07-07-2022 Searchable Packet — Cupertino City Council, July 7, 2022 (part 4 of 6)

Silty Sand
3/10/2020
1 2 3 4
10163.1 10431.5 10709.8 10474.9
5905.7 5905.7 5905.7 5905.7
125.31 133.21 141.40 134.49
H-19 AE-9 H-25 H-30
126 125.6 127.5 127.3
457.8 442.3 389.9 456.2
438.12 416.95 362.65 413.46

19.68 25.35 27.25 42.74
312.12 291.35 235.15 286.16

6.31 8.70 11.59 14.94
117.88 122.55 126.72 117.01
126.72
12%
Weight Class A B C D Bulk Mass (lbs): 1015.3
Weight (lbs) 687.9 54.3 36.6 236.5
Percentage (%) 0.678 0.053 0.036 0.233
No Rammer Type: Mechanical
No
No
No
YES
No
Tested By: Reviewed By:

Signature: Signature:
#4 3/8" 3/4"
Method A:

Soil Compaction Data:

GIVO #REF!
Moisture Content %
Dry Unit Weight (pcf)
Weight of Mold (gr)
Wet Unit Weight (pcf)
Tare Number
Weight of Wet Soil & Tare (gr)
Weight of Dry Soil & Tare (gr)
Maximum Dry Density (Lbs/C.F):

List of Methods
1 Source:

Soil
FIELD
Type of Material:

Optimum Mositure (%):

Weight of Wet Soil & Mold (gr)
Weight of Water (gr)
Weight of Tare (gr)
Weight of Dry Soil (gr)
Page #:

Compaction Sample No.

Sample Date:

Report Date:

Project No:

Project Name:

Project Address:

Technician
Material Description:

Sampled by: MOBIN
CBR1
03102020 - 4134 - Soil - CBR1
Method A w/ Correction OR Method B:

Method B:

Method B w/ Correction OR Method C:

Method C:

Project No:

Project Name:

Project Address:

Technician:

Type of Material:

Source:

Sampled by: Sample Date:

Sample No: CBR1-1 CBR1-2 CBR1-3
Ht. of Sample: Disturbed Disturbed Disturbed
Tare No: CA - 19 CA - 22 CA - 21
Gross Wet Wt: 589.15 535.63 526.28
Gross Dry Wt: 562.13 514.41 505.99
Tare Wt: 336.93 336.73 337.93
Net Dry Wt: 225.20 177.68 168.06
Wt. of Water: 27.02 21.22 20.29
% Moisture 12% 12% 12%
Liners Dia
Density Factors
Dry Density
Tested By: Reviewed By:

Signature: Signature:

Sample Description:

C B R 2

587
CC 07-07-2022
587 of 1038
California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
ASTM: D 1883 - AASHTO: T193-99
3/23/2020 AEC Project#:

Alan Enterprise Sample No.:

Page #: 4
Moisture (%)
before Soaking After Soaking
CA - 3
861.22
811.47
342.2
469.27

49.75 11
Remark:

Net Dry weight
Weight of Water
Tare Weight
Gross wet weight
Gross Dry Weight
Tare No
Expansion Ratio Determination
Sample Condition:

Initial Dial Gauge Reading, (in)
Difference, (in)
Initial Height of Specimen, (in)
Sample No CBR2-1
Surcharge Weight, (Lb) Expansion Ratio (ER):

24.947 25.509
Wt. of Compacted Sample,
Mold and Base Plate, (Lb)
Wt. of Mold and Base Plate, (Lb) 15.822

9.125
Height of Speciment, (in3) 4.59
Vol. of Specimen, (in3)
Moisture Content, (%)
032320 - 4134 - L50 - NH
Cupertino
Report Date:
*Client:

Report ID:
*Project Address:
4134
CBR2-1
Condition of specimen Before Soaking After Soaking
Density Data
6 Wt. of Sample, (Lb)
11 Dry Density, (Lbs/C.F) 123.99
Tested by (Name / Initial): Nami NH Signature:

Water Content Data
10 4.59
0 0.048

0.048
Final Dial Gauge Reading, (in)
Form#: L-50 Date Prepared: 02/11/2019 Revision No: 1 Revised: 04/06/2019 𝐸𝑅 =

0.048

4.59 = 1.045
2455 Autumnvale Drive, Unit E, San Jose, CA 95131, Tel: (408) 217-9174, Fax: (408) 217-9632 / www.achieveng.com 588
CC 07-07-2022
588 of 1038
California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
ASTM: D 1883 - AASHTO: T193-99
3/23/2020 AEC Project#:

Alan Enterprise Sample No.:

Page #: 5
Moisture (%)
before Soaking After Soaking
CA - 4
525.94
506.92
336.3
170.62

19.02 11
Remark:

Net Dry weight
Weight of Water
Tare Weight
Gross wet weight
Gross Dry Weight
Tare No
Expansion Ratio Determination
Sample Condition:

Initial Dial Gauge Reading, (in)
Difference, (in)
Initial Height of Specimen, (in)
Sample No CBR2-2
Surcharge Weight, (Lb) Expansion Ratio (ER):

27.418 27.697
Wt. of Compacted Sample,
Mold and Base Plate, (Lb)
Wt. of Mold and Base Plate, (Lb) 17.558

9.86 Height of Speciment, (in3) 4.59
Vol. of Specimen, (in3)
Moisture Content, (%)
032320 - 4134 - L50 - NH
Cupertino
Report Date:
*Client:

Water Content Data
10 4.59
0 0.048

0.048
Final Dial Gauge Reading, (in)
Form#: L-50 Date Prepared: 02/11/2019 Revision No: 1 Revised: 04/06/2019 𝐸𝑅 =

0.048

4.59 = 1.045
2455 Autumnvale Drive, Unit E, San Jose, CA 95131, Tel: (408) 217-9174, Fax: (408) 217-9632 / www.achieveng.com 589
CC 07-07-2022
589 of 1038
California Bearing Ratio (CBR)
ASTM: D 1883 - AASHTO: T193-99
3/23/2020 AEC Project#:

Alan Enterprise Sample No.:

Page #: 6
Form#: L-50 Date Prepared: 02/11/2019 Revision No: 1 Revised: 04/06/2019 11 Dry Density, (Lbs/C.F) 123.99
Tested by (Name / Initial): Nami NH Signature:

Water Content Data
10 4.59
0 0.048

0.048
Final Dial Gauge Reading, (in)
Condition of specimen Before Soaking After Soaking
Density Data
6 Wt. of Sample, (Lb)
032320 - 4134 - L50 - NH
Cupertino
Report Date:
*Client:

Report ID:
*Project Address:
4134
CBR2-1
Surcharge Weight, (Lb) Expansion Ratio (ER):

27.798 27.969
Wt. of Compacted Sample,
Mold and Base Plate, (Lb)
Wt. of Mold and Base Plate, (Lb) 17.696

10.102
Height of Speciment, (in3) 4.59
Vol. of Specimen, (in3)
Moisture Content, (%)
Gross wet weight
Gross Dry Weight
Tare No
Expansion Ratio Determination
Sample Condition:

Initial Dial Gauge Reading, (in)
Difference, (in)
Initial Height of Specimen, (in)
Sample No CBR2-3
Net Dry weight
Weight of Water
Tare Weight
Moisture (%)
before Soaking After Soaking
CA - 5
416.63
408.8
337.02

71.78 7.83
11 Remark:

𝐸𝑅 =

0.048

4.59 = 1.045
2455 Autumnvale Drive, Unit E, San Jose, CA 95131, Tel: (408) 217-9174, Fax: (408) 217-9632 / www.achieveng.com 590
CC 07-07-2022
590 of 1038
ELE International Page 1 of 2
California Bearing Ratio of Laboratory
Compacted Soils (CBR)
Client AEC Lab Ref
Project Alan Enterprise LLC Job 4134
Borehole CBR2 Sample CBR2-1
Test Details
Standard ASTM D1883-99 / AASHTO T193-98
Sample Type Bulk disturbed sample
Sample Description Silty Sand
Location Cupertino
Variations from Procedure None
Specimen & Equipment Details
Specimen Reference A
Method of Sample
Preparation
ASTM D 1883
Diameter 6.0000 in
Height 4.5900 in
Dry Density before Soak 1.75 lb/ft3 Dry Density after Soak 1.75 lb/ft3 Surcharge Weight 10.0000 lb Comments
Moisture Content
Before Compaction 1.00 % After Compaction 11.00 %
Top 1” Layer after penetration 0.00 % Average after soak 17.84 % Soaking Details
Soaking Time 96.00 hrs
Sample Weight after Soaking 9.6870 lb
Soaking Travel 0.0480 in
Swell 1.05 %
Tested By
and Date:

Nami 03/23/2020
Checked By
and Date:

A.F 03/23/2020
Approved By
and Date:

S.H 03/23/2020
591
CC 07-07-2022
591 of 1038
ELE International Page 2 of 2
California Bearing Ratio of Laboratory
Compacted Soils (CBR)
Client AEC Lab Ref
Project Alan Enterprise LLC Job 4134
Borehole CBR2 Sample CBR2-1
592
CC 07-07-2022
592 of 1038
ELE International Page 1 of 2
California Bearing Ratio of Laboratory
Compacted Soils (CBR)
Client AEC Lab Ref
Project Alan Enterprise LLC Job 4134
Borehole CBR2 Sample CBR2-2
Test Details
Standard ASTM D1883-99 / AASHTO T193-98
Sample Type Bulk disturbed sample
Sample Description Silty Sand
Location Cupertino
Variations from Procedure None
Specimen & Equipment Details
Specimen Reference B
Method of Sample
Preparation
ASTM D 1883
Diameter 6.0000 in
Height 4.5900 in
Dry Density before Soak 1.89 lb/ft3 Dry Density after Soak 1.89 lb/ft3 Surcharge Weight 10.0000 lb Comments
Moisture Content
Before Compaction 1.00 % After Compaction 11.00 %
Top 1” Layer after penetration 0.00 % Average after soak 14.14 % Soaking Details
Soaking Time 96.00 hrs
Sample Weight after Soaking 10.1390 lb
Soaking Travel 0.0480 in
Swell 1.05 %
Tested By
and Date:

Nami 03/23/2020
Checked By
and Date:

A.F 03/23/2020
Approved By
and Date:

S.H 03/23/2020
593
CC 07-07-2022
593 of 1038
ELE International Page 2 of 2
California Bearing Ratio of Laboratory
Compacted Soils (CBR)
Client AEC Lab Ref
Project Alan Enterprise LLC Job 4134
Borehole CBR2 Sample CBR2-2
594
CC 07-07-2022
594 of 1038
ELE International Page 1 of 2
California Bearing Ratio of Laboratory
Compacted Soils (CBR)
Client AEC Lab Ref
Project Alan Enterprise LLC Job 4134
Borehole CBR2 Sample CBR2-3
Test Details
Standard ASTM D1883-99 / AASHTO T193-98
Sample Type Bulk disturbed sample
Sample Description Silty Sand
Location Cupertino
Variations from Procedure None
Specimen & Equipment Details
Specimen Reference C Method of Sample
Preparation
ASTM D 1883
Diameter 6.0000 in
Height 4.5900 in
Dry Density before Soak 1.94 lb/ft3 Dry Density after Soak 1.94 lb/ft3 Surcharge Weight 10.0000 lb Comments
Moisture Content
Before Compaction 1.00 % After Compaction 11.00 %
Top 1” Layer after penetration 0.00 % Average after soak 12.88 % Soaking Details
Soaking Time 96.00 hrs
Sample Weight after Soaking 10.2730 lb
Soaking Travel 0.0480 in
Swell 1.05 %
Tested By
and Date:

Nami 03/23/2020
Checked By
and Date:

A.F 03/23/2020
Approved By
and Date:

S.H 03/23/2020
595
CC 07-07-2022
595 of 1038
ELE International Page 2 of 2
California Bearing Ratio of Laboratory
Compacted Soils (CBR)
Client AEC Lab Ref
Project Alan Enterprise LLC Job 4134
Borehole CBR2 Sample CBR2-3
596
CC 07-07-2022
596 of 1038
LABORATORY COMPACTION (Modified)
(ASTM D1557)
3/10/2020
4134
Sample #: Alan Enterprise LLC
Sample ID: 22690 Stevens Creek BLVD, Cupertino
Curve No. GIVO

Page 1 of 2 ends

Silty Sand
3/10/2020
1 2 3 4
10206.8 10503.3 10591.2 10310.9
5905.7 5905.7 5905.7 5905.7
126.60 135.32 137.91 129.66
A-7 AE-21 H-31 H-8
134.2 126.3 127.9 129.5
451.4 453.8 433.5 444.4
431.75 425.35 400.95 402.1

19.65 28.45 32.55 42.3
297.55 299.05 273.05 272.6

6.60 9.51 11.92 15.52
118.75 123.57 123.22 112.24
123.99
11%
Weight Class A B C D Bulk Mass (lbs): 1058.7
Weight (lbs) 756.3 37.5 45.6 219.3
Percentage (%) 0.714 0.035 0.043 0.207
No Rammer Type: Mechanical
No
No
No
YES
No
Tested By: Reviewed By:

Signature: Signature:

Method A w/ Correction OR Method B:

Method B:

Method B w/ Correction OR Method C:

Method C:

Not Applicable:

Page #:

Compaction Sample No.

Sample Date:

Report Date:

Project No:

Project Name:

Project Address:

Technician
Material Description:

Sampled by: MOBIN
CBR2
03102020 - 4134 - Soil - CBR2
Optimum Mositure (%):

Weight of Wet Soil & Mold (gr)
Weight of Water (gr)
Weight of Tare (gr)
Weight of Dry Soil (gr)
2 Source:

Soil
FIELD
Type of Material:
#4 3/8" 3/4"
Method A:

Soil Compaction Data:

GIVO #REF!
Moisture Content %
Dry Unit Weight (pcf)
Weight of Mold (gr)
Wet Unit Weight (pcf)
Tare Number
Weight of Wet Soil & Tare (gr)
Weight of Dry Soil & Tare (gr)
Maximum Dry Density (Lbs/C.F):

Project No:

Project Name:

Project Address:

Technician:

Type of Material:

Source:

Sampled by: Sample Date:

Sample No: CBR2 - 1 CBR2 - 2 CBR2 - 3
Ht. of Sample: Disturbed Disturbed Disturbed
Tare No: CA - 3 CA - 4 CA - 5
Gross Wet Wt: 861.22 525.94 416.63
Gross Dry Wt: 811.47 506.92 408.80
Tare Wt: 342.20 336.30 337.02
Net Dry Wt: 469.27 170.62 71.78
Wt. of Water: 49.75 19.02 7.83
% Moisture 11% 11% 11%
Liners Dia
Density Factors
Dry Density
Tested By: Reviewed By:

Signature: Signature:
3/23/2020
4134
Alan Enterprise LLC
Cupertino
Nami
Soil Sample Description:

A PPENDIX D :

P HASE I E NVIRONMENTAL S ITE

A SSESSMENT
600
CC 07-07-2022
600 of 1038
........................................................................................................................ 601 CC 07-07-2022
601 of 1038
Achievement Engineering Corp.

July 29, 2019
Alan Enterprise LLC.

Mr. Ali Mozafari
Reference: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report for 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard,
Cupertino, California 95014
(Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66) AEC Project No. 3940
Dear Mr. Mozafari:

Achievement Engineering Corp. (AEC) is pleased to submit this report of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the above-referenced project. This report presents a review of the information collected through historical research and our site visit (including interviews) and a summary of our professional judgment based on the information available.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project and would be happy to discuss our findings with you. We look forward to serving as your environmental/geotechnical engineer on your future projects.

Respectfully,
ACHIEVEMENT ENGINEERING CORP.

Sadaf Safaai, PE
Project Engineer
Copies: Mr. Ali Mozafari
602
CC 07-07-2022
602 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. 2 2- PURPOSE....................................................................................................................... 5 3- METHODOLOGY USED ................................................................................................. 6 4- REGULATORY REVIEW ................................................................................................ 8 Standard Environmental Records Reviewed................................................................ 8 Surrounding Sites Search results ................................................................................ 9 4-2-1- Federal CERCLIS NFRAP: ................................................................................... 9 4-2-2- State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS................................................................. 9 4-2-3- State and tribal leaking storage tank lists .............................................................10 4-2-4- State and tribal registered storage tank lists ........................................................11 4-2-5- State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites................................................................12 4-2-6- Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites..........................................12 4-2-7- Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks..............................................................13 4-2-8- Other Ascertainable Records ...............................................................................14 4-2-9- EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS .........................................................16 4-2-10- Unmapped addresses ......................................................................................17 OTHER REGULATORY INFORMATION....................................................................17 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST ............................................17 5- PHYSICAL SETTING.....................................................................................................18 TOPOGRAPHY ..........................................................................................................18 SOILS.........................................................................................................................18 FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION..................................................................................18 GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................18 SURFACE WATER/GROUND WATER HYDROLOGY...............................................19 6- HISTORICAL REVIEW ..................................................................................................20 PRESENT OWNER....................................................................................................20 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS..........................................................................................20 HISTORICAL MAPS...................................................................................................20 HISTORICAL CHAIN OF TITLE REPORT..................................................................20 ZONING AND LAND USE RECORDS........................................................................20 7- SITE RECONNAISSANCE.............................................................................................21 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND CONTAINERS ...................................................21 FACILITY STORAGE TANKS.....................................................................................21 SOLID WASTE GENERATION AND DISPOSAL........................................................21 STORM WATER AND WASTE WATER SYSTEMS ...................................................21 603
CC 07-07-2022
603 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
SURFACE AREAS .....................................................................................................21 AREA RECONNAISSANCE .......................................................................................22 8- ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS ............................................................23 WETLANDS ...............................................................................................................23 AIR EMISSIONS.........................................................................................................23 9- FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................24 10- LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................27 APPENDIX A ! EDR REPORT
APPENDIX B ! TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS
APPENDIX C ! AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX D ! SANBORN MAPS
APPENDIX E! CITY DIRECTORY ABSTRACTS
APPENDIX F ! FOIA INFORMATION
APPENDIX G ! SITE PHOTOS
APPENDIX H ! SITE MAP
APPENDIX I ! SITE ZONE MAP
APPENDIX J ! BUILDING PERMIT REPORT
APPENDIX K ! TAX REPORT
APPENDIX L ! ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN
604
CC 07-07-2022
604 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
1- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Achievement Engineering Corp. (AEC) was retained by Alan Enterprise LLC. to perform a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the property located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014 (Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342- 14-66). The following summary highlights the significant findings and conclusions representing our best professional judgment based on the information and data available to us during the course of this assessment. The reader is referred to the report text for full details.

PHYSICAL SETTING
! The subject site is located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014 (Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66), with coordinates of 37° 19!

18.27!! N and 122° 4! 8.20!! W.
! The topography of the subject is relatively flat at the target property with an average elevation of approximately 386.0 feet (General topographic gradient is NNE). ! It appears that the upper soil near the site is Urban Land, with unreported surface texture and drainage class.
! Rock stratigraphic unit geologic age identification is as follows:

Era: Cenozoic
Category: Continental Deposits
System: Tertiary
Series: Pliocene
Code: Tpc (decoded above as Era, System & Series)
The subject site does not contain any evidence of jurisdictional non-tidal wetlands (national or state).

HISTORICAL DATA
The subject site is currently owned by Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart (George and Nahida Bateh) and is located on the west south corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd. intersection at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, within mixed use plan development( General Commercial) zone of Cupertino.

The subject site comprised of three parcels with assessor parcel number (APN) 342-14-04, 342- 14-05, and 342-14-66, with a total area of approximately 0.75 acre. Review of the historical data available for the subject site reveals that most probably the development of the site as is took place between 1950 and 1956 (based on aerial photos), the first city directory listing for this 605
CC 07-07-2022
605 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
3 property belongs to 1975, before that, this address does not exist in 1970 and 1968 listings. Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart has been listed in 2014 back to 1980 listings. In 1975 directory, a "#$%&!' ()*+,# $%- .#,/0#1 23,#0 4$' 500% 6)'30-7 86', $% )%30#9)0: /,%-+/30- 51 ,340#' )% ;<=> reveals that before 1976, the place was used as a bar. No building permit was found indicating any other use for this property. Per aerial photos, in 1939 an orchard was in the property that cannot be observed in 1950 aerial photo. Sometime between 1939 and 1950 the trees were gradually cleared, starting from north to south. The existence of fertilizers, pesticides and metals are possible in the shallow soil due to this historical land use.

Also, review of the historical data for adjacent properties of the subject site using the City Directory Abstract (refer to Appendix E) provided by EDR reveals that for the most part, uses were mixed residential and commercial (a veterinary clinic has existed since (at least 1989) at 10012 N.

Foothill Blvd.) and Beacon Service Station has been in service under different names as follows:
1995- to Present -Cupertino Beacon Service Station, Cupertino Auto Care 1989- Foothill Mobil
1981-1984 -McElroy Mobil Service
1976 -D&D Mobil Service
1971 -Johns Mobil Service, Mobil Oil Corporation
1968 -Johns Mobil

ENVIRONMENTAL LIEN
The search by EDR indicates that no environmental lien was found for the subject property. Also no OTHER ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS (AULs) was found for this property. The Appendix L exhibits the search results.

SITE RECONNAISSANCE
Hazardous Materials !Hazardous chemicals and/or products, as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1200, is not used per record and was not observed at the subject site.

Storage Tanks ! Currently, no underground storage tank is being used at the subject site. Per Phase I performed by EIS in March 2017, the current business stored small quantities of propane in a locked metal cabinet adjacent to the northeastern building exterior.

Waste Generation ! At the time of this ESA, no hazardous or regulated wastes has been observed at the Site. Dumpsters for domestic waste located at the back of building.

Surface Areas ! Currently, The subject property consists of three conjoined parcels that form an L-shaped area of approximately 0.75-acres. One 3,025-SF commercial structure is developed on the northeastern corner of the property. The building is currently occupied by Bateh Bros Liquors & Mini Mart. Paved asphalt parking spaces are located on the eastern portion of the Site. The rest of the property is currently an undeveloped dirt and gravel lot. 606
CC 07-07-2022
606 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
4 Adjacent Properties ? Adjacent properties are mixed use (commercial, services and residentials) Two major properties are Beacon Service Station at 22510 Stevens Creek Blvd. and Arcadia Veterinary at 10012 N. Foothill Blvd.

CONCLUSIONS
Based on the currently available information, the subject site is currently owned by Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart (George and Nahida Bateh), located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CA 95014 within mixed use plan development (General Commercial) zone of Cupertino. The site itself has not been listed in any data base searched.

In May 2017 EIS performed a limited Phase II investigation at this property to assess the impact of neighboring site (Cupertino Beacon at 22510 Stevens Creek) at this property. Above-ESL benzene concentration in soil vapor was found in the borings at the subject site.

There is one site listed on various databases in the close proximity to and at higher elevation of the subject site;
! Santa Clara County Fire Station (Also recorded as Monta Vista Fire station) at 22620 Stevens Creek Blvd., 332 ft., west of the subject site.

There are two sites in the close proximity of the site, but at lower elevations:
! Cupertino Beacon at 22510 Stevens Creek, 180 ft. east of the subject property ! Foothill Auto Services at 10121 N. Foothill, 620 ft., north of the subject property The review of the aerial photos and historical use of the property as an orchard from at least 1939 to 1950 indicate that there is a potential that metals and pesticides exist in shallow site soil. AboveESL benzene concentration in soil vapor was found in the borings at the subject site is also a recognized environmental conditions. Besides, the open LUST case and documented soil, groundwater, and soil vapor contamination at neighboring property 22510 Stevens Creek Boulevard (Cupertino Beacon) represents an offsite controlled recognized environmental condition. To assess the impacts of the neighboring site at the subject site, conducting a limited Phase II investigation is recommended.

No disturbed soil areas, discolored or polluted water, unusual or noxious, floor drains, PCB containing transformers or nearby former railroad tracks was observed at the subject site. 607
CC 07-07-2022
607 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
5 2- PURPOSE
The purpose of this Phase I ESA is limited to providing an assessment of current environmental conditions at the subject site, to the extent feasible, based on the data available and as referenced as part of an estate transaction process. The assessment was conducted to identify and highlight recognized environmental conditions (REC). REC can be defined as the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: 1) due to any release to the environment, 2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or 3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions. The following scope of work was performed to identify REC associated with the subject site:
! A review and evaluation of federal and state databases systems including Federal NPL, Federal Delisted NPL site list, Federal CERCLIS, Federal RCRA (CORRACTS and non- CORRACTS) facilities list, Federal CERCLIS NFRAP, Federal RCRA Generator list, Federal institutional controls/engineering controls registries, Federal ERNS list, State- and tribal, State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists, State and tribal leaking storage tank lists, State and tribal registered storage tank lists, State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites and State and tribal Brownfields sites, Local Brownfield lists, Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites, Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites, Local Land Records, Records of Emergency Release Reports, EDR High Risk Historical Records, EDR Recovered Government Archives and Other Ascertainable Records, as indicated in Appendix A, pages 6 and 7. ! An evaluation of the physical characteristics of the site including topography, geology, soil type, wetlands, and flood plain information.
! A review and evaluation of standards practiced including historical information available for the subject site such as aerial photographs, zoning records and historical maps, reviewing land uses by the aid of City Directory.
! A site visit searching for physical indication of any contamination, documenting it with photographs and interviews with land owner/local peopleworking in the area looking for history of any contamination or release.
! @09)0: ,A 340 3:, #0B,#3' CD4$'0 E F%9)#,%G0%3$6 2)30 8''0''G0%3H ;;IJ< 23090%' K#00& Boulevard, Santa Clara, K$6)A,#%)$L -$30- M$#/4 ;<=> $%- CPhase II Limited Soil, Groundwater, & Soil Vapor Investigation Report, 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CaliforniaLH dated May 2017, both prepared by EIS.
608
CC 07-07-2022
608 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
6 3- METHODOLOGY USED
The following assessment and pertaining report were prepared in accordance with ASTM E 1527- 2013, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessment: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. We used the following methods to evaluate the environmental conditions at the subject site.

A review of the regulatory status of the subject site as it pertains to regulated activities involving the use of hazardous chemicals, the generation of hazardous waste, the treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste, or the release of regulated substances. AEC used services of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) to conduct the appropriate radius searches of the subject site of this report in conformance with the scope and limitations of the above referenced ASTM. The Standard approximate minimum search review distances requirements are as follows (The ones in italic font do not have standard distances, but have been reviewed under the distances specified, if any data available for the subject site):

To One (1) Mile:
! Federal National Priorities List (NPL).
! Resource Conservation and Recovery Act - Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (RCRA-TSD).
! Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
! State- and tribal-equivalent NPL
! Notify 65
To One-Half (0.5) of a Mile:
! Federal Delisted NPL site list
! Federal CERCLIS list
! Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
! Solid Waste Disposal Facilities, Active and Inactive (SWLF) ! Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
! State- and tribal-equivalent CERCLIS
! State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists ! State and tribal leaking storage tank lists (LUST)
! State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
! HIST CORTESE
! Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
To One-Quarter (0.25) of a Mile:
! RCRA-SQG
! RCRA-LQG
609
CC 07-07-2022
609 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
7 ! RCRA-CESQG
! Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks (SWEEPS, HIST UST, CA FID UST, CERS TANKS) ! Available State Lists of Underground Storage Tanks (USTs). ! CUPA Listings
! DRYCLEANERS
To One-Eighth (0.125) of a Mile:
! Environmental Response Notification System (ERNS)
! Resource Conservation and Recovery Act - Large Quantity Generators (RCRA- LgGen) ! Resource Conservation and Recovery Act - Small Quantity Generators (RCRA- SmGen) ! EDR Hist Cleaner
! EDR Hist Auto list
! Federal institutional controls/engineering controls registries A copy of the EDR Report is attached as Appendix A. This report also includes the time that information requested, last updated by EDR and last updated by the original reference. ! AEC has forwarded correspondences to Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health (SCDEH) and Santa Clara Fire Department in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The results of all inquiries will be documented in Appendix F. DTSC (Department of Toxic Substances Control) Archives will also be consulted. ! Historical research of the subject site back to year 1897 was conducted (when data available).

The history of site development and usage was developed using the following historical sources:
" Aerial photographs available from EDR back to 1939.
" City directories available from EDR back to 1968.
" Historical Topographic maps obtained from EDR back to 1897. " Certified Sanborn maps obtained for this address was not available.

AEC representative visually and physically observed the peripheral surface areas of the subject site on 27 July, 2019. In addition, the observations of the adjacent properties to identify high-risk and contamination migration concerns were made by a walk-through of the accessible sections of the referenced site and its surroundings. An interview was conducted with George Bateh the owner of the liquor store and a mechanic who has worked in Cupertino Beacon for almost 19 years which the responses have been used in preparing this report. 610
CC 07-07-2022
610 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
8 4- REGULATORY REVIEW
Standard Environmental Records Reviewed.

The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. Among the standard databases searched by EDR, the following can be named (for full details, see end of Appendix A):

Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL- Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE: Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
CA RESPONSE: State Response Sites
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists

INDIAN LUST
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
UST CLOSURE: Proposed Closure of Underground Storage Tank (UST) Cases UST: Active UST Facilities
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS Considered Brownfields Sites Listing
611
CC 07-07-2022
611 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
9 Additional Environmental Records are listed in pages 5 to 7, Appendix A.

Surrounding Sites Search results
4-2-1- Federal CERCLIS NFRAP:

SEMS-ARCHIVE: SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP, renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to 340 50'3 ,A FD8!' &%,:60-N0H $''0''G0%3 $3 $ ')30 4$' 500% /,GB6030- $%- 34$3 FD8 4$' determined no further steps will be taken to list the site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that based upon available information, the location is not judged to be potential NPL site.

