential for landslide is therefore non-existent. As noted in Item 3.2.6.a(iii), above, the potential for differential settlement and lateral spreading on the site is considered to be very low, and the potentially liquefiable soils on the site would be removed during project construction. Excavations for the subsurface parking structure would be properly shored and engineered, with all geotechnical design features subject to approval by the City Engineer. As a result, project construction would not be expected to destabilize the existing ground or place fill material that could be susceptible to future slope failure. In addition, the existing ground cover consists of pavement and minor landscaping, so project-related site clearing would not be expected to remove any vegetation that currently provides a high degree of soil stabilization.d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Answer:
Explanation:
As noted in Item 3.2.6.a(iii), above, the site is generally underlain by very stiff to hard soils that do not appear to change in thickness or consistency abruptly over short distances. While there are some interbedded layers of medium-dense sand, this material would be removed during excavation for the project. Therefore, the project would not be located on expansive soil, and the project would not create substantial risks to life or property. As previously noted, prior to issuing a building permit for the project, the City would review the geotechnical report prepared for the project to ensure that it includes a sufficient analysis of soils conducted by a qualified engineer or geologist and, to the City's satisfaction, includes appropriate soils, foundation, and structural engineering recommendations to adequately account for any unstable soils underlying the site.e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
Answer:
Explanation:
Sewer service is available on the project site and use of septic tanks or alternative waste water methods would not occur.3.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
. Would the project:a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Answer: NO IMPACT
Explanation:
Operation of the proposed office/retail project would not involve the use or transport of hazardous materials.b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Answer:
Impact H-1:
Potential Contaminated Soils Impact. Construction of the project would include excavation and disposal of approximately 306,000 cubic yards of soil. The soils beneath the project site may contain unsafe levels of toxic substances, which could expose construction workers to safety hazards when disturbed and could be released into the environment through improper disposal.Explanation:
In June 1998, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the property at 111 West Evelyn Avenue parking (Assessor's Parcel Number 209-06-055), located immediately adjacent to the northeast corner of the project site. The Phase I report identified all potential toxic sites in the vicinity of the project; the proposed project site was not included in the list of identified sites. Although the report identified six fuel leaks and 43 toxic leak sites within a one-mile radius of parcel 209-06-055, it concluded that the sites are down-gradient (north) or cross-gradient (east and west) of the property or are at distances too great (greater than one-half mile) to be likely to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the property. Because the proposed project site is south of that site, and therefore upgradient, the same conclusion is likely applicable to the project site. However, previous uses of the project site may have involved the use or storage of hazardous materials. Therefore, the potential remains for soils on the site to be contaminated from previous activities on the site. Construction of the project would involve excavation of substantial amounts of soil from the site which could be released into the environment.Mitigation H-1:
Potential Contaminated Soils Impact. Prior to project approval, require a Phase I Site Assessment for the site. Implement all measures recommended by the Phase I study, including onsite soil testing if warranted. Use the findings of this assessment to ensure compliance with all applicable existing state- and county-mandated site assessment, remediation, removal and disposal requirements for soil, surface water, and/or groundwater contamination. In particular, these include the requirements of the City of Sunnyvale, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).Compliance with the above mitigation measures would be expected to assure that possible hazardous material impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Answer:
Explanation:
No activities related to the proposed project would involve hazardous materials in such a way as to affect any existing or proposed schools within one-quarter mile of the project site.d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Answer:
Explanation:
As noted in Item 3.2.7.b, a recent Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for an adjacent site did not identify the project site as a hazardous materials site. Although the potential remains for contaminated soil and/or groundwater to be present on the site, this issue has been addressed under Impact H-1 and would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of Mitigation H-1. Consequently, no hazard to the public or the environment would present on the site.e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Answer:
Explanation:
San Jose International Airport is the public airport closest to the project site. This airport is over two miles from the project site and its land use plan does not include the project site.The project would be located within two miles of Moffett Federal Air Field, located northwest of the project area. Project buildings would be a maximum of approximately 105 feet high (see Figures 8 and 9). At this proposed height, the buildings would not extend into the "instrument approach area" for aircraft using the air field, and no significant safety hazard would be expected. The project site is not located within the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) Accident Potential Zone defined for Moffett Field by the US Department of Defense.
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Answer:
Explanation:
There are no private airstrips in the City of Sunnyvale.g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Answer:
Explanation:
The L-shaped project site is surrounded by public streets on all sides with the exception of a surface parking lot at the east end of the site that extends from the site onto the adjacent parcel. The parking lot is bordered on the south by a restaurant. Construction of the project would not impair access to any of the surrounding properties.h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is located within a highly urbanized area. The proposed project would cover the site with impervious surfaces and does not involve the creation or preservation of any wildlands. Therefore, the project would not have an impact on the potential for wildland fires.3.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
. Would the project:a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Answer: LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Explanation:
Site clearing, grading/excavation and stockpiling activity associated with construction of the project would expose currently stable soils to both wind and water erosion. If washed into the stormdrain system and the San Francisco Bay, these materials could increase both turbidity and sedimentation, which would lower water quality. For projects such as the proposed approximately 4.5-acre development that entail the disturbance of less than 5 acres, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) does not require a permit. However, the City of Sunnyvale routinely requires certain measures to be taken during construction to minimize construction-period erosion. Also, the downtown Sunnyvale storm drain system flows to a City holding basin (Storm Drain Station #2) designed to further reduce the amount of sedimentation into the San Francisco Bay. These normal requirements and conditions would be anticipated to reduce the project's construction-period water quality impacts to a less-than-significant level.The use of hazardous materials and heavy equipment, which represents an incidental component of all construction, would also introduce materials that might be spilled on the project site and subsequently washed into the storm drain system and the San Francisco Bay. These substances would have a direct, adverse effect on water quality in the creek and the bay. Implementation of standard City of Sunnyvale construction-period measures to reduce the risk of construction-period pollutants would be anticipated to reduce this risk to a less-than-significant level.
