DFG: 3/94

Planner

DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

Signature Date

Diana O’Dell, Associate Planner
City of Sunnyvale
Printed Name For (Lead Agency)

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1)	A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2)	All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3)	Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4)	"Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
5)	Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (d). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6)	Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7)	Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8)	This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9)	The analysis of each issue should identify: (a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and (b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Issues and Supporting Information		Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?		q	q	q	T	2, 94
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?		q	q	q	T	2, 94
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?		q	q	q	T	2, 94, 101
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?		q	q	q	T	2, 94
AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?		q	q	q	T	3, 97, 100, 111,
Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.		q	q	q	T	3, 97, 100, 111,
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)?		q	q	q	T	3, 96, 97, 100, 111,
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?		q	q	q	T	62, 63, 111, 112
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?		q	q	q	T	111, 112

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
III. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
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?	q	q	q	T	2, 94, 111, 112, 109
Have a substantially adverse impact 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 Wildlife Service?	q	q	q	T	2, 94, 111, 112, 109
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?	q	q	q	T	2, 94, 111, 112, 109
Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?	q	q	q	T	2, 94, 111, 112, 109
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?	q	q	q	T	41, 94, 111, 112
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?	q	q	q	T	2, 41, 94, 111, 112
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?	q	q	q	T	10, 42, 60, 61, 94, 111
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5?	q	q	q	T	10, 42, 94,

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?	q	q	q	T	10, 42, 94, 111
Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?	q	q	q	T	2, 111, 112
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?	q	q	q	T	2, 11, 12, 21, 28
Conflict with an 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?	q	q	q	T	31, 28, 111
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan?	q	q	q	T	2, 41, 94, 111
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?	q	q	q	T	2, 94,
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?	q	q	q	T	2, 94
NOISE. Would the project result in:
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?	q	q	T	q	See discusion
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?	q	q	q	T	2, 16, 26, 94, 111, 112
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?	q	q	q	T	2, 16, 26, 94, 111, 112
A substantially temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?	q	q	T	q	Discus-sion at end of check-list

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?	q	q	q	T	2, 11, 111, 112
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?	q	q	q	T	2, 11, 111, 112,
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?	q	q	q	T	2, 11, 111, 112
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Parks?	q	q	q	T	2, 18, 111, 112
Fire protection?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
Schools?	q	q	q	T	2, 111, 112
Other public facilities?	q	q	q	T	1, 2, 111, 112
e) Police protection?	q	q	q	T	26, 65, 66, 103, 104

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
Planning Division Checklist (8 of 8)
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?	q	q	q	T	2, 10, 26, 42, 59, 60, 61, 111, 112
Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?	q	q	q	T	1, 2, 111, 112
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?	q	q	q	T	111, 112

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
Building & Safety Division Checklist (1 of 1)
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:
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? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.	q	q	q	T	UBC, UPC, UMC, NEC
Strong seismic ground shaking?	q	q	T	q	See disc.
Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?	q	q	q	T	"
Landslides?	q	q	q	T	"
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?	q	q	q	T	"
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?	q	q	q	T	"
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-a-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?	q	q	q	T	"
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?	q	q	q	T	"

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?	q	q	q	T	2, 20, 24, , 87, 88, 89, 90, 111, 112
Require or result in construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?	q	q	q	T	2, 20, 24, 25 , 87, 88, 89, 111, 112
Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?	q	q	q	T	2, 20, 24, 25, 87, 88, 89, 111, 112
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?	q	q	q	T	2, 20, 24, 25, 87, 88, 89, 111, 112
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that services or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?	q	q	q	T	2, 20, 24, 25, 87, 88, 89, 90, 111, 112
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?	q	q	q	T	2, 22, 90, 111, 112
Comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste?	q	q	q	T	2, 22, 90, 111, 112

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
Cause an increase in the traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?	q	q	q	T	2, 12, 71, 75, 76, 77, 111, 112
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?	q	q	q	T	2, 71, 75, 76, 77, 80, 84, 111, 112,
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?	q	q	q	T	2, 111, 112, 113
Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?	q	q	q	T	2, 12, 71, 75, 76, 77, 80, 84, 111, 112,
Result in inadequate emergency access?	q	q	q	T	2, 111, 112
Result in inadequate parking capacity?	q	q	q	T	2, 37, 111, 112
Conflict with adopted policies or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?	q	q	q	T	2, 12, 81, 111, 112

Issues and Supporting Information	Potentially Significant Impact	Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated	Less Than Significant Impact	No Impact	Source
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project?
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an exiting or proposed school?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
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?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
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?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC
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?	q	q	q	T	UFC/UBC/SVMC

Return to RTC# 02-354