A review of the SEMS-ARCHIVE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/11/2019 has revealed that there is 1 SEMS-ARCHIVE site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property:

SEMS-ARCHIVE
Equal/Higher
Elevation
Address Direction / Distance

KAISER ALUMINUM
FOIL 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.)
4-2-2- State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
K8 FOPE@Q2RQ@S R40 T0B$#3G0%3 ,A R,U)/ 2+5'3$%/0' K,%3#,6!' VTR2K!'W 2)30 M)3)N$3),% $%- X#,:%A)06-' @0+'0 D#,N#$G!' V2MX@D!'W FnviroStor database identifies sites that have known contamination or sites for which here may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites.

EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerlycontaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.

A review of the CA ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/29/2019 has revealed that there are 4 CA ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property. 612
CC 07-07-2022
612 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
10 CA ENVIROSTOR
Equal/Higher Elevation
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance
KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) KAISER CEMENT CORP 2401 STEVENS CREEK B W 1/2 - 1 (0.994 mi.)

CA ENVIROSTOR
Lower Elevation
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance
BLACKBERRY FARM PLAY 21979 SAN FERNANDO D ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.485 mi.) ACRIAN INC 10131 BUBB RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.973 mi.)
4-2-3- State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
CA LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites included in GeoTracker.

GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.

A review of the CA LUST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 7 CA LUST sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

CA LUST
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) MONTA VISTA SUBSTATI 10110 CALIFORNIA OAK NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.327 mi.)

CA LUST
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) ARCO #6182 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.)
FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N. FOOTHILL BO N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) CA CPS-SLIC: Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; also known as Site Cleanups [SC] and formerly known as Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups [SLIC] sites) included in GeoTracker.

GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.

A review of the CA CPS-SLIC list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 2 CA CPSSLIC sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. 613
CC 07-07-2022
613 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
11 CA CPS-SLIC
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.495 mi.) CA HIST LUST: A listing of open and closed leaking underground storage tanks. This listing is no longer updated by the county. Leaking underground storage tanks are now handled by the Department of Environmental Health.

A review of the CA HIST LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/29/2005 has revealed that there are 4 CA HIST LUST sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

CA HIST LUST
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.)

CA HIST LUST
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) ARCO #6182 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.)
FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) 4-2-4- State and tribal registered storage tank lists
CA UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data /,G0 A#,G 340 23$30 Y$30# @0',+#/0' K,%3#,6 X,$#-!' Z$[$#-,+' 2+5'3$%/0 23,#$N0 K,%3$)%0# Database.

A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there is 1 UST site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA UST
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
MONTA VISTA FIRE STA 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) CA UST
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) 614
CC 07-07-2022
614 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
12 CA UST
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) ARCO SERVICE STATION 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) 4-2-5- State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
CA VCP: Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities $%- 4$90 $N#00- 3, B#,9)-0 /,90#$N0 A,# TR2K!' /,'3'7
A review of the CA VCP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/29/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA VCP site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

CA VCP
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
BLACKBERRY FARM PLAY 21979 SAN FERNANDO D ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.485 mi.) 4-2-6- Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites CA CERS HAZ WASTE: List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, and RCRA LQ HW Generator programs.

A review of the CA CERS HAZ WASTE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/09/2019 has revealed that there are 4 CA CERS HAZ WASTE sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA CERS HAZ WASTE
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
DONNA COTNER DDS 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.)

CA CERS HAZ WASTE
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) CUPERTINO AUTO REPAIR 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) ACADIA VETERINARY CL 10012 N FOOTHILL BL NE 0 - 1/8 (0.038 mi.) 615
CC 07-07-2022
615 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
13 4-2-7- Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
CA SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the SWRCB in the 0$#61 =JJ<!'7 R40 6)'3)%N )' %, longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list.

A review of the CA SWEEPS UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1994 has revealed that there are 4 CA SWEEPS UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA SWEEPS UST
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.)

CA SWEEPS UST
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N. FOOTHILL BO N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) CA HIST UST: Historical UST Registered Database.

A review of the CA HIST UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/15/1990 has revealed that there are 4 CA HIST UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA HIST UST
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
MOBIL SERVICE STATIO 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) !" #$%&$%'& INC. 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) !" #$%&$%'& (%)" 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) CA FID UST: The Facility Inventory Database contains active and inactive underground storage tank locations. The source is the State Water Resource Control Board.

A review of the CA FID UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/1994 has revealed that there is 1 CA FID UST site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA FID UST Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
MOBIL SERVICE STATIO 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) 616
CC 07-07-2022
616 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
14 CA CERS TANKS: List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank regulatory programs.

A review of the CA CERS TANKS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/09/2019 has revealed that there are 2 CA CERS TANKS sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA CERS TANKS
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
MONTA VISTA FIRE STA 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.)

CA CERS TANKS
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) 4-2-8- Other Ascertainable Records
@K@8 O,%.0% \ O(@S @K@8E%A, )' FD8!' /,GB#040%')90 )%A,#G$3),% '1'30GH B#,9)-)%N $//0'' to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste.

A review of the RCRA NonGen / NLR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/25/2019 has revealed that there are 4 RCRA NonGen / NLR sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

RCRA NonGen / NLR
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 10011 N FOOTHILL BLV NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) CAMBRIDGE PROPERTY M 22731 STEVENS CREEK W 1/8 - 1/4 (0.174 mi.) RCRA NonGen / NLR
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO AUTO CARE 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) DAVID RANNELLS 10073 AMADOR OAK COU NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.151 mi.) CA Cortese: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites).

A review of the CA Cortese list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/25/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA Cortese site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property. 617
CC 07-07-2022
617 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
15 CA Cortese
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) K8 K]D8 ()'3)%N'S 8 6)'3)%N ,A ')30' )%/6+-0- )% 340 /,+%31!' K0#3)A)0- ]%)A)0- D#,N#$G 8N0%/1 -$3$5$'07 K$6)A,#%)$!' 20/#03$#1 A,# F%9)#,%G0%3al Protection established the unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulatory program as required by chapter 6.11 of the California Health and Safety Code. The Unified Program consolidates the administration, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities.

A review of the CA CUPA Listings list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 10 CA CUPA Listings sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

CA CUPA
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
DONNA COTNER DDS 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) GARFIELD FAMILY CHIR 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.)

CA CUPA
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) CUPERTINO AUTO CARE 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) ACADIA VETERINARY CL 10012 N FOOTHILL BL NE 0 - 1/8 (0.038 mi.) FOOTHILL VALERO 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) FREEMANS AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) AAA AUTO REPAIR AND 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) CA HIST CORTESE: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. This listing is no longer updated by the state agency.

A review of the CA HIST CORTESE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2001 has revealed that there are 5 CA HIST CORTESE sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

CA HIST CORTESE
Equal/Higher Elevation
Equal/Higher Address Direction / Distance
SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) 618
CC 07-07-2022
618 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
16 CA HIST CORTESE
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) ARCO #6182 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.113 mi.)
FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) CA HWP: Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action ("clean ups") tracked in EnviroStor.

A review of the CA HWP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 05/20/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA HWP site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.

CA HWP
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
ACRIAN INC 10131 BUBB RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.973 mi.)
CA Notify 65: Listings of all Proposition 65 incidents reported to counties by the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This database is no longer updated by the reporting agency.

A review of the CA Notify 65 list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/18/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA Notify 65 site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.

CA HIST CORTESE
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
ARCO SERVICE STA 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) 4-2-9- EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
4-2-9-1- EDR Exclusive Records
EDR Hist Auto: EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR re'0$#/40#'7 FT@!' #09)0: :$' 6)G)30- 3, 34,'0 /$30N,#)0' ,A ',+#/0' 34$3 G)N43H )% FT@!' opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station, filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within a category of )%A,#G$3),% FT@ /6$'')A)0' $' ^Z)N4 @)'& Z)'3,#)/$6 @0/,#-'^H ,# Z@Z@7 FT@!' Z@Z@ 0AA,#3 presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches. 619
CC 07-07-2022
619 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
17 A review of the EDR Hist Auto list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 4 EDR Hist Auto sites within approximately 0.125 miles of the target property.

Hist Auto list
Lower Elevation
Lower Address Direction / Distance
ACTION AUTO SERVICE 10010 FOOTHILL BLVD NE 0 - 1/8 (0.026 mi.) JOHNS MOBIL SERVICE 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) ACED ACRO SERVICE 10121 FOOTHILL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.)
4-2-10- Unmapped addresses
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped:

CA CDL
Kaiser Cement Corp Permanente Plan SEMS
1x Stevens Creek Quarry CA HAZNET
Stevens Creek Dam FINDS
Bridge 37c0571 Over Stevens Creek FINDS
Stevens Creek Quarry, Inc. US MINES

OTHER REGULATORY INFORMATION
In addition to the above referenced databases, EDR supplied information from numerous existing government databases. The list of the databases is provided in the attached EDR report (Appendix A).

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST
AEC has forwarded correspondences to Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health (SCDEH) and Santa Clara Fire Department in compliance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The results of all inquiries will be documented in Appendix F. DTSC (Department of Toxic Substances Control) Archives will also be consulted.
620
CC 07-07-2022
620 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
18 5- PHYSICAL SETTING

TOPOGRAPHY
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) maps were reviewed. The topography of the subject site is relatively flat and general topographic gradient is NNE. The site itself is at an approximate average elevation of 386.0 feet above mean sea level. Elevation profiles are provided in Appendix A under physical setting.

SOILS
The Soil Survey of the area, available from the United States Department of Agriculture-NRCS was reviewed. It appears that the upper soil near the site is Urban Land, with unreported surface texture and drainage class.

FLOOD PLAIN INFORMATION
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through its National Flood Insurance Program, has published Flood Insurance Rate Maps that delineate flood zones. Flood events of a magnitude that are expected to be equaled or exceeded once on the average during any 100- year, or 500-year period have been selected as having special significance for flood plain management and for flood insurance rates. These events, commonly termed the 100- and 500- year floods, have a 1 and 0.2 percent chance, respectively, of being equaled or exceeded during any year. Although the recurrence interval represents the long-term average period between floods of a specific magnitude, rare floods could occur at short intervals or even within the same year. FEMA has made delineations based on whether a particular area experiences minimal flooding, is within the boundary of the 100-year flood, or is within the boundary of the 500-year flood. The Site is noted on FEMA Map Number 06085C0204H (FEMA firm Flood data). The site is not located within 100- year but it is within 500-year flood zone.

GEOLOGY
The project site is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province. Local uplift of the Santa Cruz Mountains within the last 2 to 3 million years has occurred due to a restraining bend of the San Andreas Fault, producing transpressional forces across the plate boundary. Thrust faults bound the San Andreas Fault are responsible for uplift of the range. The range is characterized by rugged hills with moderate relief, steep valleys, and locally steep hillsides abutting drainages.

East-flowing drainages result in dissection of the mountain range and alluvial deposition within the San Francisco Bay structural trough.

The site is located on SEARS POINT ASSEMBLAGE, TPc, Claystone_Massive to laminated gray claystone.

Rock stratigraphic unit geologic age identification is as follows:
621
CC 07-07-2022
621 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
19 Era: Cenozoic
Category: Continental Deposits
System: Tertiary
Series: Pliocene
Code: Tpc (decoded above as Era, System & Series)

SURFACE WATER/GROUND WATER HYDROLOGY
Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional using site-specific well data. Since ascertainable well data for the subject site is not available, it is necessary to rely on EDR to determine ground water flow. EDR utilized the information available from federal and state well databases from the nearest wells located near to the subject site. The direction of the flow for the existing wells farther from the subject site that can be helpful in deciding if the contamination can travel toward the subject site has been presented in EDR, Appendix A, TC5722958.2s Page A-6 .The groundwater levels vary near the subject site and has not been reported in EDR Report. The direction of flow, in the vicinity of the site is also variable and it has not been reported in the report. Phase II Subsurface Investigation Report for the subject site by EIS, May 2017, indicated that groundwater was observed at 21.6 to

29.0 ft. bgs in the two advanced borings.
622
CC 07-07-2022
622 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
20 6- HISTORICAL REVIEW

PRESENT OWNER
The subject site is currently owned by Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Market (George and Nahida Bateh)!

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
A review of historical aerial photographs for the years 1939, 1948,1950 1956, 1963, 1968, 1974, 1980, 1998, 2006, 2009, 2012 and 2016 was performed (Appendix C). Review of the historical data available for the subject site reveals that most probably the development of the site as is took place in 1953 (based on aerial photos).

HISTORICAL MAPS
Sanborn Fire Insurance maps were requested from EDR. EDR certified that the complete holdings of the Sanborn Library, LLC collection have been searched based on the supplied target property information and no map for the subject site was found (Appendix D).

The first city directory listing for this property belongs to 1975 :)34 340 %$G0 ,A "#$%&!' ()*+,# $%- grocery. Bateh Brothers Liquors has been listed since 1980. No building permit indicating any other land-use was found in the searched records. Per aerial photos, in 1939 an orchard was in the property that cannot be observed in 1950 aerial photo. Sometime between 1939 and 1950 the trees were gradually cleared, starting from north to south. The existence of fertilizers and pesticides are possible in the soil due to this historical land use.

HISTORICAL CHAIN OF TITLE REPORT
Obtaining a Historical Chain of Title Report is beyond the scope of services of this Phase I ESA report for the subject site.

ZONING AND LAND USE RECORDS
By reviewing Cupertino zoning map, the target property located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard in mixed use plan development (General Commercial) zone of Cupertino. (Refer to Appendix I).
623
CC 07-07-2022
623 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
21 7- SITE RECONNAISSANCE

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND CONTAINERS
During our site visit dated 27 July, 2109, no pools or sumps containing possible hazardous substances or petroleum products were observed.

FACILITY STORAGE TANKS
Our observations did not reveal the presence of any tank on the subject site. In addition, no evidence of underground pipelines bisecting the subject site was observed during the site visit dated 27 July, 2109. No current evidence of above ground gasoline or diesel storage tanks was observed at the subject site. The historical and regulatory record review revealed no evidence of any USTs previously used at the property. The current business stored small quantities of propane in a locked metal cabinet adjacent to the northeastern building exterior.

SOLID WASTE GENERATION AND DISPOSAL
The property is currently a liquor store and parking lot and no regulated solid waste is generated at the property. A Dumpster for collecting domestic wastes exists at the property.

STORM WATER AND WASTE WATER SYSTEMS
Storm water from paved surface areas is sloped to a public drain. Observation of the storm water system did not identify any abnormal accumulation of petroleum run-off or foreign material. No unusual blockages of the storm water control system were observed. Public water and sewer services are available to the area. During the ESA, no wastewater pretreatment or discharge control devices were observed or reported. The subject site did not contain any pits, ponds, or lagoons.

SURFACE AREAS
The subject property consists of three conjoined parcels that form an L-shaped area of approximately 0.75-acres. One 3,025-SF commercial structure is developed on the northeastern corner of the property. The building is currently occupied by Bateh Bros Liquors & Mini Mart.

Paved asphalt parking spaces are located on the eastern portion of the Site. The rest of the property is currently an undeveloped dirt and gravel lot. 624
CC 07-07-2022
624 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
22 AREA RECONNAISSANCE
During the site visit dated 27 July, 2109, observations were made of the adjacent properties.

These observations were made to identify recognized environmental conditions that have the potential for impacting the subject site. No issues of environmental concern were obvious as the site visit was conducted except existence of a Cupertino Beacon (Formerly Foothill Mobil) that is within 180 ft .radius, but at a lower elevation of the subject site. 625
CC 07-07-2022
625 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
23 8- ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

WETLANDS
Wetlands include freshwater marshes, wet meadows, bogs, shrub swamps, wooded swamps, bottomland hardwood forests, shallow ponds, seepage areas, and springs. They range in size from small isolated depressions surrounded by uplands to large complexes thousands of acres in size on the flood plains of major rivers. Review of the available site information did not identify any jurisdictional wetlands (State Wetlands or National Wetlands Inventory) at the subject site.

AIR EMISSIONS
No activity generating any air emission was recognized by the land use in the subject site. 626
CC 07-07-2022
626 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
24 9- FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
AEC performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-13 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process of the property located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CA 95014, (Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66). Any exceptions to, or deletions from this practice are described in Section 10.0 of this report. AEC has additionally made the following observations:

Based on the currently available information, the subject site is currently owned by Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart (George and Nahida Bateh), located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CA 95014 within mixed use plan development (General Commercial) zone of Cupertino. The site itself has not been listed in any data base searched.

In May 2017 EIS performed a limited Phase II investigation at this property to assess the impact of neighboring site (Cupertino Beacon at 22510 Stevens Creek) at this property:

EIS advanced two exploratory soil borings on the subject property to collect soil, groundwater, and oil vapor samples on May 2, 2017. EIS concluded as followed:
! Soils encountered during the investigation included interbedded gravelly sand, silty sand, sandy gravel, clayey sand, and sandy silt to an explored depth of approximately 34 ft. bgs.

Groundwater was encountered in boreholes SB-1 and SB-2 at depths of 21.61 and 29.09 ft. bgs, respectively.
! There were no detectable concentrations of TPH-g, BTEX or MTBE in the soil or groundwater samples.
! Soil sample SB-;`;a!H /,660/30- A#,G -)#0/361 3, 340 0$'3 ,A 340 2)30 6)*+,# '3,#0H /,%3$)%0- TPH-d at 1.9 mg/kg and TPH-o at 11 mg/kg. Both concentrations are below applicable ESLs for residential and commercial/industrial uses.
! Groundwater sample SB-2, collected directly to the east of the Site liquor store, contained TPH-d at 310 bN\( $%- RDZ-, $3 I;< bN\(7 X,34 /,%/0%3#$3),%' 0U/00- 340 $BB6)/$560 ESL ,A =c< bN\(7 RDZ-d and TPH-o were not detected in the groundwater sample collected from boring SB-2.
! Soil vapor sample SB-=`c!H /,660/30- A#,G 340 $'B4$63-paved parking lot in the southeastern B,#3),% ,A 340 2)30H /,%3$)%0- RDZ $3 ;<H<<< bN\Gd $%- 50%[0%0 $3 Jd< bN\Gd7 R40 50%[0%0 concentration exceeds the applicable ESLs for residential and commercial/industrial uses. The TPH concentration is below the applicable TPH-g ESLs.

TPH and benzene were not detected above laboratory reporting limits in soil vapor sample SB-;`c! /,660/30- 0$'3 ,A 340 Site liquor store.

There is one site listed on various databases in the close proximity to and at higher elevation of the subject site;
627
CC 07-07-2022
627 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
25 1- Santa Clara County Fire Station (Also recorded as Monta Vista Fire station) at 22620 Stevens Creek Blvd., 332 ft., west of the subject site
This site is a closed clean up site. The leak (diesel) was reported in 1997 and the case reported closed in 1998. The facility currently owns a UST, but no leakage or violation found in the record.

There are two sites in the close proximity of the site, but at lower elevations:
2- Cupertino Beacon at 22510 Stevens Creek, 180 ft. east of the subject property This property located east across the street from the subject site, has historically been occupied by multiple fuel service stations and auto repair businesses since 1968. Former occupants include Cupertino Beacon service station and Cupertino Auto Care from at least 1995 to present, Foothill Mobil in 1989, McElroy Mobil Service from 1981 to 1984, D&D Mobil Service in 1976, and Johns Mobil Service from at least 1968 to 1971. There is currently an open regulatory LUST case at 22510 Stevens Creek Boulevard.

In 1999, the SCVWD advanced borings adjacent to the site within Stevens Creek and South Foothill Boulevards. MTBE was detected in soil and groundwater samples collected from the borings at concentrations of up to 0.8 ppm and 8.5 ppb, respectively. In December, a waste oil UST was removed and the fuel piping was replaced. An estimated 275 tons of soil were removed at this time. Prior to installation of the new piping and fuel dispensers, 3 horizontal vapor extraction wells were installed parallel to the fuel dispenser islands.

January 2000 - 7 direct-push soil borings (GP1 through GP7) were advanced onsite to 15-34 feet below the ground surface (ft bgs). Groundwater was not encountered in the borings. The highest TPHg concentrations (2,200 ppm) were reported for borings in the central portion of the site.

MTBE was detected in all soil samples at concentrations up to 140 ppm.

April 2002 - 3 direct push soil borings (GP8 through GP10) and 6 vapor extraction wells were advanced onsite. Grab groundwater samples were collected and reported to contain up to 120,000 ppb TPHg, 24,000 ppb Benzene, and 34,000 ppb MTBE. In December, 9 monitoring wells (MW1 through MW9) and one vapor well were installed onsite. Periodic groundwater monitoring began at the site.

Between January 2003 and December 2004, several extended soil vapor extraction (SVE) events were conducted at the site.

February 2004 - offsite well MW10 was advanced to the north of the site across Stevens Creek Blvd. to a depth of 40 ft bgs. In May, 5 direct-push borings (DP1 through DP5) were advanced offsite. TPHg was not detected in any of the soil samples. Grab groundwater samples were reported to contain up to 96 ppb TPHg; Benzene and MTBE were not reported to be present above the laboratory reporting limits.

January 2007 - 3 additional offsite monitoring wells (MW11 through MW13), 3 onsite monitoring wells (MW14 through MW16), 3 onsite vapor probe wells and 2 vapor extraction wells were 628
CC 07-07-2022
628 of 1038
AEC Project No. 3940
July 29, 2019
26 installed. In April, vapor extraction and multi-phase extraction feasibility tests were conducted.

Dual phase extraction with air sparging has been proposed as the remedial alternative for this site.

In April 2008 ? two monitoring wells (MW17 and MW18), 2 air sparging wells (AS1 and AS2) and 1 vapor extraction well (V1A) were installed onsite.

In April 2009 - 4 discrete-screened wells (DSW1 through DSW4) were advanced to depths of up to 66 ft bgs to asses if higher permeability soils are present below the depth of 40 ft bgs. Initial groundwater samples from these wells reported concentrations up to 409 ppb TPHg, 2.3 ppb Benzene, and 695 ppb MTBE. These wells were incorporated into the groundwater monitoring program.

The address is currently occupied by a Cupertino Beacon service station and Cupertino Auto Care. The service station has one 6,000-gallon diesel UST and two gasoline USTs of 10,000 and 12,000-gallons, located on the northwestern section of the property. 3- Foothill Auto Services at 10121 N. Foothill, 620 ft., north of the subject property This site is a closed LUST clean up site, its initial record going back to 1988.

The review of the aerial photos and historical use of the property as an orchard from at least 1938 to early 1950s indicate that there is a potential that metals and pesticides exist in shallow site soil.

Above-ESL benzene concentration in soil vapor was found in the borings at the subject site is a recognized environmental conditions. Besides, the open LUST case and documented soil, groundwater, and soil vapor contamination at neighboring property (Cupertino Beacon) 22510 Stevens Creek Boulevard represents an offsite controlled recognized environmental condition. To assess the impacts of the neighboring site at the subject site, a limited Phase II investigation is recommended.

FORM-LBB-LMI
The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck®
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard
22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Cupertino, CA 95014
Inquiry Number: 5722958.2s
July 22, 2019
632
CC 07-07-2022
632 of 1038

SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 9
Orphan Summary 120
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1

GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting Source Map A-7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-8
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
TC5722958.2s Page 1
Thank you for your business.

Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,

ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2019 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
633
CC 07-07-2022
633 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).

The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.

TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION

ADDRESS
22690 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CA 95014

COORDINATES
Latitude (North): 37.3217440 - 37˚ 19’ 18.27’’
Longitude (West): 122.0689470 - 122˚ 4’ 8.20’’
Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 10
UTM X (Meters): 582494.1
UTM Y (Meters): 4130767.8
Elevation: 386 ft. above sea level

USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 5640178 CUPERTINO, CA
Version Date: 2012

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20140606, 20140608
Source: USDA
634
CC 07-07-2022
634 of 1038
5722958.2s Page 2
39 PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE CA CPS-SLIC Higher 2615, 0.495, South 38 BLACKBERRY FARM PLAY 21979 SAN FERNANDO D CA ENVIROSTOR, CA VCP, CA CUPA Listings Lower 2560, 0.485, ESE E37 KAISER ALUMINUM FOIL 23333 STEVENS CREEK SEMS-ARCHIVE, RCRA-SQG, NY MANIFEST Higher 1932, 0.366, West E36 KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK CA ENVIROSTOR, CA CPS-SLIC, CA EMI, CA HIST... Higher 1932, 0.366, West 35 MONTA VISTA SUBSTATI 10110 CALIFORNIA OAK CA LUST, CA NPDES, CA CIWQS, CA CERS Higher 1725, 0.327, NW 34 FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD CA LUST, CA HIST LUST, CA SWEEPS UST, CA HIST... Lower 999, 0.189, ENE 33 CAMBRIDGE PROPERTY M 22731 STEVENS CREEK RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 920, 0.174, West 32 DAVID RANNELLS 10073 AMADOR OAK COU RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 798, 0.151, NNW D31 ACED ACRO SERVICE 10121 FOOTHILL EDR Hist Auto Lower 627, 0.119, North D30 ARCO SERVICE STATION 10121 NORTH FOOTHILL CA Notify 65 Lower 626, 0.119, North D29 FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N. FOOTHILL BO CA LUST, CA SWEEPS UST, CA HIST UST, CA CERS Lower 626, 0.119, North D28 ARCO SERVICE STATION 10121 N FOOTHILL BL CA UST Lower 626, 0.119, North D27 AAA AUTO REPAIR AND 10121 N FOOTHILL BL CA CUPA Listings Lower 626, 0.119, North D26 G. JENSEN’S INC. 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV CA HIST UST Lower 626, 0.119, North D25 FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BL CA CUPA Listings Lower 626, 0.119, North D24 G JENSENS INC 10121 NORTH FOOTHILL CA HIST UST, CA HAZNET Lower 626, 0.119, North D23 ARCO #6182 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV CA LUST, CA HIST LUST, CA CERS Lower 626, 0.119, North D22 FREEMANS AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BL CA CUPA Listings Lower 626, 0.119, North D21 FOOTHILL VALERO 10121 N FOOTHILL BL CA CUPA Listings Lower 626, 0.119, North D20 FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV EDR Hist Auto Lower 626, 0.119, North D19 ARCO 10121 FOOTHILL CA HIST CORTESE Lower 597, 0.113, North C18 SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK CA LUST, CA HIST LUST, CA SWEEPS UST, CA EMI, CA... Higher 332, 0.063, West C17 MONTA VISTA FIRE STA 22620 STEVENS CREEK CA UST Higher 332, 0.063, West C16 MONTA VISTA FIRE STA 22620 STEVENS CREEK CA CERS TANKS, CA CERS Higher 332, 0.063, West B15 ACADIA VETERINARY CL 10012 N FOOTHILL BL CA CERS HAZ WASTE, CA CUPA Listings Lower 202, 0.038, NE B14 CUPERTINO AUTO REPAI 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA CERS HAZ WASTE, CA CUPA Listings, CA CERS Lower 180, 0.034, East B13 BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA UST Lower 180, 0.034, East B12 JOHNS MOBIL SERVICE 22510 STEVENS CREEK EDR Hist Auto Lower 180, 0.034, East B11 CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA UST Lower 180, 0.034, East B10 CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA LUST, CA CERS HAZ WASTE, CA CERS TANKS, CA... Lower 180, 0.034, East B9 CUPERTINO AUTO CARE 22510 STEVENS CREEK RCRA NonGen / NLR Lower 180, 0.034, East B8 CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA LUST, CA HIST LUST Lower 180, 0.034, East B7 MOBIL SERVICE STATIO 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA HIST UST Lower 180, 0.034, East B6 BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK CA SWEEPS UST, CA FID UST Lower 180, 0.034, East A5 ACTION AUTO SERVICE 10010 FOOTHILL BLVD EDR Hist Auto Lower 135, 0.026, NE A4 LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 10011 N FOOTHILL BL CA CUPA Listings Higher 111, 0.021, NW A3 LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 10011 N FOOTHILL BLV RCRA NonGen / NLR Higher 111, 0.021, NW A2 GARFIELD FAMILY CHIR 10011 N FOOTHILL BL CA CUPA Listings Higher 111, 0.021, NW A1 DONNA COTNER DDS 10011 N FOOTHILL BL CA CERS HAZ WASTE, CA CUPA Listings Higher 111, 0.021, NW

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
22690 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID SITE NAME ADDRESS DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION 635
CC 07-07-2022
635 of 1038
5722958.2s Page 3
41 KAISER CEMENT CORP, 2401 STEVENS CREEK B CA ENVIROSTOR, CA HIST CORTESE Higher 5250, 0.994, West 40 ACRIAN INC 10131 BUBB RD SEMS-ARCHIVE, CA ENVIROSTOR, CA HIST UST, RCRA... Lower 5138, 0.973, East

MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
22690 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD
CUPERTINO, CA 95014
Click on Map ID to see full detail.

MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)

ID SITE NAME ADDRESS DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION 636
CC 07-07-2022
636 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.

DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the following databases:

STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
637
CC 07-07-2022
637 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
CA RESPONSE State Response Sites
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists CA SWF/LF Solid Waste Information System
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
CA AST Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank Facilities
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
State and tribal Brownfields sites
CA BROWNFIELDS Considered Brownfieds Sites Listing

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
CA WMUDS/SWAT Waste Management Unit Database
CA SWRCY Recycler Database
CA HAULERS Registered Waste Tire Haulers Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations ODI Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register CA HIST Cal-Sites Historical Calsites Database
CA SCH School Property Evaluation Program
CA CDL Clandestine Drug Labs
CA Toxic Pits Toxic Pits Cleanup Act Sites
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
CA PFAS PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing
Local Land Records
CA LIENS Environmental Liens Listing
638
CC 07-07-2022
638 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
CA DEED Deed Restriction Listing
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
CA CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System CA LDS Land Disposal Sites Listing
CA MCS Military Cleanup Sites Listing
CA SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information

EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
CA BOND EXP. PLAN Bond Expenditure Plan
CA DRYCLEANERS Cleaner Facilities
CA ENF Enforcement Action Listing
CA Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing

CA ICE ICE
CA HWT Registered Hazardous Waste Transporter Database
CA MINES Mines Site Location Listing
639
CC 07-07-2022
639 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
CA MWMP Medical Waste Management Program Listing
CA PEST LIC Pesticide Regulation Licenses Listing
CA PROC Certified Processors Database
CA HAZMAT Hazardous Material Facilities
CA UIC UIC Listing

CA UIC GEO UIC GEO (GEOTRACKER)
CA WASTEWATER PITS Oil Wastewater Pits Listing
CA WDS Waste Discharge System
CA WIP Well Investigation Program Case List

CA MILITARY PRIV SITES MILITARY PRIV SITES (GEOTRACKER)

CA PROJECT PROJECT (GEOTRACKER)
CA WDR Waste Discharge Requirements Listing

CA OTHER OIL GAS OTHER OIL & GAS (GEOTRACKER)

CA PROD WATER PONDS PROD WATER PONDS (GEOTRACKER)

CA SAMPLING POINT SAMPLING POINT (GEOTRACKER)
CA WELL STIM PROJ Well Stimulation Project (GEOTRACKER)

EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners

EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
CA RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List CA RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases.

Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.

Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed.

Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.

Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.

STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE: SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly 640
CC 07-07-2022
640 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8
known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP, renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list the site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that. based upon available information, the location is not judged to be potential NPL site.

A review of the SEMS-ARCHIVE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/11/2019 has revealed that there is 1 SEMS-ARCHIVE site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ KAISER ALUMINUM FOIL 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) E37 103 Site ID: 0901179
EPA Id: CAD009155284
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
CA ENVIROSTOR: The Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC’s) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program’s (SMBRP’s) EnviroStor database identifes sites that have known contamination or sites for which there may be reasons to investigate further. The database includes the following site types: Federal Superfund sites (National Priorities List (NPL)); State Response, including Military Facilities and State Superfund; Voluntary Cleanup; and School sites. EnviroStor provides similar information to the information that was available in CalSites, and provides additional site information, including, but not limited to, identification of formerly-contaminated properties that have been released for reuse, properties where environmental deed restrictions have been recorded to prevent inappropriate land uses, and risk characterization information that is used to assess potential impacts to public health and the environment at contaminated sites.

A review of the CA ENVIROSTOR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/29/2019 has revealed that there are 4 CA ENVIROSTOR sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) E36 100 Facility Id: 43330001
Status: Refer: RWQCB
KAISER CEMENT CORP, 2401 STEVENS CREEK B W 1/2 - 1 (0.994 mi.) 41 117 Facility Id: 43350079
Status: Refer: Other Agency
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BLACKBERRY FARM PLAY 21979 SAN FERNANDO D ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.485 mi.) 38 108 Facility Id: 60001205
Status: No Further Action
ACRIAN INC 10131 BUBB RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.973 mi.) 40 111
Facility Id: 80001710
Status: Inactive - Needs Evaluation
641
CC 07-07-2022
641 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
CA LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) Sites included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.

A review of the CA LUST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 7 CA LUST sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) C18 70 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2014 Status: Completed - Case Closed
Facility Status: Case Closed
Date Closed: 03/30/1998
Global Id: T0608502037
SCVWD ID: 07S2W15F02F
date9: 3/30/1998
MONTA VISTA SUBSTATI 10110 CALIFORNIA OAK NW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.327 mi.) 35 96 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Database: LUST SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2014 Status: Completed - Case Closed
Date Closed: 11/20/2006
Global Id: T0608594350
SCVWD ID: 07S2W15F03F
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B8 16 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Facility Status: Pollution Characterization
CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B10 18 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Database: LUST SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2014 Status: Open - Verification Monitoring
Global Id: T0608548766
SCVWD ID: 07S2W15K01F
ARCO #6182 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D23 77 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Facility Status: Case Closed
date9: 7/29/1996
FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N. FOOTHILL BO N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D29 82 Database: LUST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Database: LUST SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2014 Status: Completed - Case Closed
Date Closed: 07/29/1996
Global Id: T10000004993
Global Id: T0608500152
SCVWD ID: 07S2W15F04F
SCVWD ID: 07S2W15F01F
FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) 34 95 Database: LUST REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Database: LUST SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 03/03/2014 642
CC 07-07-2022
642 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10
Facility Status: Case Closed
Date Closed: 01/09/1995
SCVWD ID: 07S2W15G01F
date9: 1/9/1995
CA CPS-SLIC: Cleanup Program Sites (CPS; also known as Site Cleanups [SC] and formerly known as Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups [SLIC] sites) included in GeoTracker. GeoTracker is the Water Boards data management system for sites that impact, or have the potential to impact, water quality in California, with emphasis on groundwater.

A review of the CA CPS-SLIC list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 2 CA CPS-SLIC sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) E36 100 Database: SLIC REG 2, Date of Government Version: 09/30/2004 Facility Id: 43S0663
PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.495 mi.) 39 110 Database: CPS-SLIC, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018 Facility Status: Completed - Case Closed
Global Id: T10000003039
CA HIST LUST: A listing of open and closed leaking underground storage tanks. This listing is no longer updated by the county. Leaking underground storage tanks are now handled by the Department of Environmental Health.

A review of the CA HIST LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/29/2005 has revealed that there are 4 CA HIST LUST sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) C18 70 SCVWD ID: 07S2W15F02
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B8 16 SCVWD ID: 07S2W15K01
ARCO #6182 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D23 77 SCVWD ID: 07S2W15F01
FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) 34 95 SCVWD ID: 07S2W15G01
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
CA UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board’s Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database.

A review of the CA UST list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 4 CA UST sites within 643
CC 07-07-2022
643 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11
approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ MONTA VISTA FIRE STA 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) C17 69 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Facility Id: 45
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B11 46 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B13 48 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Facility Id: 44
ARCO SERVICE STATION 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D28 82 Database: UST, Date of Government Version: 12/10/2018
Facility Id: 35
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
CA VCP: Contains low threat level properties with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases and the project proponents have request that DTSC oversee investigation and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs.

A review of the CA VCP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/29/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA VCP site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BLACKBERRY FARM PLAY 21979 SAN FERNANDO D ESE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.485 mi.) 38 108 Status: No Further Action
Facility Id: 60001205

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
CA CERS HAZ WASTE: List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, and RCRA LQ HW Generator programs.

A review of the CA CERS HAZ WASTE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/09/2019 has revealed that there are 4 CA CERS HAZ WASTE sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ DONNA COTNER DDS 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) A1 9 Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B10 18 644
CC 07-07-2022
644 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 12
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO AUTO REPAI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B14 48 ACADIA VETERINARY CL 10012 N FOOTHILL BL NE 0 - 1/8 (0.038 mi.) B15 57 Local Lists of Registered Storage Tanks
CA SWEEPS UST: Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System. This underground storage tank listing was updated and maintained by a company contacted by the SWRCB in the early 1990’s. The listing is no longer updated or maintained. The local agency is the contact for more information on a site on the SWEEPS list.

A review of the CA SWEEPS UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1994 has revealed that there are 4 CA SWEEPS UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) C18 70 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 298
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B6 13 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 39475
FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N. FOOTHILL BO N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D29 82 Status: A
Tank Status: A
Comp Number: 27102
FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) 34 95 Comp Number: 337
CA HIST UST: Historical UST Registered Database.

A review of the CA HIST UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/15/1990 has revealed that there are 4 CA HIST UST sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ MOBIL SERVICE STATIO 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B7 15 Facility Id: 00000039475
G JENSENS INC 10121 NORTH FOOTHILL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D24 78 G. JENSEN’S INC. 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D26 80 Facility Id: 00000060177
FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N. FOOTHILL BO N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D29 82 Facility Id: 00000027102
645
CC 07-07-2022
645 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13
CA FID UST: The Facility Inventory Database contains active and inactive underground storage tank locations. The source is the State Water Resource Control Board.

A review of the CA FID UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/31/1994 has revealed that there is 1 CA FID UST site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ BEACON SERVICE STATI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B6 13 Facility Id: 43001931
Status: A
CA CERS TANKS: List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank regulatory programs.

A review of the CA CERS TANKS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/09/2019 has revealed that there are 2 CA CERS TANKS sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ MONTA VISTA FIRE STA 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) C16 61 Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B10 18 Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste.

A review of the RCRA NonGen / NLR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/25/2019 has revealed that there are 4 RCRA NonGen / NLR sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 10011 N FOOTHILL BLV NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) A3 11 EPA ID:: CAL000441261
CAMBRIDGE PROPERTY M 22731 STEVENS CREEK W 1/8 - 1/4 (0.174 mi.) 33 93 EPA ID:: CAC002981476
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO AUTO CARE 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B9 16 EPA ID:: CAL000419408
DAVID RANNELLS 10073 AMADOR OAK COU NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.151 mi.) 32 92 EPA ID:: CAC002974544
646
CC 07-07-2022
646 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 14
CA Cortese: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST), the Integrated Waste Board (SWF/LS), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (Cal-Sites).

A review of the CA Cortese list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/25/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA Cortese site within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B10 18 Cleanup Status: OPEN - VERIFICATION MONITORING
CA CUPA Listings: A listing of sites included in the county’s Certified Unified Program Agency database.

California’s Secretary for Environmental Protection established the unified hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulatory program as required by chapter 6.11 of the California Health and Safety Code. The Unified Program consolidates the administration, permits, inspections, and enforcement activities.

A review of the CA CUPA Listings list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 10 CA CUPA Listings sites within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ DONNA COTNER DDS 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) A1 9 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 GARFIELD FAMILY CHIR 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) A2 11 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 LIFETIME DENTAL CARE 10011 N FOOTHILL BL NW 0 - 1/8 (0.021 mi.) A4 12 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B10 18 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 CUPERTINO AUTO REPAI 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B14 48 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 ACADIA VETERINARY CL 10012 N FOOTHILL BL NE 0 - 1/8 (0.038 mi.) B15 57 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 FOOTHILL VALERO 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D21 76 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 FREEMANS AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D22 76 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D25 80 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 AAA AUTO REPAIR AND 10121 N FOOTHILL BL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D27 81 Database: CUPA SANTA CLARA, Date of Government Version: 05/16/2019 CA HIST CORTESE: The sites for the list are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board [LUST], the Integrated Waste Board [SWF/LS], and the Department of Toxic Substances Control [CALSITES]. This listing is no longer updated by the state agency.

A review of the CA HIST CORTESE list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2001 has revealed that 647
CC 07-07-2022
647 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 15
there are 5 CA HIST CORTESE sites within approximately 0.5 miles of the target property.

Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ SANTA CLARA COUNTY F 22620 STEVENS CREEK W 0 - 1/8 (0.063 mi.) C18 70 Reg Id: 43-2219
KAISER ALUMINUM AND 23333 STEVENS CREEK W 1/4 - 1/2 (0.366 mi.) E36 100 Reg Id: 43-0770
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ CUPERTINO BEACON 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B10 18 Reg Id: 43-0455
ARCO 10121 FOOTHILL N 0 - 1/8 (0.113 mi.) D19 75
Reg Id: 43-0084
FACCIOLA RESIDENCE 22371 CUPERTINO RD ENE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.189 mi.) 34 95 Reg Id: 43-1785
CA HWP: Detailed information on permitted hazardous waste facilities and corrective action ("cleanups") tracked in EnviroStor.

A review of the CA HWP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 05/20/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA HWP site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ACRIAN INC 10131 BUBB RD E 1/2 - 1 (0.973 mi.) 40 111
EPA Id: CAD092205889
Cleanup Status: CLOSED
CA Notify 65: Listings of all Proposition 65 incidents reported to counties by the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This database is no longer updated by the reporting agency.

A review of the CA Notify 65 list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/18/2019 has revealed that there is 1 CA Notify 65 site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ARCO SERVICE STATION 10121 NORTH FOOTHILL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D30 92

EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR Hist Auto: EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR’s review was limited to those categories of sources that might, in EDR’s opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not 648
CC 07-07-2022
648 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 16
limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station, filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records"
, or HRHR. EDR’s HRHR effort presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches.

A review of the EDR Hist Auto list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 4 EDR Hist Auto sites within approximately 0.125 miles of the target property.

Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page ____________________ ________ ___________________ _____ _____ ACTION AUTO SERVICE 10010 FOOTHILL BLVD NE 0 - 1/8 (0.026 mi.) A5 13 JOHNS MOBIL SERVICE 22510 STEVENS CREEK E 0 - 1/8 (0.034 mi.) B12 46 FOOTHILL AUTO SERVIC 10121 N FOOTHILL BLV N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D20 75 ACED ACRO SERVICE 10121 FOOTHILL N 0 - 1/8 (0.119 mi.) D31 92 649
CC 07-07-2022
649 of 1038

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC5722958.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 17
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped. Count: 6 records.

Site Name Database(s) ____________ ____________
CA CDL

KAISER CEMENT CORP PERMANENTE PLAN SEMS
1X STEVENS CREEK QUARRY CA HAZNET

STEVENS CREEK DAM FINDS
BRIDGE 37C0571 OVER STEVENS CREEK FINDS
STEVENS CREEK QUARRY, INC. US MINES
650
CC 07-07-2022
650 of 1038
651
CC 07-07-2022
651 of 1038
........................................................................................................................

A PPENDIX E :

P HASE I I E NVIRONMENTAL S ITE

A SSESSMENT
652
CC 07-07-2022
652 of 1038
........................................................................................................................ 653 CC 07-07-2022
653 of 1038
Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report
Prepared for
Alan Enterprise LLC.
22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard,
Cupertino, California 95014
(Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66) By
Achievement Engineering Corp.
2455 Autumnvale Drive, Unit E
San Jose, California, 95134
Project Number: 3974
Date: October 17, 2019
654
CC 07-07-2022
654 of 1038
Project Number: 3974
Date: October 17, 2019
Alan Enterprise LLC.

Mr. Ali Mozafari
Subject: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report
22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard,
Cupertino, California 95014
(Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66) Dear Sir,
Achievement Engineering Corp. (AEC) is pleased to submit this Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report for the above-referenced project. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the subject site and for the proposed development. The subject site is currently owned by Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart (George and Nahida Bateh) and is a land totaling of three parcels, approximately 0.75 acre located on the west south corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd. intersection, at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, within mixed-use plan development (General Commercial) zone of Cupertino. The site itself has not been listed in any searched data bases (Please refer to reference 1).

In May 2017, EIS performed a limited Phase II investigation to assess the impact of the neighboring site (Cupertino Beacon at 22510 Stevens Creek Blvd.) at this property. Above-ESL benzene concentration in soil vapor was found in the borings at the subject site at that time.

There is one site listed on various databases in the close proximity to and at higher elevation of the subject site;
 Santa Clara County Fire Station (Also recorded as Monta Vista Fire station) at 22620 Stevens Creek Blvd., 332 ft. west of the subject site.

There are two sites in the close proximity of the site, but at lower elevations:
 Cupertino Beacon at 22510 Stevens Creek Blvd., 180 ft. east of the subject property.  Foothill Auto Services at 10121 N. Foothill Blvd., 620 ft., north of the subject property. 655
CC 07-07-2022
655 of 1038
The review of the aerial photos and historical use of the property as an orchard, from at least 1939 to 1950, indicate that there is also a potential of metals and pesticides existing in shallow site soil.

Above-ESL benzene concentration in soil vapor was found in the borings at the subject site is also a recognized environmental conditions. Besides, the open LUST case and documented soil, groundwater, and soil vapor contamination at neighboring property 22510 Stevens Creek Blvd. (Cupertino Beacon) represents an offsite controlled recognized environmental condition. To assess the impacts of the neighboring site at the subject site, conducting a limited Phase II investigation was recommended. This subsurface investigation program was designed to evaluate the soil and water conditions regarding the above mentioned contaminants.

We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project and would be happy to discuss our findings with you. We look forward to serving as your geotechnical/ environmental engineer on the future projects.

Respectfully Submitted,
Achievement Engineering Corp.

Sadaf Safaai, PE
Project Engineer
Copies: Alan Enterprise LLC.

Mr. Ali Mozafari
656
CC 07-07-2022
656 of 1038
ii
Achievement Engineering
Table of Contents
1- INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 2- SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................ 2 3- PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................ 2 3-1- Topography and Geological Setting ............................................................................................. 3 4- PROJECT INVESTIGATION .......................................................................................................... 3 4-1- Field Investigation and Exploratory Boreholes ............................................................................ 4 4-2- Laboratory Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 4 5- ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING LEVELS................................................................................. 5 6- INVESTIGATION RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 6 6-1- Soil and Water: Organics .............................................................................................................. 6 6-2- Soil and Water: Heavy Metals ...................................................................................................... 7 6-3- Soil Vapor ..................................................................................................................................... 7 6-4- Recommendations ........................................................................................................................ 9 7- LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 9 8- REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 10 Exhibit I – Site Location Plan
Exhibit II – Environmental
Screening Levels and STLC and
TTLC Regulatory Limits Tables
Exhibit III – Analytical Test
Results
657
CC 07-07-2022
657 of 1038
1 Achievement Engineering
1- INTRODUCTION
Achievement Engineering Corp. (AEC) was retained by Alan Enterprise LLC. to conduct a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (Phase II ESA) for 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, (three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66).

The attached Figure M01, Exhibit I shows the general location of the subject property. Providing technical assistance to Alan Enterprise LLC, AEC is contracted to assess the subject property for potential contaminants of concern, namely total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline, diesel, and motor oil (TPH-g/-d/-o), the aromatic hydrocarbons benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene total xylenes (BTEX) and MTBE. Soil vapor samples were analyzed for TPH and benzene. The samples at B3 have been tested for the presence of the pesticides and heavy metals. The Phase II ESA was performed in conformance with the scope and limitations of the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Designation E1903-11, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Process. Any limitations have been practiced, is summarized in section7.

The Phase II ESA activities consisted of the drilling of three (3) exploratory borings and the collection of soil samples for submittal to an analytical lab for analyses for potential contaminants of concern.

Soil vapor sampling was also performed during this project following the guidelines of the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) “Guidance for the Evaluation and Mitigation of Subsurface Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air” (DTSC, 2011) and “Advisory – Active Soil Gas Investigations” (DTSC et al, 2015). Temporary soil vapor probes were installed in borings B-1, B-2 and B-3 at a depth of 5.0 ft. bgs. The samples were taken on September 18, 2019. Utilizing 1 L Summa Canisters at negative pressure. Three (3) samples were taken from each of the three (3) boreholes. A purge canister was used to purge the tubes first to minimize contamination from above layers.

This report documents the activities and results of the environmental investigation conducted by AEC on September 11, 2019 and September 18, 2019.

The following report highlights the significant findings and conclusions representing our best professional judgment based on the information and data available to us during the course of this investigation.
658
CC 07-07-2022
658 of 1038
2 Achievement Engineering
2- SCOPE OF WORK
The Phase II ESA was performed in general accordance with the scope of work in AEC Fee Proposal, Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, f22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014 (three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14-66). The scope of work was to evaluate shallow subsurface soil conditions of the subject site (at specific new development location) with respect to potential contaminants of concern.

The scope of work for this investigation included the following:
 The drilling on 11 September, 2019 of three (3) exploratory borings to collect soil samples for laboratory analyses.
 Installing micro soil vapor probe on 11 September, 2019.  Collecting soil vapor samples in canisters on 18 September 2019.  Laboratory analysis of the soil samples for potential contaminants of concern, namely TPH gasoline, TPH diesel, TPH motor oil, MTBE, BTEX, heavy metals and pesticides.  Laboratory analysis of soil vapor samples for TPH and benzene.  Preparation of this technical report documenting the investigation activities and results. 3- PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The subject site is currently owned by Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart (George and Nahida Bateh) and is a land totaling 0.75 acre (combined three parcels) located on the west south corner of Stevens Creek Blvd. and Foothill Blvd. intersection at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, within mixed use plan development (General Commercial) zone of Cupertino.

The site itself has not been listed in any data bases. Review of the historical data available for the subject site reveals that most probably the development of the site, as is, took place between 1950 and 1956 (based on aerial photos), the first city directory listing for this property belongs to 1975, before that, this address does not exist in 1970 and 1968 listings. Bateh Brothers Liquors and Mini Mart has been listed in 2014 back to 1980 listings. In 1975 directory, a Frank’s Liquor and Grocery Store has been listed. Also an interview conducted by others in 2017 reveals that before 1976, the place was used as a bar. No building permit was found indicating any other use for this property.

Per aerial photos, in 1939 an orchard was in the property that cannot be observed in 1950 aerial photo. Sometime between 1939 and 1950 the trees were gradually cleared, starting from north to south. The existence of fertilizers, pesticides and metals are possible in the shallow soil due to this historical land use.
659
CC 07-07-2022
659 of 1038
3 Achievement Engineering
Also, rev reveals that for the most part, uses were mixed residential and commercial (a veterinary clinic has existed since, at least 1989, at 10012 N. Foothill Blvd. and Beacon Service Station has been in service under different names as follows:
1995- to Present -Cupertino Beacon Service Station, Cupertino Auto Care 1989- Foothill Mobil
1981-1984 -McElroy Mobil Service
1976 -D&D Mobil Service
1971 -Johns Mobil Service, Mobil Oil Corporation
1968 -Johns Mobil
3-1- Topography and Geological Setting
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) maps were reviewed. The topography of the subject site is relatively flat and general topographic gradient is NNE. The site itself is at an approximate average elevation of 386.0 feet above mean sea level.

The project site is located within the Coast Range Geomorphic Province. Local uplift of the Santa Cruz Mountains within the last 2 to 3 million years has occurred due to a restraining bend of the San Andreas Fault, producing transpressional forces across the plate boundary. Thrust faults bound the San Andreas Fault are responsible for uplift of the range. The range is characterized by rugged hills with moderate relief, steep valleys, and locally steep hillsides abutting drainages. East-flowing drainages result in dissection of the mountain range and alluvial deposition within the San Francisco Bay structural trough.

Soils encountered during the investigation included interbedded gravelly sand, silty sand, sandy gravel, clayey sand, and sandy silt to an explored depth of approximately 40ft bgs. Groundwater was not encountered during this investigation, however in previous explorations by others, groundwater had been encountered between 20 and 30 ft. bgs.
4- PROJECT INVESTIGATION
Prior to the field activities, AEC attempted to secure a Soil Boring Permit from the Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health. No need for permitting was confirmed by the DEH.

The proposed boring locations were marked on the ground with white paint. Underground Service Alert (USA) was notified to provide the required utility clearance. The boring locations were cleared of underground utilities. A health and safety plan was prepared to govern and control the field work by AEC staff and subcontractors. 660
CC 07-07-2022
660 of 1038
4 Achievement Engineering
4-1- Field Investigation and Exploratory Boreholes
Three (3) exploratory borings, designated B-1, B-2 and B-3, were completed by AEC on September 11, 2019. Isotech Environmental Corp., a C57 licensed drilling contractor (C57 #799951 B), drilled the borings under the direction of a geologist from AEC. The drilling was accomplished with the use of direct push drilling equipment providing continuous soil sampling capability. B1 and B2 were advanced into approximately forty (40) feet below ground surface (bgs.), B3 was advanced into ten (10) feet. Bgs. DPT drives or pushes small- diameter rods (2 in.) tools into the subsurface by hydraulic or percussive methods. Closed piston, single-tube samplers provided high integrity samples. Dual tube samplers utilize concentric casings to advance the boring. The outer casing remains in place as the inner casing is used to trip out the sample as the boring is advanced incrementally. The outer casing prevents borehole collapse and generally reduces the potential for cross contamination between sampling intervals.

The geologist collected soil samples from each boring for potential laboratory analyses. Sampling consisted of sealing the samples and then labeling and placing the sample in an ice chest for cold storage. Following the protocol provided by the laboratory and manufacturer, Torrent Laboratory Inc. sampling was also performed as follows. A dedicated syringe was driven into freshly exposed soil to retrieve approximately five (5) grams of soil. The extracted soil was then transferred into laboratory-supplied, 40-milliliter volatile organic analysis vials (40 mL VOAs). The VOAs were promptly sealed with Teflon caps provided, labeled with identification information, and placed in the ice chest. AEC followed chain of custody protocol in the transfer of the soil samples to the laboratory, as presented in Exhibit III.

The soil vapor samples were taken on September 19, 2019, using 1L Summa Canisters at negative pressure. Three samples were taken from each of three boreholes. A purge canister was used to purge the tubes first to minimize contamination from above layers.

All down-hole drilling and sampling equipment was cleaned with environmental detergent and rinsed between uses to prevent cross-contamination.
4-2- Laboratory Analysis
The soil samples were submitted with chain of custody documentation to Torrent Laboratory Inc., of Milpitas, California. Torrent Laboratory Inc. is certified for chemical analyses by the Department of Health Services, Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP No. 1991).

The samples were subjected to the following laboratory analytical methods:

TPH gasoline, Test Method 8260TPH
TPH motor oil, Test Method USEPA Method 8015B
661
CC 07-07-2022
661 of 1038
5 Achievement Engineering
TPH as Diesel, Test Method SW8015B
MTBE, Test Method SW8260B
BTEX, Test Method SW8260B
Pesticides (Organochlorine Pesticides by Method 8081B) and heavy metals (CAM 17, heavy metals) The latter tests were just performed for samples from B-3.

Soil vapor samples were analyzed for TPH and benzene by USEPA method TO-15.

Please note that it is our understanding that the new development is residential. Laboratory analytical testings have been performed on selected soil samples at 25.0 and 35.0 ft. for B1, 25.0 ft. for B2 and

5.0 ft. for B3 and the rest of the samples were put on hold in case further investigations required (per page 20 of Exhibit III, Analytical Test Results).

The laboratories reported that the samples were received in good condition and with appropriate chain of custody documentation. The analytical results were laboratory certified with no significant anomalies reported in the data. The laboratory analytical reports are provided in Exhibit III. 5- ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING LEVELS
The Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region (RWQCB, February 2016- REV 3.0) guidance, Screening for Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, presents environmental screening levels (ESLs) for soil and groundwater that address human health exposure risk, ecological habitat protection, and groundwater protection. For carcinogens, the human health screening levels for carcinogens are based on a target cancer risk of one-in-a-million (10-6). A hazard quotient of 0.2 is the basis for non-carcinogenic risk.

The RWQCB (February 2016) considers two (2) groundwater use scenarios: one where groundwater IS a potential source of drinking water resource, and the other where groundwater IS NOT a potential drinking water resource.

The role of environmental screening levels is to screen sites and help identify areas, contaminants and conditions that may require further attention and risk assessment. In general, at sites where contaminants are below screening levels, no further action is warranted provided that the exposure assumptions match or approximate those used in developing the screening levels. Furthermore, contaminants above screening levels, does not automatically trigger or require remedial action.

According to RWQCB (February 2016), chemical concentrations in soil and groundwater above ESLs could pose negligible risk.
662
CC 07-07-2022
662 of 1038
6 Achievement Engineering
Factors, such as background levels, have to be considered in evaluating sample data and the need for remedial action or risk management. Remedial action is generally not warranted for naturallyoccurring metals in soil and groundwater. 6- INVESTIGATION RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Three (3) exploratory borings were completed on September 11, 2019 at the subject site and the result of the investigation is as follows.
6-1- Soil and Water: Organics
Soil samples from 25.0 and 35.0 feet depths for B1 and from 25.0 feet depth for B2 were analyzed for TPH (Gasoline), TPH (Diesel), TPH (Motor oil) MTBE and BTEX. Soil sample from 5.0 feet depth for B3 was analyzed for heavy metals and Organochlorine Pesticides. The soil analytical results for organics are compared with Tier 1 ESL values (that are conservative) as well as Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) Regulatory Levels as attached in the Exhibit II, Environmental Screening Levels and STLC and TTLC Regulatory Limits Tables.

Analytical Results
B1- 25 ft.: TPH diesel: 16.2 mg/Kg, TPH motor oil: 141 mg/Kg, Pentacosane: 72.6 %4, (S)4 Bromofluorobenzene: 104 %
(S) Dibromofluoromethane: 106 %
(S) Toluene-d8: 94.7 %
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene: 84.6 %
B1-35 ft.: All compounds were non-detectable for this sample.

Pentacosane: 67.1 %4,
(S)4 Bromofluorobenzene: 107 %
(S) Dibromofluoromethane: 106 %
(S) Toluene-d8: 95.4 %
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene: 84.7 %
B2- 25 ft.: All compounds were non-detectable for this sample.

