RTC#03-171 Attachment 3

RTC 03-171 Attachment 3

NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION

This form is provided as a notification of an intent to adopt a 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 Rezone, Special Development Permit and Tentative Map by Pacific Peninsula Group.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION (APN):

2003-0102 - Pacific Peninsula Group [Applicant] Sun Pacific, LLC [Owner]: Application for related proposals on a 38,303 square foot site located at 759 & 775 Carmel Avenue in an R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 205-15-036)

Rezone from R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) to R-3/PD (Medium-Density Residential/Planned Development) Zoning District;
Special Development Permit to allow the construction of 24 town homes;
Tentative Map for a subdivision that results in 24 lots and one common lot.

WHERE TO VIEW THIS DOCUMENT:

The 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 18, 2003 may protest this 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 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 24, 2003 by the Planning Commission at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 456 West Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale; and,

Tuesday, April 8, 2003 by the City Council at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 456 West Olive Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA.

TOXIC SITE INFORMATION:

(No) listed toxic sites are present at the project location.

Circulated On February 26, 2003

Signed: Fred Bell, Principal Planner

NEGATIVE DECLARATION

This 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 Rezone, Special Development Permit and Tentative Map by Pacific Peninsula Group.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION (APN):

Rezone from R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) to R-3/PD (Medium-Density Residential/Planned Development) Zoning District;
Special Development Permit to allow the construction of 24 town homes;
Tentative Map for a subdivision that results in 24 lots and one common lot.

FINDINGS:

The Director of Community Development of the City of Sunnyvale, California, hereby determines that an environmental impact report is not required. There are sufficient environmental controls incorporated into the Zoning and Subdivision regulations to ensure no significant detrimental effect by any proposed use, in the case of a PD overlay or any application for a Special Development Permit; site and architectural control will be exercised by the Planning Commission and City Council.

The above determination is based upon the initial study conducted in this matter, information provided by the applicant in an "Application for Environmental Clearance" and is based on the fact that the use is in keeping with the adopted General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance; that the use would be in keeping with the character of the proposed Zoning District. No endangered species are known to depend on this site for habitat.

Any person prior to 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 18, 2003 may protest this 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 Negative Declaration will be considered by the adopting authority, whose action on the protest may be appealed.

Circulated On February 26, 2003	Signed: Fred Bell, Principal Planner
Adopted On _________________________	Verified: Fred Bell, Principal Planner

California Department of Fish and Game

CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION

De Minimis Impact Finding

PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION (INCLUDE COUNTY):

The Rezone, Special Development Permit and Tentative Map are located on 759 & 775 Carmel Avenue, City of Sunnyvale, County of Santa Clara in an R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) Zoning District. (APN: 205-15-036)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

Rezone from R-3 (Medium-Density Residential) to R-3/PD (Medium-Density Residential/Planned Development) Zoning District;
Special Development Permit to allow the construction of 24 town homes;
Tentative Map for a subdivision that results in 24 lots and one common lot.

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 27, 2003

City of Sunnyvale
Department of Community Development

Planning Division
P.O.Box 3707
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3707

INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
Appendix G, CEQA Guidelines
Project #: 2003-0102 RZ, SDP, and TM

Project Address: 759 & 775 Carmel Avenue

Applicant: Sun Pacific, LLP

1.

Project Title:

Twenty-Four Townhouses at 759 & 775 Carmel Avenue

2.

Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Sunnyvale, Community Development Department, Planning Division

3.

Contact Person and Phone Number:

Ryan M. Kuchenig

4.

Project Location:

759 & 775 Carmel Avenue

5.

Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

Sun Pacific, LLP - 718 Oak Grove Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025

6.

General Plan Designation:

Residential Medium Density

7.

Zoning:

R-3 (Proposed R-3/PD)

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)

The applicant proposes twenty-four townhouses on a 38,303 s.f lot for a density of 27.3 du/acre. The proposed development will be three stories in height. The units will include either one or two car garages. The unit sizes range from 1,358 sq. ft. to 1,937 sq. ft.

This project requires a three-part application: a re-zone from R-3 to R-3/PD, a Special Development Permit for the construction of the townhouse units and a tentative map to subdivide the lot into 24 lots with one common lot.

9.

Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings)

North: Elementary School
South: Apartments
East: Apartments
West: Apartments

Surrounding Zoning and Uses of the area include mostly of residential medium density development. A public facility use (elementary school) lies to the north of the project site.

10.

Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement).

