NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This form is provided as a notification of an intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration which has been prepared in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and Resolution #193-86.
PROJECT TITLE:
Application for a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Special Development Permit and Tentative Map filed by The Riding Group.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION (APN):
Application for related proposals on a 3.96-acre site located at 397 South Mary Avenue in an R-0 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 161-39-022, 023)
WHERE TO VIEW THIS DOCUMENT:
The Mitigated Negative Declaration, its supporting documentation and details relating to the project are on file and available for review and comment in the Office of the Secretary of the Planning Commission, City Hall, 456 West Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale.
Any person prior to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 4, 2003 may protest this Mitigated Negative Declaration in writing. Such protest shall be filed in the Department of Community Development, 456 W. Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale and shall include a written statement specifying anticipated environmental effects which may be significant. A protest of a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be considered by the adopting authority, whose action on the protest may be appealed.
HEARING INFORMATION:
A public hearing on the project is scheduled for:
Monday, March 10, 2003 by the Planning Commission at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 456 West Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale; and,
Tuesday, March 25, 2003 by the City Council at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 456 West Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale.
TOXIC SITE INFORMATION:
(No) listed toxic sites are present at the project location.
|
Circulated On February 12, 2003_______ |
Signed:Fred Bell, Principal Planner |
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and Resolution #193-86.
PROJECT TITLE:
Application for a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Special Development Permit and Tentative Map filed by The Riding Group.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION (APN):
Application for related proposals on a 3.96-acre site located at 397 South Mary Avenue in an R-0 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 161-39-022, 023)
FINDINGS:
The Director of Community Development of the City of Sunnyvale, California, hereby determines that an environmental impact report is not required. The above determination is based upon the initial study conducted in this matter, information provided by the applicant in an "Application for Environmental Clearance" that there are sufficient environmental controls incorporated in the Zoning and Subdivision regulations to ensure no significant detrimental effect by any proposed use allowed as a matter of right and, in the case of a PD overlay or any application for a use permit, site and architectural control will be exercised by the City. No endangered species are known to depend on the site for habitat.
Mitigation Measures:
MITIGATION MEASURE: Windows and doors should have a minimum STC (Sound Transmission Class) rating of 29.STC 29 windows are typcially achieved with standard thermal pane glazing. Fully gasketed wood core doors provide an STC rating of greater than 29. Since the windows must be closed in the units to achieve the interior standard not to exceed 45 dB, the units must be mechanically ventilated.
MITIGATION MEASURE: Prior to issuance of grading and building permits, the applicant shall conduct a final flow metering analysis of the sewer mains that would serve the proposed project site. The applicant shall provide its pro-rata share or costs of any enhancement to the sewer mains serving the project site as determined by the Director of Public Works.
Any person prior to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 4, 2003 may protest this Mitigated Negative Declaration in writing. Such protest shall be filed in the Department of Community Development, 456 W. Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale and shall include a written statement specifying anticipated environmental effects which may be significant. A protest of a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be considered by the adopting authority, whose action on the protest may be appealed.
|
Circulated On February 12, 2003_______ |
Signed:Fred Bell, Principal Planner |
California Department of Fish and Game
CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION
De Minimis Impact Finding
PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION (INCLUDE COUNTY):
The General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Special Development Permit and Tentative Map are located on 397 South Mary Avenue, City of Sunnyvale, County of Santa Clara in an R-0 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District. APN: 161-39-022, 023
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Application for related proposals on a 3.96-acre site located at 397 South Mary Avenue in an R-0 (Low-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 161-39-022, 023)
FINDINGS OF EXEMPTION:
1. This project is in an urban setting.
2. There is no alteration of land or effect on fish or wildlife.
CERTIFICATION:
I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
|
Fred Bell |
|
Title: Principal Planner, Community Development |
|
Lead Agency: City of Sunnyvale |
|
Date: February 12, 2003 |
|
City of Sunnyvale |
INITIAL STUDY Project Address: 397 South Mary |
|
|
1. |
Project Title: |
Iowa at Mary |
|
2. |
Lead Agency Name and Address: |
City of Sunnyvale, Community Development Department, Planning Division |
|
3. |
Contact Person and Phone Number: |
Fred Bell, (408) 730-7443 |
|
4. |
Project Location: |
397 South Mary Avenue |
|
5. |
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: |
The Riding Group: 1 Alameda Blvd. #705, San Jose 95113 |
|
6. |
General Plan Designation: |
RLD (Residential Low Density) |
|
7. |
Zoning: |
R-0 (Low Density Residential) |
|
8. |
Description of the Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. (Attach additional sheets if necessary) |
|
|
A General Plan Amendment to Low Medium Density Residential, Rezone to R1.7, Special Development Permit and Tentative map for 35 single family detached homes. The existing Community Christian Church will be removed. The two-story homes will have rear-loaded garages with access taken from an interior private street. |
||
|
9. |
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings)
|
Single family residential uses to the north, east and west. Multiple family residential to the south. |
|
10. |
Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement). |
|
|
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: |
|||||
|
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. |
|||||
|
q |
Aesthetics |
q |
Hazards & Hazardous Materials |
q |
Public Services |
|
q |
Agricultural Resources |
q |
Hydrology/Water Quality |
q |
Recreation |
|
q |
Air Quality |
q |
Land Use/Planning |
q |
Transportation/Traffic |
|
q |
Biological Resources |
q |
Mineral Resources |
q |
Utilities/Service Systems |
|
q |
Cultural Resources |
q |
Noise |
q |
Mandatory Findings of Significance |
|
q |
Geology/Soils |
q |
Population/Housing |
||
|
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. |
q |
|
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. |
X |
|
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. |
q |
|
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potential significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. |
q |
|
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. |
q |
|
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:
|
|
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 |
|
Planning Division Checklist (4 of 8) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
17, 2____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_17, 94___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_94______ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_95______ |
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__3______ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__3, 97___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__3______ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___3_____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___3_____ |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
Planning Division Checklist (5 of 8) |
|||||
|
III. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: |