Pentacosane (S): 63.8 %
(S)4 Bromofluorobenzene: 102 %
(S) Dibromofluoromethane: 109 %
(S) Toluene-d8: 94.4 %
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene: 84.9 %
663
CC 07-07-2022
663 of 1038
7 Achievement Engineering
B3- 5 ft.:

TPH as Diesel: 2.04 mg/Kg, Pentacosane (S): 70.3 %,
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene: 99.2 %
(S) Dibromofluoromethane: 107 %
(S) Toluene-d8: 98.1 %
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene: 88.4 %
TCMX (S): 58.5 %
DCBP (S): 64.5 %
Groundwater was not encountered or tested at any borings. 6-2- Soil and Water: Heavy Metals
B3- 5 ft.:

Arsenic: 2.50 mg/Kg
Barium: 150 mg/Kg
Chromium: 56.6 mg/Kg
Cobalt: 14.7 mg/Kg
Copper: 26.0 mg/Kg
Lead: 4.92 mg/Kg
Nickel: 41.3 mg/Kg
Vanadium: 72.1 mg/Kg
Zinc: 52.8 mg/Kg
6-3- Soil Vapor
Soil vapor samples collected from 5. ft. bgs and were analyzed for TPH and benzene by USEPA method TO-15.
664
CC 07-07-2022
664 of 1038
8 Achievement Engineering
SP1-B1

Environmental Screening Results
The soil analytical results for organics meet the RWQCB (February 2016) ESLs for a residential land use (the most conservative scenario) for soil and heavy metal concentrations does not exceed TTLC values.

However, Arsenic in the soil sample is higher than 6.7 x 10 -2 mg/Kg of Tier 1 screening level.

For the case of Chromium since the concentration was 50 mg/Kg, per code recommendation a WET extraction test has been conducted. No Chromium was detected (STLC) as indicated in page (17 of 33) of Exhibit III.

Based on these national studies and the regional data presented (Reference 2), it is apparent that arsenic concentrations across much of the United States are elevated with respect to residential RBSLs. Several states have recognized the importance of background with regards to remediation involving arsenic in soil:

California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has set an arsenic background concentration of 6 mg/kg to be used at Los Angeles Unified District school sites (CalEPA, 2005).
665
CC 07-07-2022
665 of 1038
9 Achievement Engineering
6-4- Recommendations
There are no drinking water supply wells on the subject property and vicinity, and the subject property is in the service area of the municipal potable water supply system.

Although the recent investigation results indicate no-risk or insignificant levels of TPH (Gasoline), TPH (Diesel), TPH (Motor Oils), MTBE, BETEX, Organochlorine Pesticides and heavy metals in the soil, above the regulatory values, AEC recommends the following in the event the subject property is to be redeveloped:
• A routine health and safety plan to ensure the safety and protection of the public and construction workers during construction.
• Installation of a vapor barrier beneath the concrete foundation slab of the proposed building at the site to mitigate potential odor risks associated with concentration of vapors (such as propanol).

The soil of the site may be hauled to any landfill.
7- LIMITATIONS
This Report was prepared pursuant to an Agreement dated 8 August 2019 between Alan Enterprise LLC. and AEC. All uses of this Report are subject to, and deemed acceptance of, the conditions and restrictions contained in the Agreement. The observations and conclusions described in this Report are based solely on the Scope of Services provided pursuant to the Agreement. AEC has not performed any additional observations, investigations, studies or other testing not specified in the Agreement and the Report. AEC shall not be liable for the existence of any condition the discovery of which would have required the performance of services not authorized under the Agreement.

This Report is prepared for the exclusive use of Alan Enterprise LLC. and its sub-contractors in connection with the design and construction of the development. There are no intended beneficiaries other than Alan Enterprise LLC. and its sub-contractors. AEC shall owe no duty, whatsoever, to any other person or entity on account of the Agreement or the Report. Use of this Report by any person or entity other than Alan Enterprise LLC. and its sub-contractors for any purpose whatsoever is expressly forbidden unless such other person or entity obtains written authorization from Alan Enterprise LLC. and AEC. Use of this Report by such other person or entity without the written authorization of Alan Enterprise LLC. and AEC shall be at such other person's or entities sole risk, and shall be without legal exposure or liability to AEC.

Use of this Report by any person or entity, including by Alan Enterprise LLC. and its subcontractors, for a purpose other than for the design and construction of the proposed development is expressly prohibited unless such person or entity obtains written authorization from AEC indicating 666
CC 07-07-2022
666 of 1038
10 Achievement Engineering
that the Report is adequate for such other use. Use of this Report by any person or entity for such other purpose without written authorization by AEC shall be at such person's or entities sole risk and shall be without legal exposure or liability to AEC.

This report reflects site conditions observed and described by records available to AEC as of the date of report preparation. The passage of time may result in significant changes in site conditions, technology, or economic conditions which could alter the findings and/or recommendations of the report. Accordingly, Alan Enterprise LLC. and any other party to whom the report is provided recognize and agree that AEC shall bear no liability for deviations from observed conditions or available records after the time of report preparation.

Use of this Report by any person or entity in violation of the restrictions expressed in this Report shall be deemed and accepted by the user as conclusive evidence that such use and the reliance placed on this Report, or any portions thereof, is unreasonable, and that the user accepts full and exclusive responsibility and liability for any losses, damages or other liability which may result. 8- REFERENCES
1- Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report for 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014 (Three parcels with APNs 342-14-04, 342-14-05, and 342-14- 66), AEC Project No. 3940, July 29, 2019.
2- Background Versus Risk-Based Screening Levels -An Examination Of Arsenic Background Soil Concentrations In Seven States, Kelly A.S. Vosnakis, Elizabeth Perry, Karen Madsen, Lisa J.N. Bradley, AECOM, Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on Soils, Sediments, Water and Energy, Volume 14, Article 10, January 2010. 667
CC 07-07-2022
667 of 1038
Exhibit I
668
CC 07-07-2022
668 of 1038
Project Number: Project Title: 01234

MM/DD/YY
09/26/19
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _

REVISIONS

REMARKS
...
...
...
... M
3974 Ali Mozafari - Phase II - Exhibit III
Vicinity Map 01
669
CC 07-07-2022
669 of 1038
Project Number: Project Title: 01234

MM/DD/YY
09/26/19
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _

REVISIONS

REMARKS
...
...
...
... M
3974 Ali Mozafari - Phase II - Exhibit III
Boring Location 02
670
CC 07-07-2022
670 of 1038
Project Number: Project Title: 01234

MM/DD/YY
09/26/19
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _

REVISIONS

REMARKS
...
...
...
... M
3974 Ali Mozafari - Phase II - Exhibit III
Site Location on Cupertino quadrangle 7.5' Series
Topographic Map by USGS 03
671
CC 07-07-2022
671 of 1038
Project Number: Project Title: 01234

MM/DD/YY
09/26/19
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _
_ _ /_ _ /_ _

REVISIONS

REMARKS
...
...
...
... M
3974 Ali Mozafari - Phase II - Exhibit III
Site Location on Cupertino and San Jose West quadrangles

7.5' Series Geologic Map by T. W. Dibblee and J.A. Minch 2007 04 672
CC 07-07-2022
672 of 1038
Exhibit II
673
CC 07-07-2022
673 of 1038
Boring
Sample
Depth (ft)
TPH
gasoline
(mg/Kg)
TPH
Diesel
(mg/Kg)
TPH
motor oil
(mg/Kg)
MTBE
(mg/Kg)
Benzene
(mg/Kg)
OCPs
(mg/Kg)
Aresenic
(mg/Kg)
Barium
(mg/Kg)
Chromium
(mg/Kg)
Cobalt
(mg/Kg)
Copper
(mg/Kg)
Lead
(mg/Kg)
Nickel
(mg/Kg)
B-1 35.0 ND 16.2 141 ND ND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B-1 25.0 ND ND ND ND ND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B-2 25.0 ND ND ND ND ND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B-3 10.0 ND 2.04 ND ND ND ND 2.5 150 56.6 14.7 26 4.92 41.3 Tier 1 ESL (Soil) mg/Kg
100 230 5100 2.3 *10^-2 4.4 *10^-2 * 6.7 *10^-2 3000 0.3 230 3100 80 86 TTLC (mg/Kg) 500.0 10000.0 500.0 8000.0 2500.0 1000.0 2000.0 Boring
Sample
Depth (ft)
Carbon
Disulfide
ug/m3
Hexane
ug/m3
tertButanol
ug/m3
Chloroform
ug/m3
Toluene
ug/m3
Tetrachloro
ethylene
ug/m3
Ethyl
Benzene
ug/m3
m,pXylene
ug/m3
4-Ethyl
Toluene
ug/m3
1,2,4-
Trimethyl
benzene
ug/m3
Naphthalene
ug/m3
2-
Propanol
(Isopropyl
Alcohol)
ug/m3
Aceton
ug/m3
B-1 5.0 36 2.6 1.9 3.1 5.2 26 2.6 7.5 9.1 10 2.6 320
B-2 5.0 ND ND ND ND 24
B-3 5.0 ND 1.9 ND ND 26 13
Tier 1 ESL (Vapor) ug/m3 * * * 61 1.6 *10^5 240 560 5.2*10^4 * * 41 * 1.5*10^7 Concentration in soil samples
Concentrations in the vapor samples 674
CC 07-07-2022
674 of 1038
Exhibit III
675
CC 07-07-2022
675 of 1038
Arsh Firouzjaei
Achievement Engineering Corp
2455 Autumnvale Dr.

San Jose, California 95131
Tel: 408 217 9174
Fax: 408 217 9632
Email: [email protected]
RE: Alan Enterprise
Torrent Laboratory, Inc. received 9 sample(s) on September 11, 2019 for the analyses presented in the following Report.

Dear Arash Firouzjaei:

Work Order No.: 1909078 Rev: 1
As requested on the Chain of Custody, five samples were placed on hold.

All data for associated QC met EPA or laboratory specification(s) except where noted in the case narrative.

Torrent Laboratory, Inc. is certified by the State of California, ELAP #1991. If you have any questions regarding these test results, please feel free to contact the Project Management Team at (408)263-5258; ext 204.

Date
September 18, 2019
Kathie Evans
Project Manager
Total Page Count: 33 Page 1 of 33 676
CC 07-07-2022
676 of 1038
Date: 9/18/2019
Client: Achievement Engineering Corp
Project: Alan Enterprise
Work Order: 1909078

CASE NARRATIVE
Unless otherwise indicated in the following narrative, no issues encountered with the receiving, preparation, analysis or reporting of the results associated with this work order.

Unless otherwise indicated in the following narrative, no results have been method and/or field blank corrected.

Reported results relate only to the items/samples tested by the laboratory.

This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Torrent Analytical, Inc.

REVISIONS
Report revised to include STLC data.

STLC
Note: Extraction of 50 g sample / 500g 0.2M Sodium Citrate Solution was performed according to wet extraction procedure (WET) which was rotated in a rotary shaker for 48 hours (+/- 4 hours).

Date Prepared: 10/8/19 at 5:15 PM to 10/10/19 at 1:50 PM Rev. 1 (10/16/19)
Total Page Count: 33 Page 2 of 33 677
CC 07-07-2022
677 of 1038
Report prepared for: Arash Firouzjaei
Achievement Engineering Corp
Date Received: 09/11/19
Date Reported: 09/18/19
Sample Result Summary
B1-25' 1909078-003
Parameters: Analysis DF MDL PQL Results Unit
Method
TPH as Diesel SW8015B 4 3.4 8.0 16.2 mg/Kg
TPH as Motor Oil SW8015B 4 13 40 141 mg/Kg
B1-35' 1909078-004
Parameters: Analysis DF MDL PQL Results Unit
Method
All compounds were non-detectable for this sample.

B2-25' 1909078-007
Parameters: Analysis DF MDL PQL Results Unit
Method
All compounds were non-detectable for this sample.

B3-5' 1909078-008
Parameters: Analysis DF MDL PQL Results Unit
Method
Arsenic SW6010B 1 0.15 1.30 2.50 mg/Kg
Barium SW6010B 1 0.055 5.00 150 mg/Kg
Chromium SW6010B 1 0.075 5.00 56.6 mg/Kg
Cobalt SW6010B 1 0.070 5.00 14.7 mg/Kg
Copper SW6010B 1 0.20 5.00 26.0 mg/Kg
Lead SW6010B 1 0.10 3.00 4.92 mg/Kg
Nickel SW6010B 1 0.50 5.00 41.3 mg/Kg
Vanadium SW6010B 1 0.10 5.00 72.1 mg/Kg
Zinc SW6010B 1 0.30 5.00 52.8 mg/Kg
TPH as Diesel SW8015B 1 0.85 2.0 2.04 mg/Kg
Total Page Count: 33 Page 3 of 33 678
CC 07-07-2022
678 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 11:58
3974
Alan Enterprise
B1-25'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-003A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116592
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/13/19 12:50:00PM
Prep Analyst: EDORR
Prep Method: 3546_TPH
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH as Diesel SW8015B 4 mg/Kg 442459 3.4 8.0 16.2 x 09/16/19 15:54 MK TPH as Motor Oil SW8015B 4 mg/Kg 442459 13 40 141 09/16/19 15:54 MK Acceptance Limits
Pentacosane (S) SW8015B 59 - 129 72.6 % 09/16/19 15:54 MK 442459 NOTE: x-not typical of Diesel ref. std: peaks within Diesel range quantified as diesel Total Page Count: 33 Page 4 of 33 679
CC 07-07-2022
679 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 11:58
3974
Alan Enterprise
B1-25'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-003A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116690
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035GRO
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH(Gasoline) 8260TPH 1 ug/Kg 442441 43 100 ND 09/16/19 17:03 BP (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 8260TPH 43.9 - 127 104 % 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 5 of 33 680
CC 07-07-2022
680 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 11:58
3974
Alan Enterprise
B1-25'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-003A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116658
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
MTBE SW8260B 1 ug/Kg 442441 2.3 10 ND 09/16/19 17:03 BP Benzene SW8260B 1 2.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 Toluene SW8260B 1 1.8 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 Ethylbenzene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 m,p-Xylene SW8260B 1 3.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 o-Xylene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 (S) Dibromofluoromethane SW8260B 59.8 - 148 106 % 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 (S) Toluene-d8 SW8260B 55.2 - 133 94.7 % 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene SW8260B 55.8 - 141 84.6 % 09/16/19 17:03 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 6 of 33 681
CC 07-07-2022
681 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 12:10
3974
Alan Enterprise
B1-35'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-004A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116592
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/13/19 12:50:00PM
Prep Analyst: EDORR
Prep Method: 3546_TPH
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH as Diesel SW8015B 1 mg/Kg 442459 0.85 2.0 ND 09/14/19 13:56 MK TPH as Motor Oil SW8015B 1 mg/Kg 442459 3.2 10 ND 09/14/19 13:56 MK Acceptance Limits
Pentacosane (S) SW8015B 59 - 129 67.1 % 442459 09/14/19 13:56 MK Total Page Count: 33 Page 7 of 33 682
CC 07-07-2022
682 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 12:10
3974
Alan Enterprise
B1-35'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-004A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116690
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035GRO
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH(Gasoline) 8260TPH 1 ug/Kg 442441 43 100 ND 09/16/19 17:32 BP (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 8260TPH 43.9 - 127 107 % 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 8 of 33 683
CC 07-07-2022
683 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 12:10
3974
Alan Enterprise
B1-35'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-004A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116658
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
MTBE SW8260B 1 ug/Kg 442441 2.3 10 ND 09/16/19 17:32 BP Benzene SW8260B 1 2.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 Toluene SW8260B 1 1.8 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 Ethylbenzene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 m,p-Xylene SW8260B 1 3.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 o-Xylene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 (S) Dibromofluoromethane SW8260B 59.8 - 148 106 % 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 (S) Toluene-d8 SW8260B 55.2 - 133 95.4 % 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene SW8260B 55.8 - 141 84.7 % 09/16/19 17:32 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 9 of 33 684
CC 07-07-2022
684 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 12:30
3974
Alan Enterprise
B2-25'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-007A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116592
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/13/19 12:50:00PM
Prep Analyst: EDORR
Prep Method: 3546_TPH
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH as Diesel SW8015B 1 mg/Kg 442459 0.85 2.0 ND 09/14/19 14:20 MK TPH as Motor Oil SW8015B 1 mg/Kg 442459 3.2 10 ND 09/14/19 14:20 MK Acceptance Limits
Pentacosane (S) SW8015B 59 - 129 63.8 % 442459 09/14/19 14:20 MK Total Page Count: 33 Page 10 of 33 685
CC 07-07-2022
685 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 12:30
3974
Alan Enterprise
B2-25'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-007A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116690
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035GRO
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH(Gasoline) 8260TPH 1 ug/Kg 442441 43 100 ND 09/16/19 18:00 BP (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 8260TPH 43.9 - 127 102 % 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 11 of 33 686
CC 07-07-2022
686 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 12:30
3974
Alan Enterprise
B2-25'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-007A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116658
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
MTBE SW8260B 1 ug/Kg 442441 2.3 10 ND 09/16/19 18:00 BP Benzene SW8260B 1 2.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 Toluene SW8260B 1 1.8 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 Ethylbenzene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 m,p-Xylene SW8260B 1 3.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 o-Xylene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 (S) Dibromofluoromethane SW8260B 59.8 - 148 109 % 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 (S) Toluene-d8 SW8260B 55.2 - 133 94.4 % 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene SW8260B 55.8 - 141 84.9 % 09/16/19 18:00 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 12 of 33 687
CC 07-07-2022
687 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116656
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 4:15:00PM
Prep Analyst: BJAY
Prep Method: 7471BP
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
Mercury SW7471B 1 mg/Kg 442463 0.083 0.50 ND 09/17/19 10:53 BJAY Total Page Count: 33 Page 13 of 33 688
CC 07-07-2022
688 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116655
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 4:15:00PM
Prep Analyst: BJAY
Prep Method: 3050B
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
Antimony SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.050 5.00 ND 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Arsenic SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.15 1.30 2.50 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Barium SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.055 5.00 150 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Beryllium SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.055 5.00 ND 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Cadmium SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.10 5.00 ND 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Chromium SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.075 5.00 56.6 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Cobalt SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.070 5.00 14.7 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Copper SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.20 5.00 26.0 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Lead SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.10 3.00 4.92 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Molybdenum SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.050 5.00 ND 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Nickel SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.50 5.00 41.3 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Silver SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.15 5.00 ND 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Vanadium SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442461 0.10 5.00 72.1 09/17/19 13:25 PPATEL Total Page Count: 33 Page 14 of 33 689
CC 07-07-2022
689 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116655
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 4:15:00PM
Prep Analyst: BJAY
Prep Method: 3050B
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
Selenium SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442473 0.22 5.00 ND 09/17/19 16:09 PPATEL Zinc SW6010B 1 mg/Kg 442473 0.30 5.00 52.8 09/17/19 16:09 PPATEL Total Page Count: 33 Page 15 of 33 690
CC 07-07-2022
690 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116655
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 4:15:00PM
Prep Analyst: BJAY
Prep Method: 3050B
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
The results shown below are reported using their MDL.

Thallium SW6010B 10 mg/Kg 442461 5.5 50.0 ND 09/17/19 13:32 PPATEL NOTE: Diluted due to suppression of the spectral signal in undiluted run Total Page Count: 33 Page 16 of 33 691
CC 07-07-2022
691 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1117290
Prep Batch Date/Time: 10/10/19 3:50:00PM
Prep Analyst: BJAY
Prep Method: WET/3010B
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
Chromium (STLC) SW6010B 1 mg/L 443035 0.010 0.20 ND 10/10/19 20:00 PPATEL Total Page Count: 33 Page 17 of 33 692
CC 07-07-2022
692 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116553
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/12/19 2:43:00PM
Prep Analyst: EDORR
Prep Method: 3546_OCP
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
alpha-BHC SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.13 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA gamma-BHC (Lindane) SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.16 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA beta-BHC SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.32 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA delta-BHC SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.16 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Heptachlor SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.11 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Aldrin SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.20 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Heptachlor Epoxide SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.078 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA gamma-Chlordane SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.16 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA alpha-Chlordane SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.17 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA 4,4'-DDE SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.19 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Endosulfan I SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.18 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Dieldrin SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.15 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Endrin SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.19 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA 4,4'-DDD SW8081B 1 ug/Kg 442401 0.57 2.0 ND 09/13/19 15:25 LA Endosulfan II SW8081B 1 0.58 2.0 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 4,4'-DDT SW8081B 1 0.13 2.0 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Endrin Aldehyde SW8081B 1 0.15 2.0 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Methoxychlor SW8081B 1 0.20 2.0 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Endosulfan Sulfate SW8081B 1 0.12 2.0 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Endrin Ketone SW8081B 1 0.094 2.0 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Chlordane SW8081B 1 2.1 20 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Toxaphene SW8081B 1 8.5 50 ND ug/Kg 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Acceptance Limits
TCMX (S) SW8081B 48 - 125 58.5 % 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 DCBP (S) SW8081B 38 - 135 64.5 % 09/13/19 15:25 LA 442401 Total Page Count: 33 Page 18 of 33 693
CC 07-07-2022
693 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116592
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/13/19 12:50:00PM
Prep Analyst: EDORR
Prep Method: 3546_TPH
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH as Diesel SW8015B 1 mg/Kg 442459 0.85 2.0 2.04 x 09/17/19 14:48 MK TPH as Motor Oil SW8015B 1 mg/Kg 442459 3.2 10 ND 09/17/19 14:48 MK Acceptance Limits
Pentacosane (S) SW8015B 59 - 129 70.3 % 09/17/19 14:48 MK 442459 NOTE: x-not typical of Diesel ref. std: peaks within Diesel range quantified as diesel Total Page Count: 33 Page 19 of 33 694
CC 07-07-2022
694 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116690
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035GRO
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
TPH(Gasoline) 8260TPH 1 ug/Kg 442441 43 100 ND 09/16/19 18:30 BP (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 8260TPH 43.9 - 127 99.2 % 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 20 of 33 695
CC 07-07-2022
695 of 1038

SAMPLE RESULTS
Report prepared for:

Date Reported: 09/18/19
Date/Time Received: 09/11/19, 1:10 pm
Achievement Engineering Corp
Arash Firouzjaei
Client Sample ID:

Date/Time Sampled:

Project Number:

Project Name/Location:
09/10/19 / 14:00
3974
Alan Enterprise
B3-5'
Sample Matrix: Soil
Lab Sample ID: 1909078-008A
SDG:

Prep Batch ID: 1116658
Prep Batch Date/Time: 9/16/19 9:43:00AM
Prep Analyst: BPATEL
Prep Method: 5035
Parameters:

Analytical
Q Units Batch
DF MDL PQL Results
Analyzed
Analysis
Method Time By
MTBE SW8260B 1 ug/Kg 442441 2.3 10 ND 09/16/19 18:30 BP Benzene SW8260B 1 2.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 Toluene SW8260B 1 1.8 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 Ethylbenzene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 m,p-Xylene SW8260B 1 3.2 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 o-Xylene SW8260B 1 1.7 10 ND ug/Kg 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 (S) Dibromofluoromethane SW8260B 59.8 - 148 107 % 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 (S) Toluene-d8 SW8260B 55.2 - 133 98.1 % 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene SW8260B 55.8 - 141 88.4 % 09/16/19 18:30 BP 442441 Total Page Count: 33 Page 21 of 33 696
CC 07-07-2022
696 of 1038
MB Summary Report
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW8081B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/12/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
ug/Kg
3546_OCP 1116553
Soil 442401
1909078
9/13/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
alpha-BHC ND 0.13 2.0
gamma-BHC (Lindane) 0.16 2.0 ND
beta-BHC ND 0.32 2.0
delta-BHC ND 0.16 2.0
Heptachlor 0.11 2.0 ND
Aldrin 0.20 2.0 ND
Heptachlor Epoxide 0.078 2.0 ND
gamma-Chlordane ND 0.16 2.0
alpha-Chlordane ND 0.17 2.0
4,4'-DDE 0.19 2.0 ND
Endosulfan I 0.18 2.0 ND
Dieldrin 0.15 2.0 ND
Endrin 0.19 2.0 ND
4,4'-DDD 0.57 2.0 ND
Endosulfan II 0.58 2.0 ND
4,4'-DDT 0.13 2.0 ND
Endrin Aldehyde 0.15 2.0 ND
Methoxychlor ND 0.20 2.0
Endosulfan Sulfate 0.12 2.0 ND
Endrin Ketone 0.094 2.0 ND
Chlordane ND 2.1 20
Toxaphene ND 8.5 50
TCMX (S) 89.1
DCBP (S) 100
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW8015B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/13/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
mg/Kg
3546_TPH 1116592
Soil 442459
1909078
9/14/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
TPH as Diesel 0.85 2.0 0.941
TPH as Motor Oil 3.2 10 ND
Pentacosane (S) 89.2
Total Page Count: 33 Page 22 of 33 697
CC 07-07-2022
697 of 1038
MB Summary Report
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW6010B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
mg/Kg
3050B 1116655
Soil 442461
1909078
9/17/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
Antimony 0.050 5.00 ND
Arsenic 0.15 1.30 ND
Barium 0.055 5.00 0.055
Beryllium 0.055 5.00 ND
Cadmium 0.10 5.00 ND
Chromium 0.075 5.00 ND
Cobalt 0.070 5.00 ND
Copper 0.20 5.00 0.99
Lead 0.10 1.30 ND
Molybdenum 0.050 5.00 0.050
Nickel 0.50 5.00 ND
Silver 0.15 5.00 ND
Thallium 0.55 5.00 ND
Vanadium 0.10 5.00 ND
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW7471B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
mg/Kg
7471BP 1116656
Soil 442463
1909078
9/17/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
Mercury 0.083 0.50 ND
Total Page Count: 33 Page 23 of 33 698
CC 07-07-2022
698 of 1038
MB Summary Report
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW8260B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
ug/Kg
5035 1116658
Soil 442441
1909078
9/16/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
Dichlorodifluoromethane ND 1.2 10
Chloromethane ND 1.8 10
Vinyl Chloride 2.0 10 ND
Bromomethane ND 2.7 10
Chloroethane ND 3.0 10
Trichlorofluoromethane ND 2.1 10
1,1-Dichloroethene ND 2.0 10
Freon 113 1.9 10 ND
Methylene Chloride 7.1 10 ND
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.1 10
MTBE ND 2.3 10
TBA 12 50 ND
Diisopropyl ether 2.3 10 ND
1,1-Dichloroethane ND 2.2 10
Ethyl tert-Butyl ether 2.3 10 ND
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene ND 2.2 10
2,2-Dichloropropane ND 1.9 10
Bromochloromethane ND 2.3 10
Chloroform ND 2.4 10
Carbon Tetrachloride 2.1 10 ND
1,1,1-Trichloroethane ND 2.1 10
1,1-Dichloropropene ND 2.0 10
Benzene ND 2.2 10
TAME ND 2.3 10
1,2-Dichloroethane ND 2.3 10
Trichloroethylene ND 1.8 10
Dibromomethane ND 1.8 10
1,2-Dichloropropane ND 1.9 10
Bromodichloromethane ND 2.0 10
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.6 10
Toluene ND 1.8 10
Tetrachloroethylene ND 1.7 10
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene ND 1.6 10
1,1,2-Trichloroethane ND 1.8 10
Dibromochloromethane ND 1.9 10
1,3-Dichloropropane ND 1.8 10
1,2-Dibromoethane ND 1.8 10
Chlorobenzene ND 1.8 10
Ethylbenzene 1.7 10 ND
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 1.9 10
m,p-Xylene ND 3.2 10
Total Page Count: 33 Page 24 of 33 699
CC 07-07-2022
699 of 1038
MB Summary Report
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW8260B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
ug/Kg
5035 1116658
Soil 442441
1909078
9/16/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
o-Xylene ND 1.7 10
Styrene ND 1.6 10
Bromoform ND 1.7 10
Isopropyl Benzene 1.6 10 ND
n-Propylbenzene ND 1.6 10
Bromobenzene ND 1.8 10
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane ND 1.9 10
2-Chlorotoluene ND 1.8 10
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene ND 1.6 10
1,2,3-Trichloropropane ND 1.9 10
4-Chlorotoluene ND 1.6 10
tert-Butylbenzene ND 1.6 10
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene ND 1.4 10
sec-Butyl Benzene 1.6 10 ND
p-Isopropyltoluene ND 1.5 10
1,3-Dichlorobenzene ND 1.7 10
1,4-Dichlorobenzene ND 1.7 10
n-Butylbenzene ND 1.5 10
1,2-Dichlorobenzene ND 1.8 10
1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane 3.7 1.8 10
Hexachlorobutadiene 2.8 1.4 10
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene ND 1.5 10
Naphthalene 4.0 1.7 10
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene ND 1.7 10
2-Butanone 2.9 2.3 10
4-Methyl-2-Pentanone ND 2.0 10
(S) Dibromofluoromethane 101
(S) Toluene-d8 93.8
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 82.8
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW8260B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
mg/Kg
5035GRO 1116690
Soil 442441
1909078
9/16/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
TPH(Gasoline) 0.089 0.043 0.10
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 112
Total Page Count: 33 Page 25 of 33 700
CC 07-07-2022
700 of 1038
MB Summary Report
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical SW6010B
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
10/10/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
mg/L
WET/3010B 1117290
Soil 443035
1909078
10/10/2019
Parameters
Method
Blank
Conc.

MDL PQL
Lab
Qualifier
Chromium (STLC) 0.010 0.20 0.033
Lead (STLC) 0.050 0.20 0.054
Nickel (STLC) 0.010 0.20 ND
Total Page Count: 33 Page 26 of 33 701
CC 07-07-2022
701 of 1038
LCS/LCSD Summary Report
Raw values are used in quality control assessment.

Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/12/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
3546_OCP 1116553
SW8081B 9/13/2019 442401
ug/Kg
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
gamma-BHC (Lindane) 0.16 2.0 ND 40 94.1 93.7 0.532 25 - 135 30 Heptachlor 0.11 2.0 ND 40 99.4 97.8 1.77 40 - 130 30
Aldrin 0.20 2.0 ND 40 94.2 93.1 1.07 25 - 140 30
Dieldrin 0.15 2.0 ND 40 93.0 91.7 1.35 60 - 130 30
Endrin 0.19 2.0 ND 40 98.6 95.7 3.08 55 - 135 30
4,4'-DDT 0.13 2.0 ND 40 102 101 1.72 45 - 140 30
TCMX (S) 100 94.2 88.5 48 - 125
DCBP (S) 100 108 98.5 38 - 135
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/13/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
3546_TPH 1116592
SW8015B 9/14/2019 442459
mg/Kg
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
TPH as Diesel 0.85 2.0 0.941 25.0 75.0 70.0 7.16 52 - 115 30 Pentacosane (S) 200 81.1 77.2 59 - 129
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
3050B 1116655
SW6010B 9/17/2019 442461
mg/Kg
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
Antimony 0.050 5.00 ND 50 87.8 91.4 4.02 80 - 120 30
Arsenic 0.15 1.30 ND 50 88.3 93.3 5.51 80 - 120 30
Barium 0.055 5.00 0.055 50 94.1 99.1 4.97 80 - 120 30
Beryllium 0.055 5.00 ND 50 90.8 93.6 3.04 80 - 120 30
Cadmium 0.10 5.00 ND 50 90.4 94.6 4.54 80 - 120 30
Chromium 0.075 5.00 ND 50 92.4 97.2 5.06 80 - 120 30
Cobalt 0.070 5.00 ND 50 88.6 92.1 3.98 80 - 120 30
Copper 0.20 5.00 0.99 50 100 105 4.10 80 - 120 30
Lead 0.10 3.00 ND 50 87.9 92.9 5.54 80 - 120 30
Molybdenum 0.050 5.00 0.050 50 94.7 98.5 3.93 80 - 120 30 Nickel 0.50 5.00 ND 50 87.9 91.6 4.01 80 - 120 30
Silver 0.15 5.00 ND 50 91.7 94.1 2.37 80 - 120 30
Thallium 0.20 5.00 ND 50 92.2 97.6 5.69 80 - 120 30
Vanadium 0.10 5.00 ND 50 96.2 101 4.67 80 - 120 30
Total Page Count: 33 Page 27 of 33 702
CC 07-07-2022
702 of 1038
LCS/LCSD Summary Report
Raw values are used in quality control assessment.

Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
7471BP 1116656
SW7471B 9/17/2019 442463
mg/Kg
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
Mercury 0.047 0.50 ND 1.25 86.4 80.7 6.70 80 - 120 30
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
5035 1116658
SW8260B 9/16/2019 442441
ug/Kg
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
1,1-Dichloroethene 81.5 81.5 2.0 10 ND 50.0 0.000 53.7 - 139 30 Benzene 2.2 10 ND 50.0 98.9 98.7 0.202 66.5 - 135 30
Trichloroethylene 104 103 1.8 10 ND 50.0 1.16 57.5 - 150 30 Toluene 1.8 10 ND 50.0 101 103 1.96 56.8 - 134 30
Chlorobenzene 101 103 1.8 10 ND 50.0 1.18 57.4 - 134 30 (S) Dibromofluoromethane 50.0 108 105 59.8 - 148
(S) Toluene-d8 50.0 100 99.0 55.2 - 133
(S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50.0 96.7 95.7 55.8 - 141
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
09/16/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:
5035GRO 1116690
SW8260B 9/16/2019 442441
mg/Kg
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
TPH(Gasoline) 106 118 0.043 0.10 0.089 1 10.7 48.2 - 132 30 (S) 4-Bromofluorobenzene 50 125 104 43.9 - 127
Work Order:

Matrix:

Units:

Prep Method:

Analytical
Method:

Prep Date:

Analyzed Date:
10/10/19 Prep Batch:

Analytical
Batch:

WET/3010B 1117290
SW6010B 10/10/2019 443035
mg/L
1909078
Soil
Parameters MDL PQL
Method
Blank
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

LCS %
Recovery
LCSD %
Recovery

LCS/LCSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
Chromium (STLC) 0.010 0.20 0.033 10 88.5 88.8 0.338 80 - 120 20 Lead (STLC) 0.050 0.20 0.054 10 95.7 96.1 0.417 80 - 120 20 Nickel (STLC) 0.010 0.20 ND 10 83.3 83.5 0.240 80 - 120 20 Total Page Count: 33 Page 28 of 33 703
CC 07-07-2022
703 of 1038
MS/MSD Summary Report
Raw values are used in quality control assessment.

Work Order: 1909078
Analyzed Date:

Prep Date:

Matrix:

Prep Method: 09/13/19
Spiked Sample: 1909078-008A
Analytical
Method:

Prep Batch:

Units:

Analytical
Batch:
3546_TPH 1116592
Soil 442459
mg/Kg
SW8015B 9/17/2019
Parameters MDL PQL Sample
Conc.

Spike
Conc.

MS %
Recovery
MSD %
Recovery
MS/MSD
% RPD
%
Recovery
Limits
% RPD
Limits
Lab
Qualifier
TPH as Diesel 0.850 2.00 ND 25.0 71.3 75.4 9.32 52 - 115 30 Pentacosane (S) 200 86.0 84.5 59 - 129
Total Page Count: 33 Page 29 of 33 704
CC 07-07-2022
704 of 1038
Laboratory Qualifiers and Definitions
Method Detection Limit (MDL) - the minimum concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with a 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero
Matrix Spike (MS/MSD) - Client sample spiked with identical concentrations of target analyte (s). The spiking occurs prior to the sample preparation and analysis. They are used to document the precision and bias of a method in a given sample matrix.

Matrix - the component or substrate that contains the analyte of interest (e.g., - groundwater, sediment, soil, waste water, etc) Laboratory Control Sample (LCS ad LCSD) - A known matrix spiked with compounds representative of the target analyte(s). This is used to document laboratory performance.

Duplicate - a field sample and/or laboratory QC sample prepared in duplicate following all of the same processes and procedures used on the original sample (sample duplicate, LCSD, MSD)
Blank (Method/Preparation Blank) -MB/PB - An analyte-free matrix to which all reagents are added in the same volumes/proportions as used in sample processing. The method blank is used to document contamination resulting from the analytical process.

Practical Quantitation Limit/Reporting Limit/Limit of Quantitation (PQL/RL/LOQ) - a laboratory determined value at 2 to 5 times above the MDL that can be reproduced in a manner that results in a 99% confidence level that the result is both accurate and precise. PQLs/RLs/LODs reflect all preparation factors and/or dilution factors that have been applied to the sample during the preparation and/or analytical processes.

Precision (%RPD) - The agreement among a set of replicate/duplicate measurements without regard to known value of the replicates Surrogate (S) or (Surr) - An organic compound which is similar to the target analyte(s) in chemical composition and behavior in the analytical process, but which is not normally found in environmental samples. Surrogates are used in most organic analysis to demonstrate matrix compatibility with the chosen method of analysis
Tentatively Identified Compound (TIC) - A compound not contained within the analytical calibration standards but present in the GCMS library of defined compounds. When the library is searched for an unknown compound, it can frequently give a tentative identification to the compound based on retention time and primary and secondary ion match. TICs are reported as estimates and are candidates for further investigation.

Units: the unit of measure used to express the reported result - mg/L and mg/Kg (equivalent to PPM - parts per million in liquid and solid), ug/L and ug/Kg (equivalent to PPB - parts per billion in liquid and solid), ug/m3, mg/m3, ppbv and ppmv (all units of measure for reporting concentrations in air), % ( equivalent to 10000 ppm or 1,000,000 ppb), ug/Wipe ( concentration found on the surface of a single Wipe usually taken over a 100cm2 surface) B - Indicates when the analyte is found in the associated method or preparation blank D - Surrogate is not recoverable due to the necessary dilution of the sample E - Indicates the reportable value is outside of the calibration range of the instrument but within the linear range of the instrument (unless otherwise noted) Values reported with an E qualifier should be considered as estimated.

H- Indicates that the recommended holding time for the analyte or compound has been exceeded J- Indicates a value between the method MDL and PQL and that the reported concentration should be considered as estimated rather the quantitative NA - Not Analyzed
N/A - Not Applicable
ND - Not Detected at a concentration greater than the PQL/RL or, if reported to the MDL, at greater than the MDL.

NR - Not recoverable - a matrix spike concentration is not recoverable due to a concentration within the original sample that is greater than four times the spike concentration added
R- The % RPD between a duplicate set of samples is outside of the absolute values established by laboratory control charts S- Spike recovery is outside of established method and/or laboratory control limits. Further explanation of the use of this qualifier should be included within a case narrative
X -Used to indicate that a value based on pattern identification is within the pattern range but not typical of the pattern found in standards.

Further explanation may or may not be provided within the sample footnote and/or the case narrative.

DEFINITIONS:

Accuracy/Bias (% Recovery) - The closeness of agreement between an observed value and an accepted reference value.

LABORATORY QUALIFIERS:

Total Page Count: 33 Page 30 of 33 705
CC 07-07-2022
705 of 1038
Sample Receipt Checklist
Client Name: Achievement Engineering Corp
Project Name: Alan Enterprise
Work Order No.: 1909078
Date and Time Received: 9/11/2019 1:10:00PM
Received By: Helena Ueng
Physically Logged By: Helena Ueng
Carrier Name: Client Drop Off
Checklist Completed By: Helena Ueng
Samples transported on ice
Comments:

Chain of Custody (COC) Information
Shipping Container/Cooler In Good Condition?
Custody seals intact on shipping container/cooler?
Custody seals intact on sample bottles?
Chain of custody present?
Chain of custody signed when relinquished and received? Chain of custody agrees with sample labels?
Samples in proper container/bottle?
Sufficient sample volume for indicated test?
All samples received within holding time?
Container/Temp Blank temperature in compliance?
Water-VOA vials have zero headspace?
Water-pH acceptable upon receipt?
Temperature:

Yes
Not Present
Not Present
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No VOA vials submitted
N/A
Samples containers intact? Yes
°C
Sample Receipt Information
Sample Preservation and Hold Time (HT) Information
pH Checked by: N/A pH Adjusted by: N/A

13.0 Total Page Count: 33 Page 31 of 33 706
CC 07-07-2022
706 of 1038
Login Summary Report
Report Due Date:
9/11/2019
TL6309 Achievement Engineering Corp II
Alan Enterprise
3974
9/18/2019
TAT Requested:

Date Received:

Time Received:

QC Level:

Project Name:

Project # :

Comments:

Client ID:
5+ day:5
1:10 pm
Work Order # : 1909078
Requested Subbed
Tests
Test
On Hold
Sample
On Hold
Scheduled
Disposal
Collection Matrix
Date/Time
Client
Sample ID
WO Sample ID
1909078-001A Soil 03/08/20 B1-5' 09/10/19 10:38
Hold Samples
1909078-002A B1-15' 09/10/19 11:14 Soil 03/08/20
Hold Samples
1909078-003A B1-25' 09/10/19 11:58 Soil 03/08/20
TPHDO_S_8015(Mod
)
VOC_S_MBTEX
VOC_S_GRO
1909078-004A B1-35' 09/10/19 12:10 Soil 03/08/20
TPHDO_S_8015(Mod
)
VOC_S_MBTEX
VOC_S_GRO
1909078-005A B2-5' 09/10/19 11:30 Soil 03/08/20
Hold Samples
1909078-006A B2-15' 09/10/19 13:00 Soil 03/08/20
Hold Samples
1909078-007A B2-25' 09/10/19 12:30 Soil 03/08/20
TPHDO_S_8015(Mod
)
VOC_S_MBTEX
VOC_S_GRO
1909078-008A B3-5' 09/10/19 14:00 Soil 03/08/20
TPHDO_S_8015(Mod
)
Met_S_CAM17STLC
Pest_S_8081OCP
Met_S_6010B CAM17
Hg_S_7471B
VOC_S_MBTEX
VOC_S_GRO
1909078-009A B3-10' 09/10/19 15:00 Soil 03/08/20
Hold Samples
Total Page Count: 33 Page 32 of 33 707
CC 07-07-2022
707 of 1038
Total Page Count: 33 Page 33 of 33 708
CC 07-07-2022
708 of 1038
709
CC 07-07-2022
709 of 1038
........................................................................................................................

A PPENDIX F :

N OISE D ATA
710
CC 07-07-2022
710 of 1038
........................................................................................................................ 711 CC 07-07-2022
711 of 1038
Fundamentals of Noise
NOISE
Noise is most often defined as unwanted sound; whether it is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable. Although sound can be easily measured, the perception of noise and the physical response to sound complicate the analysis of its impact on people. People judge the relative magnitude of sound sensation in subjective terms such as “noisiness” or “loudness.”
Noise Descriptors
The following are brief definitions of terminology used in this chapter:
 Sound. A disturbance created by a vibrating object, which, when transmitted by pressure waves through a medium such as air, is capable of being detected by a receiving mechanism, such as the human ear or a microphone.
 Noise. Sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable.  Decibel (dB). A unitless measure of sound, expressed on a logarithmic scale and with respect to a defined reference sound pressure. The standard reference pressure is 20 micropascals (20 µPa).  A-Weighted Decibel (dBA). An overall frequency-weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear.
 Equivalent Continuous Noise Level (Leq); also called the Energy-Equivalent Noise Level. The value of an equivalent, steady sound level which, in a stated time period (often over an hour) and at a stated location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound. Thus, the Leq metric is a single numerical value that represents the equivalent amount of variable sound energy received by a receptor over the specified duration.
 Statistical Sound Level (Ln). The sound level that is exceeded “n” percent of time during a given sample period. For example, the L50 level is the statistical indicator of the time-varying noise signal that is exceeded 50 percent of the time (during each sampling period); that is, half of the sampling time, the changing noise levels are above this value and half of the time they are below it. This is called the “median sound level.” The L10 level, likewise, is the value that is exceeded 10 percent of the time (i.e., near the maximum) and this is often known as the “intrusive sound level.” The L90 is the sound level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is often considered the “effective background level” or “residual noise level.”
 Maximum Sound Level (Lmax). The highest RMS sound level measured during the measurement period.
 Root Mean Square Sound Level (RMS). The square root of the average of the square of the sound pressure over the measurement period.
712
CC 07-07-2022
712 of 1038
 Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn or DNL). The energy-average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to the sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM.
 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 5 dB added from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and 10 dB from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. NOTE: For general community/environmental noise, CNEL and Ldn values rarely differ by more than 1 dB (with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive – that is, higher than the Ldn value). As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are interchangeable and are treated as equivalent in this assessment.
 Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). The peak rate of speed at which soil particles move (e.g., inches per second) due to ground vibration.
 Sensitive Receptor. Noise- and vibration-sensitive receptors include land uses where quiet environments are necessary for enjoyment and public health and safety. Residences, schools, motels and hotels, libraries, religious institutions, hospitals, and nursing homes are examples.

Characteristics of Sound
When an object vibrates, it radiates part of its energy in the form of a pressure wave. Sound is that pressure wave transmitted through the air. Technically, airborne sound is a rapid fluctuation or oscillation of air pressure above and below atmospheric pressure that creates sound waves.

Sound can be described in terms of amplitude (loudness), frequency (pitch), or duration (time). Loudness or amplitude is measured in dB, frequency or pitch is measured in Hertz [Hz] or cycles per second, and duration or time variations is measured in seconds or minutes.

Amplitude
Unlike linear units such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale. Because of the physical characteristics of noise transmission and perception, the relative loudness of sound does not closely match the actual amounts of sound energy. Table 1 presents the subjective effect of changes in sound pressure levels. Ambient sounds generally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Changes of 1 to 3 dB are detectable under quiet, controlled conditions, and changes of less than 1 dB are usually not discernible (even under ideal conditions). A 3 dB change in noise levels is considered the minimum change that is detectable with human hearing in outside environments. A change of 5 dB is readily discernible to most people in an exterior environment, and a 10 dB change is perceived as a doubling (or halving) of the sound.

Table 1 Noise Perceptibility
Change in dB Noise Level
± 3 dB Barely perceptible increase
± 5 dB Readily perceptible increase
± 10 dB Twice or half as loud
± 20 dB Four times or one-quarter as loud
Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013, September. Technical Noise Supplement (“TeNS”). 713
CC 07-07-2022
713 of 1038
Frequency
The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies. Sound waves below 16 Hz are not heard at all, but are “felt” more as a vibration. Similarly, though people with extremely sensitive hearing can hear sounds as high as 20,000 Hz, most people cannot hear above 15,000 Hz. In all cases, hearing acuity falls off rapidly above about 10,000 Hz and below about 200 Hz.

When describing sound and its effect on a human population, A-weighted (dBA) sound levels are typically used to approximate the response of the human ear. The A-weighted noise level has been found to correlate well with people’s judgments of the “noisiness” of different sounds and has been used for many years as a measure of community and industrial noise. Although the A-weighted scale and the energy-equivalent metric are commonly used to quantify the range of human response to individual events or general community sound levels, the degree of annoyance or other response also depends on several other perceptibility factors, including:
 Ambient (background) sound level
 General nature of the existing conditions (e.g., quiet rural or busy urban)  Difference between the magnitude of the sound event level and the ambient condition  Duration of the sound event
 Number of event occurrences and their repetitiveness
 Time of day that the event occurs
Duration
Time variation in noise exposure is typically expressed in terms of a steady-state energy level equal to the energy content of the time varying period (called Leq), or alternately, as a statistical description of the sound level that is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period. For example, the L50 noise level represents the noise level that is exceeded 50 percent of the time; half the time the noise level exceeds this level and half the time the noise level is less than this level. This level is also representative of the level that is exceeded 30 minutes in an hour. Similarly, the L2, L8 and L25 values represent the noise levels that are exceeded 2, 8, and 25 percent of the time or 1, 5, and 15 minutes per hour, respectively. These “n” values are typically used to demonstrate compliance for stationary noise sources with many cities’ noise ordinances.

Other values typically noted during a noise survey are the Lmin and Lmax. These values represent the minimum and maximum root-mean-square noise levels obtained over the measurement period, respectively.

Because community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night, state law and many local jurisdictions use an adjusted 24-hour noise descriptor called the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) or Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn). The CNEL descriptor requires that an artificial increment (or “penalty”) of 5 dBA be added to the actual noise level for the hours from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and 10 dBA for the hours from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. The Ldn descriptor uses the same methodology except that there is no artificial increment added to the hours between 7:00 PM and 10:00 PM. Both descriptors give roughly the same 24-hour level, with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive (i.e., higher). The CNEL or Ldn metrics are commonly applied to the assessment of roadway and airport-related noise sources.
714
CC 07-07-2022
714 of 1038
Sound Propagation
Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. This phenomenon is known as “spreading loss.” For a single-point source, sound levels decrease by approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the source (conservatively neglecting ground attenuation effects, air absorption factors, and barrier shielding). For example, if a backhoe at 50 feet generates 84 dBA, at 100 feet the noise level would be 79 dBA, and at 200 feet it would be 73 dBA. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by on-site operations from stationary equipment or activity at a project site. If noise is produced by a line source, such as highway traffic, the sound decreases by 3 dB for each doubling of distance over a reflective (“hard site”) surface such as concrete or asphalt. Line source noise in a relatively flat environment with ground-level absorptive vegetation decreases by an additional 1.5 dB for each doubling of distance.

Psychological and Physiological Effects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA.

Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of 75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the nervous system.

Extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA results in permanent cell damage, which is the main driver for employee hearing protection regulations in the workplace. For community environments, the ambient or background noise problem is widespread, through generally worse in urban areas than in outlying, lessdeveloped areas. Elevated ambient noise levels can result in noise interference (e.g., speech interruption/masking, sleep disturbance, disturbance of concentration) and cause annoyance. Since most people do not routinely work with decibels or A-weighted sound levels, it is often difficult to appreciate what a given sound pressure level number means. To help relate noise level values to common experience, Table 2 shows typical noise levels from familiar sources.
715
CC 07-07-2022
715 of 1038
Table 2 Typical Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise Level
(dBA) Common Indoor Activities
Onset of physical discomfort 120+
110 Rock Band (near amplification system)
Jet Flyover at 1,000 feet
100
Gas Lawn Mower at three feet
90 Diesel Truck at 50 feet, at 50 mph Food Blender at 3 feet 80 Garbage Disposal at 3 feet
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
70 Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feet
Commercial Area Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy Traffic at 300 feet 60
Large Business Office
Quiet Urban Daytime 50 Dishwasher Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Theater, Large Conference Room (background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime
30 Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (background) 20 Broadcast/Recording Studio
10 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing 0 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013, September. Technical Noise Supplement (“TeNS”).

Vibration Fundamentals
Vibration is an oscillatory motion through a solid medium in which the motion’s amplitude can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Vibration is normally associated with activities stemming from operations of railroads or vibration-intensive stationary sources, but can also be associated with construction equipment such as jackhammers, pile drivers, and hydraulic hammers. As with noise, vibration can be described by both its amplitude and frequency. Vibration displacement is the distance that a point on a surface moves away from its original static position; velocity is the instantaneous speed that a point on a surface moves; and acceleration is the rate of change of the speed. Each of these descriptors can be used to correlate vibration to human response, building damage, and acceptable equipment vibration levels. During construction, the operation of construction equipment can cause groundborne vibration. During the operational phase of a project, receptors may be subject to levels of vibration that can cause annoyance due to noise generated from vibration of a structure or items within a structure.

Vibration amplitudes are usually described in terms of either the peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (RMS) velocity. PPV is the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal and RMS is the 716
CC 07-07-2022
716 of 1038
square root of the average of the squared amplitude of the signal. PPV is more appropriate for evaluating potential building damage and RMS is typically more suitable for evaluating human response.

As with airborne sound, annoyance with vibrational energy is a subjective measure, depending on the level of activity and the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying. Persons accustomed to elevated ambient vibration levels, such as in an urban environment, may tolerate higher vibration levels. Table 3 displays the human response and the effects on buildings resulting from continuous vibration (in terms of various levels of PPV).

Table 3 Human Reaction to Typical Vibration Levels
Vibration Level,
PPV (in/sec) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings

0.006–0.019 Threshold of perception, possibility of intrusion Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of any type

0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible Recommended upper level of vibration to which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected

0.10 Level at which continuous vibration begins to annoy people
Virtually no risk of “architectural” (i.e. not structural) damage to normal buildings

0.20 Vibrations annoying to people in buildings
Threshold at which there is a risk to “architectural”
damage to normal dwelling – houses with plastered
walls and ceilings

0.4–0.6
Vibrations considered unpleasant by people
subjected to continuous vibrations and unacceptable
to some people walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than normally expected
from traffic, but would cause “architectural” damage
and possibly minor structural damage
Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013, September. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. 717
CC 07-07-2022
717 of 1038
LOCAL REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS
718
CC 07-07-2022
718 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%*
+,-./ 012345622375843923:56;3;<<=9=>;:5434?9;3@A5B2823:64=8<26C8;3D53D ?8491=9;3745<26:49;E4864=8<266=<1;6?822F;@:8;G<H012A2D822:4 IJKLJMNKOPQPLNRPOSMSMMNTSMLPUPVPMUONMSWSXKPYTNZZSLYNXOKML[\UKM] MNKOP[PWP[^YKRPNZUST^QSL_]XN\MUON\MUO^SMUO\XXN\MUKM][SMU\OP` a,bbc+-de+,-./fc+ghb/+dhi. jJPYJXPPP[PRPMYONZLNRR\MKYTMNKOPSXPMNKOP[PWP[^MNKOPOVPLYX\R^SMU WSXKSYKNMKMMNKOP[PWP[IKYJYKRP`kNKOP[PWP[KORPSO\XPUKMUPLKQP[OlUmn`kNKOP 56<49o462A4?7;854=6?82p=23<526F5:153;345626o2<:8=9:1;:A2q32:12 LJSXSLYPXNZYJPMNKOP`rKMLPJ\RSMJPSXKM]KORNXPOPMOKYKWPYNYJPJK]JPX OVPPLJZXPs\PMLKPO^YJPtuIPK]JYPUZXPs\PMLTMPYINX_KOSVV[KPU^KMSLLNXUSMLP IKYJMSYKNMS[SMUKMYPXMSYKNMS[OYSMUSXUO^YNSUv\OYYJPRPSO\XPUMNKOP[PWP[YN RNXPL[NOP[TXP[SYPYNJ\RSMVPXLPVYKNMNZ[N\UMPOO` w45622375843923:61;72A5B2823:<1;8;<:2856:5<6:1;:7;8@F5:1A=8;:543 SMUYKRPNZUSTxZNXKMOYSMLPSZXPPISTRSTPRKYSZSKX[TLNMOYSMYMNKOP [PWP[ZNX[NM]VPXKNUOIJK[PSMSKXVNXYRSTPRKYRSMTOJNXYuYPXRJK]J[PWP[ MNKOPPWPMYOV\MLY\SYPUQTPyYPMUPUVPXKNUONZs\KPY`jNVXNWKUPSOYSMUSXU RPSO\XPZNXLNRR\MKYTMNKOPPyVNO\XPYJSYYS_POKMYNSLLN\MYYJPYKRPuWSXTKM] LJSXSLYPXKOYKLO^YJPrYSYPNZzS[KZNXMKSSUNVYPUYJPzNRR\MKYTkNKOP{s\KWS[PMY |272>}~w|;6:126:;3A;8A92:85<H012~w|56;14=82328D@;728;D2 RPYXKLYJSYVPMS[KPOPWPMKM]SMUMK]JYYKRPMNKOP^SMUVXNWKUPOS\MKZNXR RPSO\XPZNXYKRPuWSXTKM]MNKOPPMWKXNMRPMYO`