Following the completion of construction, the likelihood of onsite erosion would be substantially reduced because all disturbed areas would be stabilized underneath buildings, pavement, and landscaping. As a result, there should be little significant threat of long term erosion or increased turbidity and sedimentation in the San Francisco Bay resulting from project development.
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
Answer:
Explanation:
Currently, approximately 90 percent of the project site is covered with paved surface parking, with a small unpaved, grass- and weed-covered area located at the northwest corner of the site. Following construction of the proposed buildings, parking structures, public plaza, and other pedestrian areas, the entire site would be covered with impervious surfaces, with the exception of about 31,300 square feet of landscaped areas. Although this is substantially more landscaping than is currently present in and around the existing parking lot, much of the proposed landscaped areas would be located above the subsurface parking garage. While these planter boxes and other landscaped areas would retard storm runoff and retain water, they would not contribute to groundwater recharge. The project is therefore expected to marginally increase the impervious surfaces on the site (by a maximum of 15 percent). While the City derives approximately 15 percent of its municipal water supply from local groundwater wells, the project area and the downtown area in general do not constitute a significant recharge area for the underground aquifers. The removal of up to one-half acre of permeable ground surface would not appreciably affect the rate of recharge of the City's drinking water aquifers.c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is in an urbanized area and there are no streams or rivers on or near the site. The level of runoff from the project site into the City's storm drain system is not anticipated to change significantly because the site is already paved for surface parking and structures. The potential for substantial construction-related erosion or siltation has been addressed in item 3.2.8.a above.d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Answer:
Explanation:
Because the majority of the project site is already paved for surface parking, development of the project would not be anticipated to significantly alter the total volume of storm water runoff in the existing storm drain system. As a result, the project would be expected to have a less-than-significant drainage impact. See item 3.2.8.e below.e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Answer:
Explanation:
All stormwater runoff from the project site is discharged into City of Sunnyvale Storm Drain Station #2 through the City's downtown storm drain system. The tiny incremental increase in stormwater runoff that would result from the project would not be expected to exceed stormwater drainage capacity. See item 3.2.8.b, above, for additional information.f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project would replace an existing surface parking lot with three office/retail buildings, a public plaza, and a below-grade parking structure. Stormwater runoff from the site currently collects motor oil, grease, antifreeze, and other contaminants leaked from automobiles, as well as eroded tire fragments and heavy metals settling from vehicle exhaust, and discharges these pollutants into the City's storm drainage system. By replacing these surface parking spaces with covered spaces that would not be exposed to stormwater runoff, the quality of stormwater runoff from the site would be expected to improve. This is a potentially beneficial impact of the project. The potential water quality impacts related to erosion and increased stormwater runoff are addressed above in items 3.2.8.a and 3.2.8.e, respectively.g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project proposal does not include a housing component.h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is located in a 100-year flood hazard area with average depths of less than one foot. At this low level of flooding, the project structures would not be anticipated to affect the flood flow.i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is not in the proximity of a dam or levee. The low level (up to one foot) of the 100-year flood event would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death.j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Answer:
Explanation:
The project site is not located in close enough to a body of water that could be affected by an earthquake-generated tsunami (ocean wave) or seiche (inland body of water wave). The project is located on level topography in downtown Sunnyvale and is not susceptible to mudflows from higher elevations.3.2.9 Land Use and Planning
. Would the project:a. Physically divide an established community?
Answer: NO IMPACT
Explanation:
The project entails conversion of an existing surface parking lot to three office/retail buildings with a subsurface parking structure and demolition of an existing two-story office/warehouse building. Implementation of the proposed plans would enhance, rather than divide, the established community. In addition to preserving the existing view corridors along Capella Way, Aries Way, and Altair Way through the placement of the project buildings, the project would enhance pedestrian access to the area and increase the sense of place through creation of a public plaza in an area currently occupied by a parking lot. No established community pattern would be adversely affected.b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Answer:
Explanation:
The City of Sunnyvale has land use jurisdiction over the project site, which is located in the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan planning subarea. The guiding documents for new land uses on the project site are both the Sunnyvale General Plan and the Sunnyvale Downtown Specific Plan.The sole existing land use currently on the project site is surface parking that serves the commercial development that occupies the rest of Block 1. The adjacent Hill Building, which would be demolished as part of the project, also occupies a 12,000-square-foot site on Block 1. Most of Block 1 is developed as the Town & Country Village shopping center. Small internal streets separate large-footprint one- and two-story buildings housing restaurants, retail shops, service businesses, and some office uses. Landscape trees and angle or parallel parking lines most of these internal streets.
To the south of Block 1 is the Sunnyvale Town Center shopping center, which is home to Macy's, J.C. Penney, Montgomery Ward, and 121 specialty stores. An extensive two-story parking structure for the shopping mall is directly opposite Block 1. In March 1999, the Sunnyvale City Council approved plans to expand the mall and add parking garages on the mall site. To the west, the opposite side of Mathilda Avenue is lined with single-family residences, which continue into the blocks further west. South of North Washington Avenue, the west side Mathilda Avenue is lined