Building Safety Division
Public Works Department

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

DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.	x
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.	q
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

Ryan Kuchenig____	Date
Signature	City of Sunnyvale

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
Planning Division Checklist (4 of 8)
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?	q	q	q	x	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	x	2, 94
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?	q	q	q	x	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	x	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	x	3, 97, 100, 111
Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.	q	q	q	x	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	x	3, 96, 97, 100, 111
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?	q	q	q	x	62, 63, 111, 112
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?	q	q	q	x	111, 112

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:
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	x	2, 94, 111, 112, 109
	q	q	q	x
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	x	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	x	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	x	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	x	41, 94, 111, 112, 109
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	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	x	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	x	10, 42, 94

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)
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?	q	q	q	x	10, 42, 94, 111
Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?	q	q	q	x	2, 111, 112
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?	q	q	q	x	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	x	31, 28 111,
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan?	q	q	q	x	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	x	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	x	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	q	x	2, 16, 26, 94, 111, 112
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?	q	q	q	x	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	x	2, 16, 26, 94, 111, 112

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)
A substantially temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?	q	q	x	q	Discus-sion at end of check-list
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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?	q	q	q	x	2, 16, 94, 11, 112, 113
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?	q	q	q	x	2, 16, 94, 111, 112
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	x	q		2, 11, 111, 112
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?	q	q	q	x		2, 11, 111, 112
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?	q	q	q	x		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:
Schools?	q	q	q	x		2, 111, 112
b. Other public facilities?	q	q	q	x		2, 111, 112

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	x	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	x	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	x	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	x	UBC, UDC, UNC, NEC
Strong seismic ground shaking?	q	q	x	q	See disc.
Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?	q	q	q	x	"
Landslides?	q	q	q	x	"
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?	q	q	q	x	"
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	x	"
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	x	"
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	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)
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?	q	q	q	x	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	x	2, 20, 24, 87, 88, 89, 90, 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	x	2, 20, 24, 87, 88, 89, 90, 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	x	2, 20, 24, 87, 88, 89, 90, 111, 112
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?	q	q	q	x	2, 20, 24, 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	x	2, 22, 90, 111, 112
Comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste?	q	q	q	x	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

Traffic Division Public Works Department Checklist (1 of 1)

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

x

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

x

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

x

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

x

2, 12, 71, 75, 76, 77, 80, 84, 111, 112

Result in inadequate emergency access?

q

q

q

x

2, 111, 112,

Result in inadequate parking capacity?

q

q

q

x

2, 37, 111, 112

Conflict with adopted policies or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

q

q

q

x

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

Fire Division Public Safety Department Checklist (1 of 2)

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

x

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

x

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

x

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

x

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

x

UFC/UBC/SVMC

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?

q

q

q

x

UFC/UBC/SVMC

Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

q

q

q

x

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

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)
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:
Fire protection?	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 )
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:
a) Police protection?	q	q	q	x	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
Parks & Recreation Department Checklist (1 of 1)
RECREATION
Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?	q	q	q	x	2, 18, 111, 112
Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?	q	q	q	x	2, 18, 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:
a) Parks?	q	q	q	x	2, 18, 111, 112

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?

Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide

City of Sunnyvale Department of Community Development Planning Division P.O.Box 3707 Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3707		INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Appendix G, CEQA Guidelines Project #: 2003-0102 RZ, SDP, and TM Project Address: 759 & 775 Carmel Avenue Applicant: Sun Pacific, LLP
1.	Project Title:	Twenty-Four Townhouses at 759 & 775 Carmel Avenue
2.	Lead Agency Name and Address:	City of Sunnyvale, Community Development Department, Planning Division
3.	Contact Person and Phone Number:	Ryan M. Kuchenig
4.	Project Location:	759 & 775 Carmel Avenue
5.	Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:	Sun Pacific, LLP - 718 Oak Grove Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025
6.	General Plan Designation:	Residential Medium Density
7.	Zoning:	R-3 (Proposed R-3/PD)
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) The applicant proposes twenty-four townhouses on a 38,303 s.f lot for a density of 27.3 du/acre. The proposed development will be three stories in height. The units will include either one or two car garages. The unit sizes range from 1,358 sq. ft. to 1,937 sq. ft. This project requires a three-part application: a re-zone from R-3 to R-3/PD, a Special Development Permit for the construction of the townhouse units and a tentative map to subdivide the lot into 24 lots with one common lot.
9.	Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings)	North: Elementary School South: Apartments East: Apartments West: Apartments Surrounding Zoning and Uses of the area include mostly of residential medium density development. A public facility use (elementary school) lies to the north of the project site.
10.	Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement).	Building Safety Division Public Works Department