. 719
CC 07-07-2022
719 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%*
+,-.//+0-1,+2/+3 456789:667;9<87=67>?@7A676<@BBCD6E9;9E6E97>8>F8?@>6A8<96:G HIJKLMNIHJHONKPIQRJHQSJKSKNKPHIJKLMNIHJHONKIQRJHQSKNOLQTUIJVWKNOLQOLHXQ YIQJHQLHWNKHIOZ[HNIHNKNOLQMNRR[HONKOK\[MQIHOKNJKSNKQN]HXQ^NLHSOVW[RH HNWNKHINRHXIN[YXRNWJRQ_NIHTU`N^JaNI]IQQ`JbLcdKHQILHJHQefgJKShOYX`Jb fijJKS]N[I^JaNIWNIIOSNILckHQlQKL\IQQmnN[RQlJISopQqKrJnN[RQlJISo s8=6:>6@Et8@Eu@7Ev88>59BBw8xB6;@<Ey?<8::zx{6<>978|456:6<8@EF@C: @<6x>9B9}6E78>87BCDCB8?@B<6:9E67>:@7E6={B8C66:uDx>@B:8DC?8==x>6<: >8E6:>97@>987:D6C87Ezx{6<>978|s6@;C~Ex>C><x?97A8{6<@>987:>8@7E<8= >56s@7:876<=@767>6z6=67>B@7>@7E>6;67:z<66x@<<CB8?@>6E97>56 F6:>6<788>59BB:76@<>6;67:z<66w8xB6;@<E@7Ev88>59BBw8xB6;@<E@<6@B:8 JLOYKOWJKHHIJKLMNIHJHONKPIQRJHQSKNOLQWNKHIOZ[HNIT zx{6<>978<6?69;6::8=6@9<?<@>789:6<8=@?9B9>96:F9>597>56<6A98797?BxE97A kJK NLQdKHQIKJHONKJRqOIMNIHoN_QHHQSQIJRqOIQRSJKSJRNqRHNqOIMNIH XN`QlQIoHXQ\[MQIHOKNWOHbRO^OHSNQLKNH]JRR`OHXOKHXQOSQKHOQSKNOLQWNKHN[IL 8@7C@9<{8<>|76<@9B<8@EB976{@::6:>5<8xA5>5687>@9:>@769A5D8<588E @7E?8776?>:F9>5>56s@7:876<=@767>6z6=67>B@7>|459:<69A5><@9BF@C 8{6<@>6:@>;6<CB8F<6x67?96:uF9>5@{{<89=@>6BC>5<66><@97><9{:976@?5 E9<6?>987{6<F66ux:x@BBCEx<97A>56E@C>9=68<6@<BC6;6797A| 87~><@7:{8<>@>987789:6;@<96:<8=:>@>987@<C6x9{=67>6|A|u@9<?87E9>98797A x79>:y>8?87:><x?>987@?>9;9>C|t6AxB@>987>8=979=9}66?6::9;6789:6<8=787~ ><@7:{8<>@>987:8x<?6:97?BxE6:?8={B9@7?6F9>5>56z9>C:789:6:>@7E@<E:>5@> B9=9>?6<>@97789:6~A676<@>97A@?>9;9>CEx<97A6;6797A@7E6@<BC=8<797AuF567 J^ZOQKHKNOLQRQlQRLHQKSHNZQRN`QITqSlJKWQ^QKHLOKHQWXKNRNYbHN^[Q :8x7E@B:8<6Ex?6789:6<8=?87:><x?>9876x9{=67>@7E:>@>987@<C6x9{=67> :x?5@:?8={<6::8<:@7EA676<@>8<:| .720
CC 07-07-2022
720 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%*
+,-./012345,6787+769 :;<=>?<@ABCDE>CBFB?GH=DI<J:BAH<KLJD>AHBC<MA;<NGOBN>NCDBM<H<P<HMDC @<F<BPBCQ?@D?<@AB<MRGM<I>?DCHGCI>M<AS?<MTUVWXYZ[0\]^_`GCI>M<I<FBa MBDCMGCIA;<I<P<HD?N<CA@<PB<b?@DF<MM?HGSGHG@Q<@DH<BCNBCBNBcBCQCDBM< BN?GFAMDCM<CMBABP<HGCI>M<M_dDBM<FDN?GABRBHBASNGSR<GF;B<P<IRSGPDBIBCQ efghijkeliminjimoljelmphkmqrsgskqtkjgmeeiimgkmiefgukmqlmjiuviukelmp wrxguskmqmilsgjimeuihegjfmlyrgslmjhrqlmpsgewkjzs{hkmqsjkvlmp{wrlhqlmp A@GCMBABDCMJMBA<I<MBQCJGCIR>BHIBCQFDCMA@>FABDCA<F;CB|><M_}<H<FABDCD~A;< G??@D?@BGA<CDBM<FDCA@DHA<F;CB|><bBHHPG@SI<?<CIBCQDCA;<H<P<HD~CDBM<A;GA C<<IMADR<@<I>F<IGMb<HHGMA;<HDFGABDCGCIBCA<CI<IHGCI>M<_ [0\ 721
CC 07-07-2022
721 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%*
:;/<=45+;15>,92 +,--./0123,045678,4.95 ?@ABCDEFG@HAIJ KKLMNOPQRSTU VWXYZW[\Y]^_`a^\Yb]cY^d ef][XYW[\ghZiY[i j`h\W^Xklh\W^Xm nophh^XkgYqf]fYWXkrpafopWXk lhXsY\]^XktafXY[ilhcWX uaZY\hfYacXkrh[oWf\l]^^Xk ucspY\pW]\WfX nshf\XufW[]kva\Zhhf nsWo\]\hfnshf\X w^]difha[ZXk tWYipqhfphhZw]fxX yh^zrhafXWXkVYZY[in\]q^WXk {]\WfVWofW]\Yh[krWcW\WfYWX vz|oW}aY^ZY[iXkrhccWfoY]^ ][ZwfhzWXXYh[]^rW[\WfX ~[ZaX\fY]^k`][az]o\afY[ik \Y^Y\YWXkuifYoa^\afW VWXYZW[\Y]^_ghW[XY\d jnY[i^Wb]cY^dkas^Wk `hqY^WlhcWXm thfc]^^duooWs\]q^W nsWoY|WZ^][ZaXWYXX]\YXz]o\hfdk q]XWZash[\pW]XXacs\Yh[\p]\][d qaY^ZY[iXY[h^WZ]fWhz[hfc]^ oh[W[\Yh[]^oh[X\fao\Yh[kY\pha\ ][dXsWoY]^[hYXWY[Xa^]\Yh[ fWaYfWcW[\X rh[ZY\Yh[]^^duooWs\]q^W tWoh[X\fao\Yh[hfZWW^hscW[\ Xpha^ZqWa[ZWf\]xW[h[^d]z\Wf] ZW\]Y^WZ][]^dXYXhz\pW[hYXW fWZao\Yh[fWaYfWcW[\XYXc]ZW][Z [WWZWZ[hYXWfWZao\Yh[zW]\afWX Y[o^aZWZY[\pWZWXYi[ rh[W[\Yh[]^ oh[X\fao\Yh[kqa\Y\po^hXWZY[ZhX ][ZzfWXp]YfXass^dXdX\WcXhf]Yf oh[ZY\Yh[Y[iY^^[hfc]^^dXaz|oW thfc]^^d[]ooWs\]q^W tWoh[X\fao\Yh[hfZWW^hscW[\ Xpha^ZiW[Wf]^^dqWZYXohaf]iWZ ~z [Woh[X\fao\Yh[hfZWW^hscW[\ ZhWXsfhoWWZk]ZW\]Y^WZ][]^dXYXhz \pW[hYXWfWZao\Yh[fWaYfWcW[\X caX\qWc]ZW][Z[WWZWZ[hYXW Y[Xa^]\Yh[zW]\afWXY[o^aZWZY[\pW ZWXYi[ r^W]f^d[]ooWs\]q^W tWoh[X\fao\Yh[hfZWW^hscW[\ Xpha^ZiW[Wf]^^d[h\qWa[ZWf\]xW[

¡ ¢£¤ ¢ ¥ ¤ ¦§¨©722
CC 07-07-2022
722 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%* +,,-./01,23425
6789:;<=>?@A7<;7>B;?=C?B;D:E@F;;:@:9EC=>@?G<@H7I=J;8>=FD97=>B;?=>KF HCF7=@;?79<;:9LE>M7CK;=FC?B79::@<==J;M@DD9?>=FA7J>GJN9CE>=F@KE>K;O P??@QC=>Q;7>=;B;7>G?C?BM@?7=<9M=>@?=;MJ?>N9;7C<;?;;B;B=@<;B9M;?@>7; >?B;Q;E@:D;?=7?;C<DCR@<M@<<>B@<7C?BHJ;<;97;7C<;D>S;B=@;?79<; M@D:C=>L>E>=FOT><;:<@=;M=>@?C?B:9LE>M7CK;=F7J@9EBL;;?JC?M;B>?CDC??;< UVWUXYZ[\]^_WV\`VabWc\UdZe_^Y[\f^gV\c^fZhU\hb\h`UZi^j_fWccdY^_XZh_\ic^k lJ;K@EE@H>?GC<;HCF7=J;8>=FH>EECBB<;77m;FMJCEE;?G;7C?B@::@<=9?>=>;7 KCM>?G89:;<=>?@n /,.opq 67r=C=;I<;G>@?CEC?BE@MCE:@E>M>;7;?M@9<CG;D>S;Bs97;B;Q;E@:D;?= ?;C<M@<<>B@<7I=J;8>=F7J@9EBE@@m=@HCF7=@<;B9M;?@>7;>D:CM=7 @?<;7>B;?M;7?;C<C?B>?79MJB;Q;E@:D;?=7=J<@9GJ7>=;B;7>G?I EC?B7MC:>?GC?BM@?7=<9M=>@?=;MJ?>N9;7O6BB>=>@?CEEFI=J;8>=F7J@9EB <;Q>;HE@MC=>@?7C?B7>=;B;7>G?K@<7;?7>=>Q;97;7>?ME9B>?G7MJ@@E7I MJ>EBMC<;KCM>E>=>;7C?BJ@7:>=CE7=@;?79<;=JC==J;FC<;?@=?;GC=>Q;EF >D:CM=;BLF?@>7;O t2,upvw5po.0/4/5,tp24w.,/oq x;C79<;779MJC7:<@R;M=C?BL9>EB>?GB;7>G?I;D;<G;?MFCMM;77I @:;<C=>@?7C?BDC>?=;?C?M;@K:<@:;<=FIMC?J;E:B;Q;E@:D;?=7:<@D@=; Xbic\fWh]jY^_We^UdkybfVz^W_bY^_g\ccWc_ZWccZgUV^XYZ[\]^Y_UZ DC>?=C>?CJ>GJ7;<Q>M;E;Q;EIHJ>E;CMM@DD@BC=>?GK9=9<;G<@H=JO v,{{|/.w}t42w.v.t4w.,/q lJ;8>=FC?B7;<Q>M;:<@Q>B;<77J@9EB;?JC?M;M@DD9?>=F:C<=>M>:C=>@? =J<@9GJ?;HC?B;S>7=>?G:<@G<CD779MJC7?;>GJL@<J@@BHC=MJI ;D;<G;?MF:<;:C<;B?;77C?B7MJ@@E:<@G<CD7O o~42p52po,|2vpoq V^\UdfWh^hVWhf^^z^Y`^hfdjY^_We^UdWh]Xbic\f_We^Ud_^Y[\f^_ LFM@@<B>?C=>?G:<@G<CD7H>=J7;<Q>M;:<@Q>B;<7C?B?;>GJL@<>?GM>=>;7 =J<@9GJ7JC<;B7;<Q>M;7ID9=9CEC>BC?BCG<;;D;?=7O

~o
723
CC 07-07-2022
723 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%*
+,-./012 34546478594:846;<=>:95>?8=966@54>A <5B6<45><45<=96;<>4CD8594:8 85E4F95685>G9F8H4:>45I<5BG@>@F8D<5B@:8 J,.KLM/012NOP.-QRS0TRTLK0K,Q TU-.S-VK,Q WXYZ[Y\]^_WXY`abc]ZdedfdZghai j966@54>Ak94:8l5E4F95685>:=?<F>m >?8n@>@F8k94:8j95>9@F3<;o:88 n4I@F8pqr45s;;85B4Hpt<5B>?8j4>A 3@54=4;<Dj9B8>98E<D@<>8D<5B@:8 B8=4:495:u J,.KLM/012NvPwSK.RKQ+-QR0KVT RT0K+Q 34546478594:846;<=>:>?F9@I? <;;F9;F4<>8C@4DB45I<5B:4>8B8:4I5u 0Vx-VT+KT0P /012NvNOPLyzz{|}~R{~{|-|{N 9=<>8B8D4E8FA<F8<:G9F58 =9668F=4<D<5B45B@:>F4<D B8E8D9;685>:<
<AGF968H4:>45I9F ;D<558B?968:u
/012NvNvPQy~{Ly|yV{}~{N 8@4F8<5<DA:4:<5B46;D8685><>495 ahZY[^dYXZaa^ZiafZ[YYYZX 9G594:8GF9645B@:>F4<D8@4;685> <5B;F9=8::8:G9F;F98=>:58<FD9 q 45>85:4>AF8:4B85>4<D@:8:u /012NvNP0yx{~|{z{N lH8F=4:8B4:=F8>49545F8@4F45I :9@5B <DD:>9C8:@F8>?<><DD9>?8F 68<:@F8:9G594:8=95>F9D?<E8 C8858H;D9F8B<5B>?<>>?8:9@5B <DDCD85B:
4>?>?8584I?C9F?99Bu 9@5B
<DD::?9@DBC8B8:4I58B<5B f]^_X]cY_ZaZd^ZaZ[YY^dia^bY^Z Q,K0T ?8j4>A:88:>985:@F8>?<>>?8=966@54>A=95>45@8:>9859A<?4I?@<D4>A9G fdhYZ[ia[iY_Y^adXYcaffZda^YYZdYciaYZ_YXd^]^_^adXYb]^]YbY^Z 9;8F<>495:u /01724
CC 07-07-2022
724 of 1038

!"#
$%&'($%)%*
+,-./01234567/,829:;/9.,8<8= ><.89?8<8/?</[email protected].?2 ABCDEFGBHIJKGLDHGMIJFJN OFMJGBJFJHBFHGMPMGMBKQRKGFSEMKT FJNBJUILHBLBFKIJFSEBFEEIVFSEB WBLMINKIUGTBNFXYNDLMJCVBBZNFXKY VBBZBJNKFJNTIEMNFXKUIL HIJKGLDHGMIJFHGMPMGMBKQAB[DMLB HIJKGLDHGMIJHIJGLFHGILKGIDKBGTB SBKGFPFMEFSEBGBHTJIEICXGIOMJMOM\B B]HBKKMPBJIMKBFJNPMSLFGMIJULIO HIJKGLDHGMIJB[DMWOBJGKDHTFKWMEB NLMPBLKY^FHZTFOOBLKYFJNPMSLFGILX LIEEBLKQ +,-./012345_7`:??a<0=?2.b8<8= 8?.b1c,:1,,=8,.2? RJKDLBGTFGLIFNKFJNNBPBEIWOBJG defghijhkldmnodgpqgrsturdrsvnw FLBNBKMCJBNFJNMOWLIPBNMJFVFX GTFGOMJMOM\BKJBMCTSILTIINJIMKBQ +,-./012345x78?.b1c,:1,,=2 ABPMBVLBKMNBJGKyJBBNKUIL HIJPBJMBJHBFJNKFUBGXFJNWLMILMGM\B GTBOIPBLGTBHIJPBJMBJGOIPBOBJG fz{f||}rsftrktf}hkrtd~{lksts WLFHGMHFEQ +,-./01234579:<``.//<->.8b 2,-;9.,829,29:??98,.2? RPFEDFGBKIEDGMIJKGINMKHIDLFCB rktf}hkrtd~{jggsjhkftkffpu GTLIDCTBJTFJHBNWFPMJCFJN |fpjspurtssrpsujhg 29:<9?b07 1234557- .5 INMUXKGLBBGNBKMCJGIOMJMOM\BJIMKB MOWFHGGIJBMCTSILKQ+,-./0123457:?=;/9.,8,`8,.2? `:,>9:;/.8b,+?:<9.,82 ILZGIHFLLXIDGJIMKBOMGMCFGMIJ OBFKDLBKGINMOMJMKTJIMKBFEIJC IIGTMEEFJNGBPBJKLBBZIDEBPFLNK ULIOGTB[DFLLXFJNHBOBJGWEFJG GLDHZMJCIWBLFGMIJKQTBKBOBFKDLBK MJHEDNBLBCDEFGMIJIUGLDHZKWBBNYGTB PIEDOBIUGLDHZFHGMPMGXYFJNGLDHZMJC FHGMPMGXTIDLKGIFPIMNEFGBBPBJMJC FJNBFLEXOILJMJCQEGBLJFGMPBKGI rt}{rtdguftrus{j{deemtdjedts KGLIJCEXBJHIDLFCBNVTBJUBFKMSEBQ 29:<9?b.?27 1234557: / ¡ ;+5 IILNMJFGBVMGTGTBIDJGXGILBKGLMHG GTBJDOSBLIUGLDHZKYGTBMLKWBBN FJNJIMKBEBPBEKFEIJCIIGTMEEFJN GBPBJKLBBZIDEBPFLNKYGIGTB s¢rsgrdeeflspjgrks£us¤st|jr RJKDLBGTFGLBKGLMHGMIJKFLBOIJMGILBN FJNBJUILHBNSXGTBIDJGXQ 123455¥7:¦.:¦ 9
§.
5 IJKMNBLLIFNMOWLIPBOBJGKKDHT FKOBNMFJKYEFJNKHFWMJCYJIMKB FGGBJDFGMJCFKWTFEGYFJNIGTBL OBGTINKGILBNDHB[DFLLXGLDHZ MOWFHGKQ 123_¨ 725
CC 07-07-2022
725 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*

" ,
-./0123456-78.4393/:;-5<0 =>?@ABCDEFGHI=JKKLMNAOMJNPB=JMACJQR S092354 TUVWXVUTUY0Z3432354[V TUVWXVUTT\523905Z]35;:2354V TUVWXVUT^8.;23/;0[092354://;39:2354V TUVWXVUTW_2`0110a0<30[V TUVWXVUbUc0:<:d049ef5ZZ393:;V TUVWXVUbTg5h01[5Z2`0\53[0-54215;_ZZ3901V TUVWXVUbbY.230[5Z2`0\53[0-54215;_ZZ3901V TUVWXVUb^Y.230[:4<10[/54[3i3;3230[5Z52`01<0/:12a042[V TUVWXVUbjk5a05h4015110[3<042954<.920<954[21.92354h51l0m90/2354V TUVWXVU^Una01d049e0m90/2354V TUVWXVU^TS/093:;0m90/2354[V TUVWXVU^b7//0:;[V TUVWXVUWUY:e23a0:4<43d`223a0a:m3a.a453[0;0]0;[V TUVWXVUoUp130Z<:e23a03493<042[V TUVWXVUoTc:4<[9:/0a:34204:490:923]3230[V TUVWXVUob_.2<551/.i;390]042[V TUVWXVUo^q1:<34d6954[21.92354:4<<0a5;32354V TUVWXVUoWr4201351453[034a.;23/;0sZ:a3;e<h0;;34d[V TUVWXVUoo85251]0`39;03<;34dV TUVWXVUot\53[0Z15a10d3[2010<a5251]0`39;0[V TUVWXVUou\53[0Z15 5ZZs15:<10910:2354:;]0`39;0[V TUVWXVUtU\53[0<3[2.1i:490[V TUVWXVUtT743a:;[:4<i31<[V TUVWXVUtb\3d`223a0<0;3]0130[:4</39l./[V TUVWXVUuUv35;:2354wg04:;2eV xg135151<34:490`3[251ey_1<[VTUbb6TUtt6TTUu6TTWj6TTuj:4<TbuXV 726 CC 07-07-2022
726 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*

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`;KDQFN?LJ@FM?BC@A;KK;VDMRQFN?Ga@Vb@F<c?ZFNUd@J;<DFKZFNUeMQ@=@MQ@ME@ZFNUfFT;<ZFNU gCFMX?RDWDMRZFNUIC<D?BJF?ZFNS HeMQ>?B<DFKF<@FLJ@FM?DMQ>?B<DFKKNOP;M@Q=<;=@<BNF?Q@ADM@QDMBC@E;JJ>MDBNP;MDMR;<QDMFME@S Hd>AAK@<LJ@FM?FQ@WDE@A;<<@Q>EDMR;<QD??D=FBDMRBC@?;>MQ;A@?EF=DMRRF?@?U;<;BC@<BN=@?;AM;D?@U A<;JFJ@ECFMDEFKQ@WDE@;<@MRDM@S Hd>KBD=K@OAFJDKNQV@KKDMR>MDBLJ@FM?F<@?DQ@MBDFK?B<>EB><@E;MBFDMDMR?@=F<FB@KDWDMR^>F<B@<?A;<BV; ;<J;<@AFJDKD@?U@FEC>MDBVDBC?DJDKF<FMQE;JJ;MFEE@??B;BC@;>B?DQ@S HaIhLJ@FM?M;D?@E;MB<;K;AADE@<S HaDRCBBD LJ@FM?=@<D;Q?;AV@@XQFN?A<;J@DRCB=SJSB;BV@KW@JDQMDRCBUFMQA<;JJDQMDRCBB;?@W@M FSJSUFMQ=@<D;Q?;MV@@X@MQ?A<;J?DY=SJSB;JDQMDRCBFMQA<;JJDQMDRCBB;MDM@FSJS Ha;D?@LJ@FM?FMN?;>MQVCDECFMM;N?;<QD?B><T?C>JFM?;<VCDECEF>?@?;<B@MQ?B;EF>?@FMFQW@<?@ =?NEC;K;RDEFK;<=CN?D;K;RDEFK@AA@EB;MC>JFM?S Ha;D?@I;MB<;KhAADE@<[aIh]LJ@FM?BC@J>MDED=FKFR@MENUQ@=F<BJ@MB;<DMQDWDQ>FKCFWDMRK@FQ <@?=;M?DTDKDBNA;<DJ=K@J@MBFBD;MFMQ@MA;<E@J@MB;ABCD?ECF=B@<UF?Q@?DRMFB@QTNBC@IDBNdFMFR@<FMQ F==<;W@QTNBC@IDBNI;>MEDKS Ha;D?@QD?B><TFME@LJ@FM?FMN?;>MQVCDECG iS_MQFMR@<?;<DMj><@?BC@?FA@BN;<C@FKBC;AC>JFM?;<FMDJFK?k;< lSmMM;N?;<QD?B><T?F<@F?;MFTK@=@<?;M;AM;<JFK?@M?DBDWDBD@?k;< nS_MQFMR@<?;<QFJFR@?=@<?;MFK;<<@FK=<;=@<BNS Ha;D?@K@W@KLJ@FM?BC@?FJ@F??;>MQK@W@KS 727 CC 07-07-2022
727 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*
-
./01234563175898238:;38149816<0136=0207>327>8123456317589?434@4?A>84A0;;32A589@B20=34450189 0==5A3@516?47258902B?C95A@8463=5136517>3<0151D0265181A3@C?710751A9?651DB?C95A25D>74E0=EF8GH .I32401:;381481G5165J56?89@8440A587501@B8271324>5B@A02B0287501@02B?C95A8D31AG@81651A9?63481G 8440A587360==5A32@3;B90G330263B827;317H .I20B327GC0?1682G:;3814815;8D5182G95138901D7>3D20?164?2=8A3@816574J3275A893K7314501@F>5A> 43B8287347>32389B20B327G0F136CG013B32401=20;7>870F136CG8107>32B32401H .I?C95A8238:;381481GB20B327G02472?A7?2347>32301F>5A>8230F136@?7595<36@02A017209936CG8 D0J321;3178931757GH .I?C95A25D>7E0=EF8G:;381481G472337@8J31?3@C0?93J826@>5D>F8G@B82LF8G@8993G0245;5982B98A3 F>5A>540F13602A017209936CG8D0J321;3178931757GH .M34563175898238:;3814234563175899G<013698168463=5136517>3A0;;?157G<0151D0265181A3H .N0?16:;3814828B56J8258750151852B2344?23@F>5A>@C3A8?430=574;8D157?63816=23O?31AG@A81C3 >3826CG8>?;81F57>8J328D3>38251D8C5957GH .N0?1693J39:;38147>3;8K5;?;A01751?0?40223B38736B38LJ89?3;384?236CG7>3?430=840?16 93J39;37328167>3.P:F35D>751D137F02L@844B3A5=53651P;325A81/8750189N78168264Q14757?73 4B3A5=5A875014=0240?1693J39;37324RP/NQNQPESTUS@027>398734723J54501VHW>3238651D0C78513651 63A5C394546345D187366XPHQ=7>3;3732234B0143A>828A7325475A541075165A8736@.NYZ[:234B01434>899 C3?436H .N0?1693J39;3732:;38148151472?;317F>5A>51A9?6348;5A20B>013@8;B95=532@M\N6373A702@ 5173D287020275;38J328D32@0?7B?7;3732@816F35D>751D137F02L4?43670;384?2340?1693J394@816;3374 P;325A81/8750189N78168264Q14757?734B3A5=5A87501NSH]ESTUS@0298734723J54501@=02WGB3S@WGB3^02 WGB3^P0B3287501H .[33L68G:;381481G68G@\0168G7>20?D>_2568G@7>87541070130=7>3>09568G4H .[33L316:;3814N87?268G4816N?168G47>87823107>09568G4H .`3>5A?9826395J3253402B5AL?B4:;38147>36395J32G02B5AL?B027>38225J89=027>36395J32G02B5AL?B0= D0064@F8234@;32A>816543816F8473;8732589CG7>3?430=;0702J3>5A934@51A9?651D@C?710795;573670@ 7>30B32875010=;07025<36A0;;32A589D20?16E4F33B51D02F8473E23;0J89;8A>5132G@F>37>32B0278C9302 439=EB20B39936H RZ26HSaUS@RB827V@^bbSV cdefgedcchijklminokipqjkire sKA3B7517>3A843F>3237>32354A93823J5631A37>878B32401548A751D51D006=857>816F57>899 6395C328734B33670A0;B9GF57>B20J5450140=7>54A>8B7328=7328J32C8902F257731F82151D0=8J50987501@ 7>3A01751?51DJ509875014>899C3A8?43=02357>328A5787501@A0;B98517@02818C873;3170263270C3544?36CG 7>3/0543t017209Z==5A32@0207>32234B0145C930==5A589H RZ26HSaUS@RB827V@^bbSV cdefgedcuvwpjkxpmymljkirzxxpklqjkire Q17>33J3177>87;0237>8101343A75010=7>54A>8B7328BB9GD3132899G81645;?978130?49G708D5J3110543 40?2A30251A56317@7>393847234725A75J323D?9875014>899C3513==3A7@8167>3;047234725A75J395;574>899107C3 728 CC 07-07-2022
728 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*

-./012342562789::0;<62:9.3-.6-32.8:9<2:726-=-69>>?-32.8-=-23-.8@2A0:8<2:8<-68-/2>-A-8B@-6@-: 977>-69C>2D EF<3DGHIG4E79<8J4KLLGJ MNOPQONMPRSTUVWUXUYZU[O \07<0/-:-0.0=8@-:6@9782<:@9>>C260.:8<;2380-A79-<9.?60AA0.>9B0<:898;80<?69;:20=968-0.40< >2]9><2A23?8@2<2=<0A40=9.?72<:0.=0<-.^;<?0<39A9]29<-:-.]=<0A9.?/-0>98-0.0=8@-:6@9782<0< =<0A08@2<>9BD_@27<0/-:-0.:0=8@-:6@9782<9<2.08-.82.323809==268-.9.?A9..2<4/-0>98-0.:0<9<<2:8: 0=72<:0.:=0<9/-0>98-0.0=`268-0.aGb0=8@2c9>-=0<.-9d2.9>c0320<9.?08@2<7<0/-:-0.0=`8982>9BD _@2;.9/9->9C->-8?0=9:0;.3>2/2>A282<802.=0<628@27<0/-:-0.:0=8@-:6@9782<302:.087<26>;328@2 2.=0<62A2.80=9.?7<0/-:-0.0=`8982>9BD EF<3DGHIG4E79<8J4KLLGJ MNOPQONeNfUgYhiUjklmRnnZkZgoO _@2.0-:260.8<0>7<0]<9A2:89C>-:@23C?8@-:6@9782<:@9>>C293A-.-:82<23C?9.38@2<2:70.:-C->-8?0=4 8@2\0-:2c0.8<0>F==-62<E\cFJD EF<3DGHIG4E79<8J4KLLGJ MNOPQONeMpqrUV[qnSTUsqZ[UtqjSVqoRnnZkUVO u.0<32<80-A7>2A2.89.32.=0<628@-:6@9782<9.3=0<8@2]2.2<9>7;<70:20=.0-:29C982A2.89.3 60.8<0>48@2\cF:@9>>@9/24-.933-8-0.809.?08@2</2:8239;8@0<-8?48@270B2<80v wDx2/-2B0=d;C>-69.3d<-/982d<0^268:Dx2/-2B0=7;C>-69.37<-/9827<0^268:4:;C^26880A9.3980<? <2/-2B0<977<0/9>C?08@2<3279<8A2.8:4=0<60A7>-9.62B-8@8@-:0<3-.9.624-=:;6@7<0^268:9<2>-12>?80 69;:2.0-:2-./-0>98-0.0=8@-:6@9782<y zDu.:7268-0.:D{70.7<2:2.898-0.0=7<072<6<232.8-9>:9.3B-8@72<A-::-0.0=8@27<072<8?0B.2<0< 066;79.842.82<9.3-./2:8-]98297082.8-9>0<3-.9.62/-0>98-0.0.9.?7<072<8?0<7>96249.3-.:72689.? <270<80<<260<3:989.?<29:0.9C>28-A2Du=72<A-::-0.-:<2=;:230<69..08C20C89-.2349:29<6@B9<<9.8 A9?C20C89-.23=<0A960;<80=60A7282.8^;<-:3-68-0.;70.:@0B-.]0=7<0C9C>269;:280C2>-2/28@989 /-0>98-0.0=8@-:6@9782<A9?25-:8D`;6@-.:7268-0.A9?-.6>;3293A-.-:8<98-0.0=9.?.262::9<?82:8:D EF<3DGHIG4E79<8J4KLLGJ MNOPQONee|}SZU[qnSTUsqZ[UtqjSVqoRnnZkUVO u.0<32<80-A7>2A2.89.32.=0<628@-:6@9782<2==268-/2>?48@2\cF:@9>>B-8@-.9<29:0.9C>28-A29=82< 8@22==268-/239820=8@20<3-.9.62603-=-23-.8@-:6@9782<v wD~;-32>-.2:4_2:8-.]28@03:9.3d<0623;<2:D2/2>079.37<0A;>]982];-32>-.2:482:8-.]A28@03: 9.37<0623;<2:9:<2;-<23Dw.?.0-:2A29:;<2A2.87<0623;<2;:23-.2.=0<62A2.80=8@-:6@9782<B@-6@ 82.3:80;.32<2:8-A9828@2968;9>.0-:2>2/2>0=8@2:0;<62C2-.]A29:;<23:@9>>.08-./9>-39828@2 2.=0<62A2.8968-0.y zDu./2:8-]9829.3d;<:;2-0>98-0.:Du.60.:0.9.62B-8@7<0/-:-0.:0=8@-:6@9782<4-./2:8-]9829.3 7;<:;270::-C>2/-0>98-0.:y 729 CC 07-07-2022
729 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*
-
./012134567879:;5<7=65>/012134519;8?5678@AB<1=14CC=7C=6451;8D1=5<6@?<4C51=A5775<1=C1=@78812 48D5775<1=D1C4=5E185@A@;FG1?5574CC=7H42795<1.65>I48431=/ JK=D/LMNLAJC4=5OAPQQLO RSTUVTSWXYZ[\]^_`ab]^cd`^\e\f\[\]^dgh[i]jY]c_j[k]`[^T :/01C4=5E18542:?5678@/:22.65>D1C4=5E185@@<422A575<19;221@51l5185?78@6@5185B65<75<1=24BA ?4==>7;55<16=C=73=4E@68@;?<4E4881=4@579;=5<1=5<1C726?>48D685185795<6@?<4C51=/ m/n=7G1?5:CC=7H42/:22D1C4=5E185@B<7@1D;5>656@57=1H61B48D4CC=7H181BC=7G1?5@A7=?<4831@ 571l6@5683C=7G1?5@A5<45E4>=1@;25685<1C=7D;?567879D6@5;=F683876@1A@<422?78@;25B65<5<1o.KC=67= 5748>@;?<4CC=7H42/ ./.785=4?5@/:8>B=65518?785=4?5A43=11E185AC;=?<4@17=D1=A7=75<1=68@5=;E185B<1=1F>5<1.65>6@ ?7EE6551D575<11lC18D65;=17996H15<7;@48DD7224=@7=E7=168=15;=897=377D@7=@1=H6?1@A48DB<6?< 68H72H1@876@1pC=7D;?6834?56H6561@A@<422?785468C=7H6@678@=1q;6=683?7EC2648?1B65<5<6@?<4C51=/ JK=D/LMNLAJC4=5OAPQQLO RSTUVTSWrsdk]dt`]jdjb]^\a]`[uvd`aZw[]avd`^[jZw[\d`xdjyz{w]c[\d`T .78@5=;?5678?78D;?51DF>5<1<7E17B81=7==1@6D185794@68321DB122683A;@683D7E1@56??78@5=;?5678 5772@6@4227B1D78<726D4>@F15B1185<1<7;=@7986814/E/48D@6lC/E/ JK=D/LMNLAJC4=5OAPQQLO RSTUVTSXSzk]j|]`w}z{w]c[\d`T ~<1C=7H6@678@795<6@?<4C51=@<4228754CC2>575<11E6@@67879@7;8D97=5<1C;=C7@179421=5683C1=@78@ 575<11l6@518?179481E1=318?>A7=5<11E6@@67879@7;8D685<1C1=97=E48?1791E1=318?>B7=/ JK=D/LMNLAJC4=5OAPQQLO RSTUVTSXRc]w\_fz{w]c[\d`^T :/~<1o.K@<422<4H15<14;5<7=65>A?78@6@5185B65<5<6@@1?5678A573=485@C1?6421l?1C5678@B<6?<E4> F1=1q;1@51D/ m/:8>C1=@78@116834@C1?6421l?1C5678C;=@;485575<6@@1?5678@<4229621484CC26?45678B65<5<1 o.K/~<14CC26?45678@<422?7854686897=E45678B<6?<D1E78@5=451@5<45F=6836835<1@7;=?179@7;8DA7= 4?56H65>97=B<6?<5<1@C1?6421l?1C56786@@7;3<5A6857?7EC2648?1B65<5<6@?<4C51=B7;2D?78@565;5148 ;8=14@784F21<4=D@<6C785<14CC26?485A785<1?7EE;865>A7=7875<1=C1=@78@/n=67=576@@;48?17948 1l?1C5678A5<1o.K@<42287569>7B81=@48D7=7??;C485@79814=F>C=7C1=561@B<6?<E4>F14991?51DF> @;?<1l?1C5678@/:8>68D6H6D;42B<7?246E@57F14DH1=@12>4991?51DF>4227B48?1795<1@C1?642 1l?1C5678@E4>96214@5451E185B65<5<1o.K?78546868348>6897=E4567857@;CC7=5<6@?246E/95<1o.K 968D@5<454@;996?6185?785=7H1=@>1l6@5@=134=D683484CC26?45678A4C;F26?<14=683E4>F1<12D/ ./8D151=E68683B<15<1=573=4857=D18>5<14CC26?45678A5<1o.K@<422F4248?15<1<4=D@<6C575<1 4CC26?485A5<1?7EE;865>A48D75<1=C1=@78@798753=4856835<1@C1?6421l?1C567843468@55<14DH1=@1 6EC4?5785<1<1425<A@4915>A48DB1294=179C1=@78@4991?51DA5<14DH1=@16EC4?578C=7C1=5>4991?51DA48D 48>75<1=4DH1=@16EC4?5@793=4856835<1@C1?6421l?1C5678/:CC26?485@97=@C1?6421l?1C5678@48DC1=@78@ 730 CC 07-07-2022
730 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*