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___94____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__94_____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__94_____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__94_____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___41____ |
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 |
X |
__17_____ |
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___59____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_10______ |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Planning Division Checklist (6 of 8) |
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__10__ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_10___ |
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__12__ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___12_ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__17__ |
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
___19_ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__19__ |
|
|||||
|
q |
X |
q |
q |
_See attached |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_16___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__16__ |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Planning Division Checklist (7 of 8) |
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_16___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_16___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__16__ |
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__11__ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_11___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__11__ |
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__95__ |
b. Other public facilities? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_8, 18_ |
|
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) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
______ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
______ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
______ |
|
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) |
|||||
|
|||||
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: |
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UBC, UDC, UNC, NEC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
" |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Public Works Department Checklist (1 of 1) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
20 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
20 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
24 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
25 |
|
q |
X |
q |
q |
See notes on last page |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
22 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
22 |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Traffic Division Public Works Department Checklist (1 of 1) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
75 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
12, 82 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
114 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
76 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
76 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
37 |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
85, 12 |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Fire Division Public Safety Department Checklist (1 of 2) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Fire Division Public Safety Department Checklist (2 of 2) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
UFC/UBC/SVMC |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Crime Division Public Safety Department Checklist (1 of 1 ) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
a) Police protection? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
__13__ |
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Parks & Recreation Department Checklist (1 of 1) |
|||||
|
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
_18___ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
__18__ |
|
|||||
|
a) Parks? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_17, 18 |
Source: Open Space and Recreation Sub-elements
|
Issues and Supporting Information |
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Street Trees & Landscape Division Parks & Recreation Department Checklist (1 of 1) |
|||||
XIX. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project? |
|||||
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
91____ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
91__ |
|
q |
q |
q |
X |
91____ |
|
Issues and Supporting Information
|
Potentially Significant Impact |
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated |
Less Than Significant Impact |
No Impact |
Source |
|
Environmental Division Public Works Department Checklist (1 of 1) |
|||||
|
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: |
|||||
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_24, 87 |
b) Substantially degrade 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)? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_25,___ |
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? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_95, 24 |
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 surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off site? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_95, 24 |
e) Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_24___ |
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_56___ |
g) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_56___ |
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_56__ |
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? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_56___ |
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? |
q |
q |
q |
X |
_24___ |
|
Completed By: Fred Bell |
Date: February 12, 2003 |
RESPONSE
VII NOISE:
ITEM (a) 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.
Appendix A of the Noise Sub-element of the General Plan establishes noise contours that may result in the residential units closest to Mary Avenue being subjected to noise levels exceeding the maximum permitted by the goals and ordinances of the City of Sunnyvale.
An acoustical assessment was conducted by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. regarding the potential for noise impacts on residential units closest to Mary Avenue. The acoustical assessment concluded that exterior noise levels would not exceed City standards provided solid wood fences are installed at the side yards locations. Interior noise levels would not exceed City noise standards provided:
MITIGATION MEASURE: Windows and doors should have a minimum STC (Sound Transmission Class) rating of 29.STC 29 windows are typcially achieved with standard thermal pane glazing. Fully gasketed wood core doors provide an STC rating of greater than 29. Since the windows must be closed in the units to achieve the interior standard not to exceed 45 dB, the units must be mechanically ventilated.
XII UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
h) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which 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?
A preliminary study was completed by CH2Mhill in 2002 for the City’s wastewater collection system which suggests that insufficient sewer capacity may exist at the project location of Mary and Iowa Avenues.
MITIGATION MEASURE: Prior to issuance of grading and building permits, the applicant shall conduct a final flow metering analysis of the sewer mains that would serve the proposed project site. The applicant shall provide its pro-rata share or costs of any enhancement to the sewer mains serving the project site as determined by the Director of Public Works.
INITIAL STUDY REFERENCE CHECKLIST
Note: All references are the most recent version as of the date the initial Study was prepared:
|
1. City of Sunnyvale General Plan: |
|
2. Map |
|
3. Air Quality Sub-Element |
|
4. Community Design Sub-Element |
|
5. Community Participation Sub-Element |
|
6. Cultural Arts Sub-Element |
|
7. Executive Summary |
|
8. Fire Services Sub-Element |
|
9. Fiscal Sub-Element |
|
10. Heritage Preservation Sub-Element |
|
11. Housing & Community Revitalization Sub-Element |
|
12. Land Use & Transportation Sub-Element |
|
13. Law Enforcement Sub-Element |
| 14. Legislative
Management Sub-Element 15. Library Sub-Element |
|
16. Noise Sub-Element |
| 17. Open Space Sub-Element. |
| 18. Recreation Sub-Element |
| 19. Safety & Seismic Safety Sub-Element |
| 20. Sanitary Sewer System Sub-Element |
| 21. Socio-Economic
Sub-Element 22. Solid Waste Management Sub-Element |
| 23. Support
Services Sub-Element 24. Surface Run-off Sub-Element |
|
25. Water Resources Sub-Element |
|
26. City of Sunnyvale Municipal Code: |
|
27. Chapter 10 |