-./01203/4251-36718-1503./296:;1<1=>3<1?0.2>;9306/:3/@.<9603./0A1BCD96:<162./6;7:<1=>3<1E F/4<6/03/4.<?1/:3/46/65573-603./G0A1BCD2A677576-1./5>;73-@3716-.5:.@0A1?1-323./6/?0A1 <162./2@.<?1/:3/4.<4<6/03/40A1251-36718-1503./E HEI51-36718-1503./22A677;14<6/01?;:/.03-10.0A165573-6/0-./063/3/4677/1-1226<:-./?303./2G 3/-7>?3/46039173930./0A151<93001?6-03J30:EKA1251-36718-1503./2A677/.0;1-.911@@1-03J1>/037677 -./?303./26<164<11?0.;:0A165573-6/0EB./-.95736/-1L30A6/:-./?303./.@0A1251-36718-1503./2A677 01<93/601306/?2>;M1-00A151<2./A.7?3/4300.0A.215<.J323./2.@0A32-A6501<<14>7603/40A12.><-1.@ 2.>/?.<6-03J30:@.<LA3-A0A1251-36718-1503./L624<6/01?E NEO5573-603./@.<1801/23./.@0391739302251-3@31?3/251-36718-1503./2.<@.<9.?3@3-603./.@.0A1< 2>;206/0367-./?303./22A677;10<1601?73P165573-603./2@.<3/30367251-36718-1503./2>/?1<2>;21-03./Q.@ 0A3221-03./E RD<?ESTUSGR56<0VGWXXSV YZ[\][Z^_`aabcde[ O551672.@6/:?1-323./.@0A1BCD2A677;196?10.0A1C30:C.>/-37E RD<?ESTUSGR56<0VGWXXSV YZ[\][Z\Zfcghijbcklminohhijbpcqijrjmsiebtbubde[ F/?3J3?>67/.3212.><-12G.<0A1-.9;3/603./.@64<.>5.@/.3212.><-127.-601?./0A126915<.51<0:G 2A677/.05<.?>-16/.32171J1718-11?3/40A.21251-3@31?./5<.51<0:v./1?62@.77.L2G>/7122251-3@3-677: 5<.J3?1?3/6/.0A1<21-03./.@0A32-A6501<w tcklxebch
ysikhsz{|inik pcqijrjmsiebtbubd ch}sjadcikh~ihbsz bbiuikny|sab|hg B34A00391 H6:0391 123?1/0367 X?QOX?QO B./<123?1/0367?Q ?QO RD<?ESWSGR56<0VGWXX
D<?ESTUSGR56<0VGWXXSV YZ[\][ZZ|ibzfcghijbkilbkhe[ OEH><3/40A1?6:039151<3.?./7:G;<31@/.3213/-3?1/0218-11?3/47393023/.0A1<21-03./2.@0A32-A6501< 6<1677.L1?5<.J3?3/4G0A600A12>9.@0A1/.321?><603./3/93/>01257>20A118-122/.32171J17?.12/.0 18-11?0L1/0:3/60L.A.><51<3.?E.<1869571G0A1@.77.L3/4-.9;3/603./2L.>7?;1677.L6;71w msiebk|bjbkh `subms|jcd
~hcklc|l msiebfr|chiskik _sr|yb|isl 731
CC 07-07-2022
731 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*
-
./012.3456789 2:;012: 2.;01.3456789 2<;012 5678 0=>?@36A74BC34AD;E8AA45F4578@4?@5?498GH8I74?52:=JK=:.JG7L8963?B8MI8995?498A8N8AC5;;6@C74?5 453456789?BCO@48B;CD743845I4;8579LCAA5?78MI88;78545C5D7E?PL?6@Q8@4?;G38C96@8;C77L8 @8I84N45FA?IC74?5= R=H8I74?52:=JK=:.:1;?895?7CQQAD7?H8I74?52:=JK=:..ST?7?@U8L4IA8V;A45FW= SX@;=2KY2GSQC@7WGZ::2W [\]^_]\`[abcdefbghibjckhcbcfhlfkjmjkjhe] nL8698?B3?7?@4o8;8p64Q3857B?@AC5;9ICQ83C45785C5I8CI74N474899LCAAO8A43478;7?7L8L?6@9?BKq:: C=3=7?Kq::Q=3=?5E88r;CD9GC5;<q::C=3=7?sq::Q=3=?5E88r85;9C5;L?A4;CD9GE47L7L88MI8Q74?5?B AC5;9ICQ83C45785C5I8CI74N47489B?@Q6OA4I9IL??A9GQ6OA4IC5;Q@4NC78F?ABI?6@989GC5;Q6OA4IBCI4A47489G EL4ILC@8CAA?E8;7?O8F45C7Yq::C=3=nL8698?B3?7?@4o8;8p64Q3857B?@AC5;9ICQ83C45785C5I8 CI74N47489;6@45F7L898L?6@9498M83Q78;B@?37L8A43479?BH8I74?52:=JK=:J:tQ@?N4;8;G7LC7@8C9?5COA8 8BB?@79C@83C;8OD7L8698@7?345434o87L8;4976@OC5I897?58C@OD@894;8579ODGB?@8MC3QA8G4597CAAC74?5?B CQQ@?Q@4C7836BBA8@9?@5?498OCBBA89G@65545F8p64Q3857?5AD7L834543CAQ8@4?;58I899C@DGC5;A?IC745F 8p64Q38579?C97?F858@C7834543635?498A8N8A9?5C;u?4545FQ@?Q8@7489= SX@;=2<Z2GSQC@7WGZ::vtX@;=2KY2GSQC@7WGZ::2W [\]^_]\`wxykdzz{|y}~jfmhcke] 1=X67;??@8N8579?Q857?7L8F858@CAQ6OA4I?55?5@894;8574CAQ@?Q8@7DG96ILC9QC@C;89G@CAA489GBC4@9G I?5I8@79C5;9Q8I4CA9CA89C5;Q@?3?74?5CA8N8579G45N?AN45FF858@C74?5?B5?498A8N8A9L4FL8@7LC5E?6A; 5?@3CAAD?II6@GOD698?B7L8L63C5N?4I8GQ6OA4IC;;@8999D97839G3694ICA4597@638579G8A8I7@?54I C3QA4B4IC74?59D97839GC5;9434AC@9?65;Q@?;6I45FCI74N47489GC@8CAA?E8;6Q?5?O7C4545FC5CQQ@?Q@4C78 Q8@347B@?37L8I47DGC5;96Ou8I77?7L8B?AA?E45FF858@CAA4347C74?59q 2=nL88N8579LCAA5?7Q@?;6I85?498A8N8A9CO?N898N857D;01?5C5D@894;8574CAQ@?Q8@7DB?@CQ8@4?; A?5F8@7LC57L@88L?6@9;6@45F;CD7438= Z=nL88N8579LCAA5?7Q@?;6I85?498A8N8A9CO?N894M7D;01?5C5D@894;8574CAQ@?Q8@7D;6@45F7L8 Q8@4?;B@?384FL7Q=3=7?8A8N85Q=3=GC5;CO?N8B4B7DPB4N8;01B?@C5D?7L8@54FL77438Q8@4?;= v=R?57456?69?@@8Q8C78;Q8Cr5?498A8N8A9CO?N854587DPB4N8;019LCAA5?7O8Q@?;6I8;C7C5D A?IC74?5EL8@8Q8@9?593CDO8I?57456?69AD8MQ?98;= 0=nL8I?5;474?5943Q?98;6Q?57L88N857?@CI74N47D457L8Q8@34749968;OD7L8R47DG@8FC@;45F 3CM43635?498A8N8AGA?IC74?5?B5?4989?6@I89G?@;6@C74?5?BCI74N47DGB?@8MC3QA8G3CDO83?@8A434745F 7LC57L4998I74?5G7?Q@?78I7I8@7C4545;4N4;6CA9GC@8C9?@58C@ODCI74N47489EL4ILE?6A;?7L8@E498O8 ;4976@O8;GC5;7L898Q8@347I?5;474?59GEL8545I?5BA4I7E47L7L4998I74?5GC@8?N8@@4;45F= SX@;=2KY2GSQC@7WGZ::2W [\]^_]\`{bdjczcek{yfkjzcbcd hz~jkjzc] 732
CC 07-07-2022
732 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*

-./01234567849:0;7:3841422<=8>3:38417:3?3:3<99@1>>A<1>>8B<2:8<C7<<2:@<4839<>3=3:98DE<7:384 FG.HI.GHG2;034521J:3=<@8;09KL08?32<26:@1::@<<M;3L=<4:;:3>3N<2@19@35@OM;1>3:J4839<=;DD><0142 1A1:<=<4:2<?37<9349:1>><214234588278423:3846142:@<17:3?3:J=<<:984<8D:@<D8>>8B345:B8703:<031P F.Q83423?32;1>2<?37<L082;7<914839<><?<>=80<:@14<35@:JO9<?<42R-1:1239:147<8D:B<4:JO D3?<D<<:ST.U=<:<09VK80 W.X@<4839<><?<>8414J4<10AJL08L<0:J28<948:<C7<<2<35@:J2R-. R.Q8:B3:@9:142345E<7:384FG.HI.GUY-63:391?38>1:3848D:@397@1L:<0:8<4515<3414J501234569:0<<: 7849:0;7:38462<=8>3:38480;42<0508;42;:3>3:JB80ZB3:@349<?<4@;420<2D3D:JD<<:8D10<932<4:31>10<184 E1:;021J96E;421J9142@8>321J961422;0345:@<435@::3=<L<03826<C7<L:19L08?32<234E<7:384FG.HI.GYG. [.[849:0;7:38468:@<0:@149:0<<:7849:0;7:384639L08@3A3:<284@8>321J96<C7<L:19L08?32<234E<7:3849 FG.HI.GW\142FG.HI.GYG. ].[849:0;7:38468:@<0:@149:0<<:7849:0;7:384639L08@3A3:<22;0345435@::3=<L<03829;4><993:=<<:9:@< 435@::3=<9:14210298DE<7:384FG.HI.GHG. ^.X@<;9<8D@<>378L:<09191L10:8D17849:0;7:384142_802<=8>3:38417:3?3:J9@1>>A<0<9:037:<2:8 A<:B<<4:@<@8;098D434<1.=.14293C:@30:JL.=.`8421J:@08;5@a0321J84>J6142L08@3A3:<284:@< B<<Z<429142@8>321J9.X@<48:37<9@1>>A<53?<41:><19::B<4:JOD8;0@8;093412?147<8D9132;915<.b4 719<98D<=<05<47J6:@<:B<4:JOD8;0@8;0L<0382=1JA<B13?<2. Sc02.FITF6SL10:V6WGGFV defghfeigjklmnopnqpormokstulovumwxyzou{|}muuok~rf Q839<L082;7<23414J=;>:3L><OD1=3>J2B<>>345;43:9@1>>48:L082;7<14839<><?<><C7<<2345HU2R- D3?<D<<:D08=14JB1>>3414J12834345;43:2;0345:@<L<0382A<:B<<49<?<41.=.142:<4L.=.680 <C7<<2345HG2R-2;0345@8;09D08=:<4L.=.:89<?<41.=.:@<D8>>8B34521J. Sc02.FITF6SL10:V6WGGFV defghfeiisplpnmoumjuok~f `8:80?<@37><96347>;23451;:8=8A3><96:0;7Z96=8:807J7><96=8:809788:<09142:013><09808:@<0 <M;3L=<4::8B<2AJ1=8:80?<@37><69@1>>48:A<1>>8B<2:80<=1343484<>871:384B3:@:@<<4534<80 1;C3>310J=8:8090;44345D80=80<:@14:@0<<=34;:<93414J@8;06341410<18:@<0:@14841L;A>37035@:O8DO B1J6;4><99P -.X@<0<5;>104839<>3=3:98DE<7:384FG.HI.GHG10<=<:B@3><:@<<4534<142_801;C3>310J=8:80910< 0;44345K80 R.X@<?<@37><3934;9<D80L08?393848DL8>37<6D30<6=<2371>6808:@<0<=<05<47J9<0?37<9. Sc02.FITF6SL10:V6WGGFV defghfeiqporm
npzm~orlmnmsplpnmoumrf -.b:391?38>1:3848D:@397@1L:<0:88B4808L<01:<1=8:80?<@37><6347>;23451;:8=8A3><96:0;7Z96 =8:807J7><91428:@<093=3>102<?37<98D1:JL<9;A<7::80<539:01:3846192<D34<234[1>3D80431<@37>< [82<6B@37@@191D1;>:J62<D<7:3?<62<:<03801:<26=823D3<260<L>17<268048<C@1;9:142_80=;DD><09J9:<=6 733 CC 07-07-2022
733 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*
-
./0123425670849:./9;49::3<9./003:=86>3/?/73:9@9<9@A.:09B3/903/C.@3B76/3.D9234@9C709E94=37/: FGHIJ./0FGHIHK LKM29E=.=37/.6ND9234@9M9:=O67490869A.:.075=90>N=29C.@3B76/3.P3?21.NO.=67@AQ.N>98=3@3R90 .:563Q.B.4399<309/497B<37@.=37/7B=23::94=37/K ST60KHUGHAS5.6=VAFJJHV WXYZ[YX\]^_`abcd_efccgh_ijhbkdbil`_minobp`knbaY q=3:.<37@.=37/7B=23:42.5=96=771/767596.=9r sKs/N7BBt67.069469.=37/.@<9234@9A3/4@803/?.@@t=966.3/<9234@9:A036=>3u9:A08/9>8??39:./07=296 :[email protected]09<349:A.:09B3/903/v3<3:37/HwKI7B=29C.@3B76/3.D9234@9C709A123422.:.B.8@=NA09B94=3<9A 09=96376.=90AQ703B390A[email protected]76/79;2.8:=./0x76Q8BB@96:N:=9QA./0123425670849:./9;49::3<9./0 03:=86>3/?/73:9@9<9@A.::5943B3903/C.@3B76/3.D9234@9C709E94=37/yUywIz LKs/N7BBt67.069469.=37/.@<9234@95670843/?./73:9@9<9@r HK{;49903/?/3/9=Nt93?2=0Ls13=23/=19/=N3/429:7B./N47Q57/9/=.=./3/=96Q903.=99/?3/9 :59907B=17=278:./0=7B786=278:./069<7@8=37/:596Q3/8=93/.:=.=37/.6N57:3=37/z76 FK{;49903/?93?2=N0Ls8/096./N47/03=37/7B.449@96.=37/A:5990A?6.09A./0@7.0.=.03:=./497B B3B=NB99=Ks=?69.=9676@9::96Q9.:869Q9/=03:=./49:A=29Q.;3Q8Q/73:9@9<9@42./?9:>NB7860LB76 9.42078>@3/?762.@<3/?7B03:=./49KM29:78/0@9<9@Q9=96:2.@@>9:9=B76|sEM69:57/:9B76=23: Q9.:869Q9/=K ST60KHUGHAS5.6=VAFJJHV WXYZ[YX}X^_`ab~`aldimkbaY 7596:7/:2.@@8/69.:7/.>@NQ.u9A47/=3/89A764.8:9=7>9Q.097647/=3/890A./N/73:903:=86>./49.: 09B3/903/E94=37/HJKUKJHJK ST60KHUGHAS5.6=VAFJJHV WXYZ[YX}Wm`einaimj`djaY q=3:8/@.1B8@./0./83:./49B76./N596:7/=7u995AQ.3/=.3/76596Q3=857/./N@7=765.649@7B@./0 13=23/=29C3=N8/09623:47/=67@./N./3Q.@A3/4@803/?./NB71@A12342>N./N:78/07646N:2.@@ 2.>3=8.@@N03:=86>=2959.49./047QB76=7B./N596:7/3/=2969.:7/.>@9./047QB76=.>@99/ 7NQ9/=7B@3B9 76567596=NK ST60KHUGHAS5.6=VAFJJHV WXYZ[YX}^`pll`eb~bn`bd`baimj`kaY q=3:8/@.1B8@./0./83:./49B76./N596:7/=7Q.u976.@@71<[email protected]09@3<9639:76534u85:=776B67Q 47QQ9643.@9:=.>@3:2Q9/=:S09B3/90.:./N:=769AB.4=76NAQ./8B.4=863/?A763/08:=63.@5@./=8:90B76=29 :.@9AQ./8B.4=863/?AB.>634.=37/A.::9Q>@N76:=76.?97B?770:A1.69:./0Q9642./03:9V>N=298:97B 563<.=967.0:A.@@9N:767=2961.N:@74.=907/93=296:30976=29>.4u7B./N>83@03/?278:3/?=29 47QQ9643.@9:=.>@3:2Q9/=12969:842563<.=967.0A.@@9N767=2961.N@39:>9=199/=29>83@03/?./0./N 734 CC 07-07-2022
734 of 1038

!"#"$#%&'#()%#
*("

*'&
+(),
&,
#*

-./-01234-5016786-2.9721.87551:;.123;-64<547:1:=>13?1123@1@7<5:781;A@34BCB-2.1;A@3-BCB ?11D.-E:FG72.-E3@57<A@H5;.-EI-2.:;J4BCB-2.2;21-BCB72?11D12.:FK-3<5.-E-2.K<2.-EI-2. @76;.-E:1J0143-:C-E>1415C;331.<2.15K103;72LMBNOBMPQB FR5.BLOSL=F4-53I=PMMLI TUVWXVUYUZ[\]^_[\`abc`^]_dV e2E415:72?@7f;76-31:3@1457f;:;72:783@;:0@-4315:@-66>1A<;63E78-C;:.1C1-275-2.<472 072f;03;723@15178:@-66>14<2;:@1.-:457f;.1.;2g@-4315LBLPB FR5.BLOOh=F4-53I=PMMLiR5.BLOSL=F4-53I=PMMLI 735
CC 07-07-2022
735 of 1038
CONSTRUCTION NOISE MODELING
736
CC 07-07-2022
736 of 1038
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 06/10/2020
Case Description: COCU-18
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Building Construction Residential 65.0 60.0 55.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Crane No 16 80.6 50.0 0.0
Generator No 50 80.6 50.0 0.0
Tractor No 40 84.0 50.0 0.0

Results
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Noise Limits (dBA)
Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Calculated (dBA)         Day           Evening
Night              Day           Evening          Night ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Equipment                  Lmax    Leq        Lmax    Leq     Lmax    Leq     Lmax Leq       Lmax    Leq     Lmax    Leq     Lmax    Leq
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐     ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐    ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐  ‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pavement Scarafier        89.5    82.5        N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A N/A       N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A
Roller                    80.0    73.0        N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A N/A       N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A
Tractor                   84.0    80.0        N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A N/A       N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A
Total      89.5    84.8        N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A N/A       N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A

Page 1 ends

745
CC 07-07-2022
745 of 1038
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 06/10/2020
Case Description: COCU-18
**** Receptor #1 ****
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
----------- -------- ------- ------- -----
Site Preperation Residential 65.0 60.0 55.0
Equipment
---------
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Usage Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device (%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
----------- ------ ----- ----- ----- -------- --------- Grader No 40 85.0 50.0 0.0
Scraper No 40 83.6 50.0 0.0
Tractor No 40 84.0 50.0 0.0

Results
-------
Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA)
---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Calculated (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
---------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- Equipment Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq
---------------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ Grader 85.0 81.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Scraper 83.6 79.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tractor 84.0 80.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 85.0 85.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
746
CC 07-07-2022
746 of 1038
Construction Activities dBA L10 distance (ft) dBA L10 distance (ft) Demolition 88.3 85.4
Site Preparation 88.0 85.1
Grading 87.6 84.7
Building Construction 85.5 82.6
Construction Activities dBA L10 distance (ft) dBA L10 distance (ft) Demolition 85.4 79.7
Site Preparation 85.1 79.4
Grading 84.7 79.0
Building Construction 82.6 76.9
Paving 87.8 50 78.3 150
Construction Activities dBA L10 distance (ft) dBA L10 distance (ft) Demolition 85.4 76.9
Site Preparation 85.1 76.6
Grading 84.7 76.2
Building Construction 82.6 74.1
Paving 87.8 50 76.9 175
Construction Activities dBA L10 distance (ft) dBA L10 distance (ft) Demolition 85.4 74.3
Site Preparation 85.1 74.0
Grading 84.7 73.6
Building Construction 82.6 71.5
Paving 87.8 50 74.2 240
Attenuation calculated through Inverse Square Law: Lp(R2) = Lp(R1) - 20Log(R2/R1) 70 135
RCNM Reference Senstive Receptors to South
50 70
Attenuation Calculation, L10
Senstive Receptors to South Senstive Receptors to North Senstive Receptors to South Sensitive Receptors to Southeast 70 185
Senstive Receptors to South Sensistive Receptors to West 70 250
747
CC 07-07-2022
747 of 1038
Construction Activities dBA Leq distance (ft) dBA Leq distance (ft) Demolition 85.3 82.4
Site Preparation 85 82.1
Grading 84.6 81.7
Building Construction 82.5 79.6
Construction Activities dBA Leq distance (ft) dBA Leq distance (ft) Demolition 82.4 76.7
Site Preparation 82.1 76.4
Grading 81.7 76.0
Building Construction 79.6 73.9
Paving 84.8 50 75.3 150
Construction Activities dBA Leq distance (ft) dBA Leq distance (ft) Demolition 82.4 73.9
Site Preparation 82.1 73.6
Grading 81.7 73.2
Building Construction 79.6 71.1
Paving 84.8 50 73.9 175
Construction Activities dBA Leq distance (ft) dBA Leq distance (ft) Demolition 82.4 71.3
Site Preparation 82.1 71.0
Grading 81.7 70.6
Building Construction 79.6 68.5
Paving 84.8 50 71.2 240
Attenuation calculated through Inverse Square Law: Lp(R2) = Lp(R1) - 20Log(R2/R1) Senstive Receptors to South Sensistive Receptors to West 70 250
Senstive Receptors to South Sensitive Receptors to Southeast 70 185
Attenuation Calculation, Leq
Senstive Receptors to South Senstive Receptors to North 70 135
RCNM Reference Senstive Receptors to South
50 70
748
CC 07-07-2022
748 of 1038
749
CC 07-07-2022
749 of 1038
........................................................................................................................

A PPENDIX G :

T RANSPORTATION D ATA
750
CC 07-07-2022
750 of 1038
........................................................................................................................ 751 CC 07-07-2022
751 of 1038
Memorandum
Date: January 10, 2020
To: Mr. Ali Mozaffari, Alan Enterprise, LLC
From: Brian Jackson
Subject: Trip Generation Study for a Residential Project on Stevens Creek Bl in Cupertino, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. has completed a trip generation study for a proposed residential development at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino, California. As proposed, the project would demolish an existing convenience market/liquor store and construct 9 three-story residential units. Each single-family residential unit would have a two-car garage. Eight additional parking spaces would be provided on-site.

The purpose of this trip generation study is to document the projected number of net new AM and PM peak hour vehicle trips generated by the proposed residential project. The City of Cupertino typically does not require preparation of a comprehensive transportation impact analysis, including an evaluation of intersection level of service, for projects deemed “small”. For small projects, a trip generation analysis usually is sufficient. Based on a preliminary evaluation of the proposed project and the previous use to be replaced, City of Cupertino staff have indicated that a trip generation study will suffice. Additionally, City of Cupertino staff have requested that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) be reported for existing and project conditions for informational purposes.

Project Trip Generation
Hexagon prepared project trip estimates based on trip generation rates obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (2017). The average weekday daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation rates for Single-Family Housing (Land Use 210) were applied to the proposed project. Single-family detached units have the highest trip generation rate per dwelling unit of all residential uses because they are the largest units in size and have more residents and more vehicles per unit than other residential land uses. Based on the ITE rates for Single-Family Housing, the proposed project would be expected to generate 85 gross daily vehicle trips, with 7 gross trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour of traffic (one-hour period between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM) and 9 gross trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour of traffic (one-hour period between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM).

Trip credits associated with the existing liquor store/convenience market to be removed can be applied to the project trip generation estimates. The weekday daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour vehicular trips generated by the existing building were estimated using standard ITE trip rates for Convenience Market (Land Use 851) because the store closed in December of 2019. The Convenience Market category is defined as markets that are open between 15 and 24 hours per day and that sell convenience foods, newspapers, magazines, and often beer and wine, but do not provide gasoline pumps. Based on the ITE rates for a 2,400 square foot (s.f.) Convenience Market, the previous use is estimated to have generated 1,829 gross daily vehicle trips, with 150 gross trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour and 118 gross trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour.
752
CC 07-07-2022
752 of 1038
Trip Generation Study for the 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard Residential Project January 10, 2020 P a g e | 2
After applying the estimated trip credits associated with the previous use on the site, the 9-unit residential project would be expected to generate 1,744 fewer daily vehicle trips than the previous use, with 143 fewer trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 109 fewer trips occurring during the PM peak hour (see Table 1).

Table 1
Project Trip Generation Estimates
Transportation Policy Change
Historically, traffic impact analysis has focused on the identification of traffic impacts and potential roadway improvements based on auto delay to relieve traffic congestion that may result due to planned growth. However, with the adoption of the State of California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), all public agencies will be required by July 2020 to base transportation impacts on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) rather than level of service (LOS). The change in measurement is intended to better evaluate the effects on the state’s goals for climate change and multi-modal transportation. In adherence with SB 743 legislation, the City of Cupertino intends to adopt a new Transportation Analysis Policy prior to July 2020. The new City Policy ultimately will establish the thresholds for transportation impacts under CEQA based on VMT rather than intersection LOS. The intent of this change is to shift the focus of transportation analysis under CEQA from vehicle delay and roadway auto capacity to a reduction in vehicle emissions, and the creation of robust multimodal networks that support integrated land uses. Starting in July 2020, all new projects in the City of Cupertino will be required to analyze transportation impacts using the VMT metric. In the interim, automobile delay is still considered the standard metric in determining a significant impact, and the City of Cupertino will continue to apply the current LOS criteria.

VMT Evaluation
VMT is the total miles of travel by personal motorized vehicles a project is expected to generate in a day. VMT measures the full distance of personal motorized vehicle-trips with one end within the project and is a useful metric in understanding the overall effects of a project on the transportation system. Many factors affect travel behavior and trip lengths such as density of land use, diversity of land uses, design of the transportation network, distance to high-quality transit, and demographics.

Low-density development separated from other land uses and located in areas with poor access to transit generates more automobile travel and higher VMT compared to development located in AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily Daily
Land Use Rate Trips Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Proposed Use
Attached Residential 1
9 DU 9.44 85 0.74 2 5 7 0.99 6 3 9
Existing Use
Convenience Market 2
2,400 SF 762.28 1,829 62.54 75 75 150 49.11 60 58 118
Net Project Trips: (1,744) (73) (70) (143) (54) (55) (109) Size
Notes: 1
Trip generation based on average rates contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, for Single-Family Housing (Land Use 210), located in a General Urban/Suburban setting. Rates are expressed in trips per dwelling unit (DU). 2 Convenience Market (Land Use 851) average rates from ITE Trip Generation, 10th Edition (2017) were used for the existing building (Bateh Bros. Liquors & MiniMart). The size of the existing building was estimated using the Existing Conditions plan prepared by BKF Engineers. 753
CC 07-07-2022
753 of 1038
Trip Generation Study for the 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard Residential Project January 10, 2020 P a g e | 3
urban areas with more access to transit. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) was used to estimate the VMT for existing and project conditions for informational purposes.

Based on the CalEEMod tool, the existing retail use on the site (a 2,400 s.f. convenience market) has an approximate daily VMT of 3,800 miles. The proposed 9-unit residential project would produce an approximate daily VMT of 538 miles based on the CalEEMod calculations. This equates to a daily reduction of 3,262 VMT for the site with the project. 754
CC 07-07-2022
754 of 1038
755
CC 07-07-2022
755 of 1038
RESOLUTION NO. 22-001

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL

ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, MITIGATION

MEASURES, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF EIGHTEEN (18) RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 4,500 SQ . FT. OF COMMERCIAL SPACE AT 10625 SOUTH FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ( APN: 342- 16- 087 & 088)
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: EA-2018- 06
Applicant: Dan Shaw (SCR Enterprises)
Location: 10625 South Foothill Boulevard ( APN#s 342-16-087 & 088) SECTION II: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino received an application on September 14, 2018 for a Zoning Map Amendment, Development Permit, Architectural and Site Approval, Use Permit, Tentative Map, and Tree Removal Permit, to allow the development of a new mixed- use development consisting eighteen ( 18) residential units and 4,500 sq. ft. of commercial with associated site and landscaping improvements, and associated environmental review (" Project"); and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 ( Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) (" CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines ( California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.) (" CEQA Guidelines"), the City prepared an Initial Study and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (" Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project is described in the March 2021 " Public Draft Initial Study for Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project" (" Draft IS/MND"); and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2021 the City issued a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, on March 25, 2021, the IS/MND for the project was distributed to responsible agencies and the public for review and comment for a 20-day period that ended April 13, 2021; and
1 756
CC 07-07-2022
756 of 1038
Resolution No. 22- 001
Page2
WHEREAS, the IS/MND concluded that significant environmental effects on Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, Tribal and Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems would be avoided or reduced to less- thansignificant levels by mitigation measures (" MM") identified in the IS/MND; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2021, the City of Cupertino' s Environmental Review Committee held a duly noticed public hearing to receive public testimony and reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft IS/MND, and voted 5-0-0 to recommend that the City Council adopt the Draft IS/MND (EA-2018- 06) and mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission independently reviewed and considered the IS/MND together with the comments and the responses to those comments prior to taking action on the Project; and
WHEREAS, the comments received by the Planning Commission do not require major revisions to the IS/MND due to new or substantially more severe significant effects on the environment; and
WHEREAS, text revisions made after publication of the Draft IS/MND, which are found in the October 2021 Final Draft Initial Study, merely clarify, amplify or make insignificant modifications to the IS/MND, and recirculation of the IS/MND is not required.

WHEREAS, on November 23, 2021, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff's presentation and public testimony, and to consider the information contained in the IS/MND along with all staff reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing, and recommended on a 5-0-0 vote, based on substantial evidence in the record, that the City Council adopt the MND, adopt and incorporate into the Project and implement as conditions of approval all of the mitigation measures for the project that are identified in the IS/MND, and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held at least one public hearing and has independently reviewed and considered the IS/MND together with the comments and the responses to those comments prior to taking action on the Project; and WHEREAS, the comments received by the City Council do not require major revisions to the IS/MND due to new or substantially more severe significant effects on the environment; and
WHEREAS, on January 13, 2022 prior to taking action on the Project, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff's presentation and public testimony, and to further consider the information contained in the IS/MND, along with all staff 2 757
CC 07-07-2022
757 of 1038
Re solution No. 22- 001
Page3
reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

That after careful consideration of the IS/MND, comments on the IS/MND, maps, facts, exhibits, testimony, staff reports, public comments, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the City Council:

1. Finds that the IS/MND for the Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City.

2. Finds that, on the basis of the whole record before it, there is no substantial evidence that the Project as proposed and mitigated will have a significant effect on the environment.

3. Finds that the text revisions to the IS/MND merely clarify, amplify or make insignificant modifications to the IS/MND; therefore, recirculation of the IS/MND is not required.

4. Adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project.

5. Adopts and incorporates into the Project all of the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND. The City Council further makes the mitigation measures, which are listed below, required conditions of approval of the Project to the extent they are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City:
a. AIR QUALITY
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: The project' s construction contractor shall comply with the following best management practices for reducing construction emissions of fugitive dust (PMlO and PM2.5) as required by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Revised California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines:

Water all active construction areas at least twice daily, or as often as needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency may be necessary whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible.

Pave, apply water twice daily or as often as necessary to control dust, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites.

Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials. 3 758
CC 07-07-2022
758 of 1038
Resolution No. 22-001

Page 4 ends

Sweep daily ( with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) or as often as needed all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at the construction site to control dust.

Sweep public streets daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) in the vicinity of the project site, or as often as needed, to keep streets free of visible soil material.

Hydroseed or apply non- toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas.

Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles ( dirt/sand).

Limit vehicle traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.

Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible and water appropriately until vegetation is established.

Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff from public roadways.

All exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: During construction, the construction contractor( s) shall:

Use construction equipment that have engines that meet either the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for off-road diesel- powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Cupertino Building Division that such equipment is not available. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the CARB' s regulations.

Prior to issuance of any construction permit, ensure that all construction plans submitted to the City of Cupertino Planning Department and/or Building Division clearly show the requirement for Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for construction equipment more than 50 horsepower.

Maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the project site for verification by the City of Cupertino Building Division official or their designee. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, and number of construction equipment on site.

Ensure that all equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer' s recommendations.
4 759
CC 07-07-2022
759 of 1038
Res olution No. 22- 001
Pages
Communicate with all sub- contractors in contracts and construction documents that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to 5 minutes or less in compliance with CARB Rule 2449 and is responsible for ensuring that this requirement is met.
b. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure BI0-1: Nests of raptors and other birds shall be protected when in active use, as required by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code. The construction contractor shall indicate the following on all construction plans, if construction activities and any required tree removal occur during the breeding season ( February 1 and August 31).

Preconstruction surveys shall:

Be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to tree removal or grading, demolition, or construction activities. Note that preconstruction surveys are not required for tree removal or construction, grading, or demolition activities outside the nesting period.

Be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of tree removal or construction.

Be repeated at 14-day intervals until construction has been initiated in the area after which surveys can be stopped.

Document locations of active nests containing viable eggs or young birds.

Protective measures for active nests containing viable eggs or young birds shall be implemented under the direction of the qualified biologist until the nests no longer contain eggs or young birds, and the young have left the nest and are foraging independently, or the nest is no longer active. Protective measures shall include:

Establishment of clearly delineated exclusion zones ( i.e., demarcated by identifiable fencing, such as orange construction fencing or equivalent) around each nest location as determined by the qualified biologist, taking into account the species of birds nesting, their tolerance for disturbance and proximity to existing development. In general, exclusion zones shall be a minimum of 300 feet for raptors and 75 feet for passerines and other birds.

Monitoring active nests within an exclusion zone on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance and confirm nesting status.

An increase in the radius of an exclusion zone by the qualified biologist if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting 5 760
CC 07-07-2022
760 of 1038
Resolution No. 22- 001

Page 6 ends

birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified biologist only in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. c. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure CULT-1: A representative from the Tamien Nation shall be retained and permitted on-site at all times during ground disturbance ( including grading, demolition and/or construction) to monitor for potential prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources. Notice shall be given to the Tamien Nation in a manner requested by the Tamien Nation at least five (5) days before any ground disturbing activity. Prior to ground disturbance activities, construction workers conducting the ground disturbing activities shall undergo cultural resource sensitivity training conducted by the on-site Tamien Nation representative.

If any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground- disturbing ( including grading, demolition and/ or construction) activities:

All work within 50 feet of the resources shall be halted, the City shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist and Tamien Nation representative shall be consulted. The contractor shall cooperate in the recovery of the materials. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for tribal cultural resources, historical resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.

The qualified archaeologist shall prepare a report for the evaluation of the resource to the California Register of Historical Places and the City Building Department. The report shall also include appropriate recommendations in collaboration with a Tamien Nation representative regarding the significance of the find and appropriate mitigations as follows:

If the resource is a non-tribal resource, the archaeologist shall assess the significance of the find according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

If the resource is a tribal resource - whether historic or prehistoric - the consulting archaeologist shall consult with the Tamien Nation to evaluate the significance of the resource and to recommend appropriate and feasible avoidance, testing, preservation, or mitigation measures, in light of factors such as the significance of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures ( e.g., data recovery) may be implemented.

Page 7 ends

d. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Mitigation Measure GE0-1: The construction contractor shall incorporate the following in all grading, demolition, and construction plans:

In the event that fossils or fossil-bearing deposits are discovered during grading, demolition, or building, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted.

The contractor shall notify the City of Cupertino Building Department and a City-approved qualified paleontologist to examine the discovery.

The paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed, in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards ( Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995), evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the finding under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find.

If the project applicant determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the proposed project based on the qualities that make the resource important.

The excavation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to implementation.
e. NOISE
Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: The following shall be incorporated in all activity phases and construction plans, as required by the Cupertino Municipal Code CMC). Construction activities shall take place only during daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and due to the close proximity of the adjacent residential land use to the west, construction may occur on the weekends, holidays or nighttime only if a .special exception has been granted by the City. In addition, the construction crew shall adhere to the following best management practices:

At least 90 days prior to the start of any construction, demolition or grading activities, all off-site businesses and residents within 300 feet of the project site will be notified of the planned activities. The notification will include a brief description of the project, the activities that would occur, the hours when activity would occur, and the construction period' s overall duration.

The notification should include the telephone numbers of the contractor' s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint.
7 762
CC 07-07-2022
762 of 1038
Res olution No. 22- 001

Page 8 ends

The project applicant and contractors shall prepare and submit a Construction Noise Control Plan to the City' s Building Department and Code Enforcement for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading, demolition, and/or building permits. The Construction Noise Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the 80-dBA limit in the CMC. The details of the Construction Noise Control Plan, including those details listed herein, shall be included as part of the permit application drawing set and as part of the construction drawing set, shall be implemented by the on- site Construction Manager, and shall include, but not be limited to, the following available controls to comply with the 80 dBA performance standard:

At least 10 days prior to the start of construction activities, a sign will be posted at the entrance( s) .to the job site, clearly visible to the public, which includes permitted construction days and hours, as well as the telephone numbers of the City's and contractor' s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. If the authorized contractor' s representative receives a complaint, they will investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City.

During the entire active construction period, equipment and trucks used for project construction will utilize the best available noise control techniques e.g., improved mufflers, equipment re-design, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds), wherever feasible.

Include noise control requirements for equipment and tools, including concrete saws, to the maximum extent feasible. Such requirements could include, but are not limited to, erecting temporary plywood noise barriers between construction areas and nearby sensitive receptors; performing work in a manner that minimizes noise; and undertaking the noisiest activities during times of least disturbance to nearby sensitive receptors.

During the entire active construction period, noisy operations will be conducted simultaneously to the degree feasible in order to reduce the time periods of these operations.

Select haul routes that avoid the greatest amount of sensitive use areas and submit to the City of Cupertino Public Works Department for approval prior to the start of the construction phase.
8 763
CC 07-07-2022
763 of 1038
Resolution No. 22- 001

Page 9 ends

Signs will be posted at the job site entrance( s), within the on-site construction zones, and along queueing lanes ( if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. All other equipment will be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes.

During the entire active construction period and to the extent feasible, the use of noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells will be for safety warning purposes only. The construction manager will use smart back- up alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm level based on the background noise level or switch off back- up alarms and replace with human spotters in compliance with all safety requirements and laws.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the Cupertino Municipal Code noise limits of 60 dBA and 50 dBA at residential uses during daytime and nighttime, respectively, and 65 dBA and 55 dBA at non-residential sensitive uses during daytime and nighttime, respectively. A qualified acoustical consultant shall be retained to review mechanical noise as these systems are selected to determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City's noise level requirements. Mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the City's noise level requirements. Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to:

Selection of equipment that emits low noise levels;
Installation of noise dampening techniques, such as enclosures and ·parapet walls, to block the line-of-sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors; or
Locating equipment in less noise- sensitive areas, where feasible.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: If paving activity during construction is required within 25 feet of nearby residential structures, the use of a static roller in lieu of a vibratory roller shall be employed. Grading and earthwork activities within 15 feet of adjacent residential structures shall be conducted with off-road equipment that is limited to 100 horsepower or less. This mitigation measure shall be identified on the permit application drawing set and as part of the construction drawing set, and shall be implemented by the on-site Construction Manager. f. TRIBAL CULUTRAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1. 9 764
CC 07-07-2022
764 of 1038
Resolution No. 22- 001

Page 10 ends

g. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: No building permits shall be issued by the City for the proposed Canyon Crossing Mixed- Use Project that would result in exceeding the permitted peak wet weather flow capacity of 13.8 mgd through the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system. The project applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Cupertino and Cupertino Sanitary District (CSD), that the proposed project would not exceed the peak wet weather flow capacity of the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system by implementing one or more of the following methods:

1. Reduce inflow and infiltration in the CSD system to reduce peak wet weather flows; or

2. Increase on-site water reuse, such as increased grey water use, or reduce water consumption of the fixtures used within the proposed project, or other methods that are measurable and reduce sewer generation rates to acceptable levels, to the satisfaction of the CSD.

The proposed project' s estimated wastewater generation shall be calculated using the generation rates used by the CSD in the Flow Modeling Analysis for the Homestead Flume Outfall to the City of Santa Clara, prepared by Mark Thomas & Co. Inc., dated December 6, 2019, unless alternative (i.e.~ lower) generation rates achieved by the proposed project are substantiated by the project applicant based on evidence to the satisfaction of the CSD. To calculate the peak wet weather flow for a 10-year storm event, the average daily flow rate shall be multiplied by a factor of 2.95 as required by CSD pursuant to their December 2019 flow modeling analysis.

6. Adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, as amended, attached hereto as Exhibit EA-1, and incorporated herein by reference, which incorporates all the mitigation measures identified in the Final IS/MND.

PASS ED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 13th day of January, 2022 by the following vote:

Vote Members of the City Council
AYES: Paul, Chao, Moore, Wei, Willey
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
765
CC 07-07-2022
765 of 1038
Resolution No. 22- 001

Page 11 ends

SIGNED:

City of C
ATTEST:

Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
Date
Date
11 1/27/22
766
CC 07-07-2022
766 of 1038
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
CANYON

CROSSING
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

APN: 342-16-087 & 088
OCTOBER 2021
1 Exhibit EA-1
767
CC 07-07-2022
767 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
AIR QUALITY During the construction Improvements City of Cupertino Mitigation Measure AQ- 1: The project' s construction contractor shall and post- construction related to these Public Works and comply with the following best management practices for reducing phases, the project measures shall Building Departments construction emissions of fugitive dust ( PMlO and PM2. 5) as required by proponent shall be be printed on the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Rev.ised California responsible for all construction Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines: implementing these documents, Water all active construction areas at least twice daily, or as often as measures, including contracts, and needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to improvements. project plans prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering and shall be reviewed by frequency may be necessary whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles the Director of per hour. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible. Community Pave, apply water twice daily or as often as necessary to control Development and the dust, or apply ( non- toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access Director of Public Work roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. prior to the issuance of Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials . grading and/ or building Sweep daily ( with water sweepers using reclaimed water if permits . possible) or as often as needed all paved access roads, parking areas .. and staging areas at the construction site to control dust.

Sweep public streets daily ( with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) in the vicinity of the project site, or as often as needed, to keep streets free of visible soil material.

Hydroseed or apply non- toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas.

Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non- toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles ( dirt/ sand).

Limit vehicle traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour .

Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible and water appropriately until vegetation is established.

Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff from public roadways.
2 768
CC 07-07-2022
768 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
All exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: During construction, the construction Project proponent to ensure Provide documentation City of Cupertino contractor( s) shall: inclusion of these demonstrating Public Works, Use construction equipment that have engines that meet either the requirements in all compliance ( i.e. Planning, and United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or contracts and permit specifications of vehicles Building Departments California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 Interim emissions documents. Prior to the and equipment) and on standards for off- road diesel- powered construction equipment with issuance of any the construction more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City construction permit. drawings clearly show of Cupertino Building Division that such equipment is not the requirement for available. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall Level 3 Diesel achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be Particulate Filters achieved by Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for a similarly sized emissions standards for engine, as defined by the CARB' s regulations. construction equipment Prior to issuance of any construction permit, ensure that all over 50 horsepower. construction plans submitted to the City of Cupertino Planning Department and/ or Building Division clearly show the requirement for Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for construction equipment more than 50 horsepower.

Ensure that all equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer' s
recommendations.

Communicate with all sub- contractors in contracts and construction documents that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to 5 minutes or less in compliance with CARB Rule 2449 and is responsible for ensuring that this requirement is met. 3 769
CC 07-07-2022
769 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
Mitigation Measure BI0-1: Nests of raptors and other birds shall be Project proponent to add If grading and/or tree City of Cupertino protected when in active use, as required by the federal Migratory Bird this to all construction removal begins during Planning Department Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code. The construction plans and contracts to the stated dates in the contractor shall indicate the following on all construction plans, if ensure biologist conducts mitigation measure, A construction activities and any required tree removal occur during the pre-construction surveys as final report of nesting breeding season ( February 1 and August 31). required. birds, including any Preconstruction surveys shall: protection measures,
Be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to tree removal or shallbe submitted tothe grading, demolition, or construction activities. Note that Director of Community preconstruction surveys are not required for tree removal or Development prior to construction, grading, or demolition activities outside the the start of demolition. nesting period.

Be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of tree removal or construction.

Be repeated at 14- day intervals until construction has been initiated in the area after which surveys can be stopped .

Document locations of active nests containing viable eggs or young birds.

Establishment of clearly delineated exclusion zones ( i .e ., demarcated by identifiable fencing, such as orange
construction fencing or equivalent) around each nest location as determined by the qualified biologist, taking into account the species of birds nesting, their tolerance for disturbance and proximity to existing development. In general, exclusion 4 770
CC 07-07-2022
770 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
zones shall be a minimum of 300 feet for raptors and 75 feet for passerines and other birds.

Monitoring active nests within an exclusion zone on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance and confirm nesting status.

An increase in the radius of an exclusion zone by the qualified biologist if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting birds . Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified biologist only in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Monitoring active nests within an exclusion zone on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance and confirm nesting status.

An increase in the radius of an exclusion zone by the qualified biologist if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified biologist only in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

The protection measures shall remain in effect until the young have left the nest and are foraging independently or the nest is no longer active.

Mitigation Measure CULT-1: A tribal representative shall be permitted During site excavation, the All archaeological Community on- site at all times during ground disturbance ( including grading, project proponent shall be monitoring and Development Public demolition and/ or construction) to monitor for potential prehistoric or responsible for reporting measures shall Works & Building historic subsurface cultural resources. Notice shall be given to the Tribe in implementation be included inall Department a manner requested by the Tribe at least 48 hours before any ground ofArchaeological construction documents, disturbing activity. Prior to ground disturbance activities, construction monitoring. Monitoring and construction workers conducting the ground disturbing activities shall undergo shall be conducted during management plans, cultural resource sensitivity training conducted by the on- site tribal earthmoving activities by a contracts, andproject representative. qualified archaeologist. plans and shall be reviewed by the
5 771
CC 07-07-2022
771 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
If any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered During construction, the Community during ground- disturbing ( including grading, demolition and/ or project proponent and Development construction) activities : contractor shall Department
All work within 50 feet of the resources shall be halted, the City beresponsible for shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist and tribal notification of representative shall be consulted . The contractor shall cooperat e in anydiscoveries. the recovery of the materials. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for tribal cultural resources, historical resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.

The qualified archaeologist shall prepare a report for the evaluation of the resource to the California Register of Historical Places and the City Building Department. The report shall also include appropriate recommendations in collaboration with a tribal representative regarding the significance of the find and appropriate mitigations as follows:

If the resource is a non- tribal resource, the archaeologist shall assess the significance of the find according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. 5.

If the resource is a tribal resource - whether historic or prehistoric - the consulting archaeologist shall consult with the appropriate tribe( s) to evaluate the significance of the resource and to recommend appropriate and feasible avoidance, testing,
preservation, or mitigation measures, in light of factors such as the significance of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations . If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures ( e.g., data recovery) may be implemented.

All significant non- tribal cultural materials recovered shall be, as necessary, and at the discretion of the consulting archaeologist, subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and documentation according to current professional standards. 6 772
CC 07-07-2022
772 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1. During site excavation, the All archaeological Director of project proponent shall be monitoring and Community
responsible for reporting measures shall Development, Public implementation of be printed on all Works & Building
Archaeological monitoring. construction documents, Department Monitoring shall be contracts, and project
conducted during plans and shall be
earthmoving activities by a reviewed by the Director
qualified archaeologist. of Community
During construction, the Development
project proponent and
contractor shall be
responsible for notification
of any discoveries.

Mitigation Measure GE0-1: The construction contractor shall incorporate At the construction phase, All attenuation City of Cupertino the following in all grading, demolition, and construction plans: the project proponent and measures shall be Public Works & In the event that fossils or fossil- bearing deposits are discovered contractor shall be printed on construction Building Department during grading, demolition, or building, excavations within 50 responsible for completing documents, contracts, feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted. all improvements. construction The contractor shall notify the City of Cupertino Building management plan, and Department and a City- approved qualified paleontologist to project plans and examine the discovery. reviewed by the Director
The paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed, in of Public Works prior to
accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards issuance of grading
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995), evaluate the potential and/ or building permits.
resource, and assess the significance of the finding under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. 5.

The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find.
7 773
CC 07-07-2022
773 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
If the project applicant determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the proposed project based on the qualities that make the resource important. The excavation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to implementation.

Mitigation Measure NOISE- 1: The following shall be incorporated in all At the construction phase, All attenuation City of Cupertino activity phases and construction plans, as required by the Cupertino the project proponent and measures shall be Public Wor ks, and Municipal Code ( CMC). Construction activities shall take place only contractor shall be printed on construction Planning and Building during daytime hours of 7:00 a .m . and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and due to responsible for completing documents, contracts, Department the close proximity of the adjacent residential land use to the west, all improvements. construction construction may occur on the weekends, holidays or nighttime only if a management plan, special exception has been granted by the City. In addition, the andproject plans and construction crew shall adhere to the following best management reviewed by the Director practices: of Public Works prior to
At least 90 days prior to the start of any construction, demolition issuance of grading or grading activities, all off- site businesses and residents within and/ or building permits . 300 feet of the project site will be notified of the planned activities.

The notification will include a brief description of the project, the activities that would occur, the hours when activity would occur, and the construction period' s overall duration. The notification should include the telephone numbers of the contractor' s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint.

The Construction Noise Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the 80- dBA limit in the CMC. The details of the Construction Noise Control Plan, including those details listed herein, shall be 8 774
CC 07-07-2022
774 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
included as part of the permit application drawing set and as part of the construction drawing set, shall be implemented by th~ onsite Construction Manager, and shall include, but not be limited to, the following available controls to comply with the 80 dBA performance standard:

At least 10 days prior to the start of construction activities, a sign will be posted at the entrance( s) to the job site, clearly visible to the public, which includes permitted construction days and hours, as well as the telephone numbers of the City' s and contractor' s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. If the authorized contractor' s representative receives a complaint, they will investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City.

During the entire active construction period, equipment and trucks used for project construction will utilize the best available noise control techniques ( e.g., improved mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds), wherever feasible.

During the entire active construction period, stationary noise sources will be located as far from sensitive rece ptors as possible, and they will be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, or insulation barriers or other measures will be incorporated to the extent feasible.
9 775
CC 07-07-2022
775 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
During the _entire active construction period, noisy operations will be conducted simultaneously to the degree feasible in order to reduce the time periods of these operations.

Select haul routes that avoid the greatest amount of sensitive use areas and submit to the City of Cupertino Public Works
Department for approval prior to the start of the construction phase.

Signs will be posted at the job site entrance( s), within the on- site construction zones, and along queueing lanes (if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. All other equipment will be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes.

Mitigation Measure NOISE- 2: Mechanical equipment shall be selected At the construction phase, At the construction City of Cupertino and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the the project proponent and phase, the project Public Works, and Cupertino Municipal Code noise limits of 60 dBA and 50 dBA at contractor shall be proponent and Planning and Building residential uses during daytime and nighttime, respectively, and 65 dBA responsible for completing contractor shall be Department and 55 dBA at non- residential sensitive uses ( i.e., the Cupertino Hotel) all improvements. responsible for during daytime and nighttime, respectively. A qualified acoustical completing all consultant shall be retained to review mechanical noise as these systems improvements. are selected to determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City' s noise level requirements.

Mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts 776
CC 07-07-2022
776 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
on surrounding uses to meet the City's noise level requirements. Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to:

Selection of equipment that emits low noise levels;
Installation of noise dampening techniques, such as enclosures and parapet walls, to block the line- of- sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors;
Locating equipment in less noise-sensitive areas, where feasible .

Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: If paving activity during construction is At the construction phase, All attenuation City of Cupertino required within 25 feet of nearby residential structures, the use of a static the projectproponent measures shall be Public Works, and roller in lieu of a vibratory roller shall be employed. Grading and andcontractor shall printed on Planning and Building earthwork activities within 15 feet of adjacent residential structures shall beresponsible constructiondocuments, Department be conducted with off-road equipment that is limited to 100 horsepower or forcompleting contracts, construction less. This mitigation measure shall be identified on the permit application allimprovements. management plan, drawing set and as part of the construction drawing set, and shall be andproject plans and implemented by the on-site Construction Manager. reviewed by the Director of PublicWorks prior
toissuance of grading
and/ or building permits .

Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: No building permits shall be issued by the Prior to the issuance of any Demonstrate that the Department of Public City for the proposed Canyon Crossing Mixed- Use Project that would construction permit. proposed hotel would Works and Cupertino result in exceeding the permitted peak wet weather flow capacity of 13. 8 not exceed the peak Sanitary District mgd through the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system. The project applicant weather flow capacity of shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Cupertino and the Santa Clara sanitary Cupertino Sanitary District ( CSD), that the proposed project would not sewer. exceed the peak wet weather flow capacity of the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system by implementing one or more of the following methods:

1. Reduce inflow and infiltration in the CSD system to reduce peak wet weather flows; or

2. Increase on-site water reuse, such as increased grey water use, or reduce water consumption of the fixtures used within the proposed 11 777
CC 07-07-2022
777 of 1038
Mitigation Measure Timeframe and Method of Compliance Oversight of Responsibility for Implementation
Implementation
project, or other methods that are measu rable and reduce sewer generation rates to acceptable levels, to the satisfaction of the CSD.

The proposed project' s estimated wastewater generation shall be calculated using the generation rates used by the CSD in the Flow Modeling Analysis for the Homestead Flume Outfall to the City of Santa Clara, prepared by Mark Thomas & Co. Inc., dated December 6, 2019, unless alternative i .e., lower) generation rates achieved by the proposed project are substantiated by the project applicant based on evidence to the satisfaction of the CSD. To calculate the peak wet weather flow for a 10- year storm event, the average daily flow rate shall be multiplied by a factor of 2 .95 as required by CSD pursuant to their December 2019 flow modeling analysis. 12 778
CC 07-07-2022
778 of 1038
Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project Initial Study
for the City of Cupertino
December 2021 | Revised Final Draft Initial Study
Image Credit: LPMD Architects, 2019. 779
CC 07-07-2022
779 of 1038
780
CC 07-07-2022
780 of 1038
Prepared By:

PlaceWorks
Berkeley, California
510.848.3815
O R A N G E CO U N T Y • BAY AREA • S A C R A M E N TO • C E N T R A L COA S T • LO S A N G E L ES • I N L A N D E M P I R E • S A N D I EG O www.placeworks.com
Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project Initial Study
for the City of Cupertino
December 2021 | Revised Final Draft Initial Study
781
CC 07-07-2022
781 of 1038
782
CC 07-07-2022
782 of 1038
PLACEWORKS i

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Table of Contents

1.1 Initial Study ............................................................................................................................ 2-1

1.2 Tiering Process....................................................................................................................... 2-2

1.3 Report Organization............................................................................................................... 2-4

2.1 Initial Study Checklist............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .......................................................................... 2-2

2.3 Determination........................................................................................................................ 2-2

2.4 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................... 2-3

3.1 Project Location and Site Characteristics .............................................................................. 3-1

3.2 Project Components............................................................................................................ 3-14

3.3 Required Permits and Approvals ......................................................................................... 3-32

4.1 Discussion of Environmental Evaluation................................................................................ 4-1 I. Aesthetics..................................................................................................................... 4-2 II. Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 4-6 III. Biological Resources .................................................................................................. 4-17 IV. Cultural Resources..................................................................................................... 4-25 V. Energy ........................................................................................................................4-28 VI. Geology and Soils....................................................................................................... 4-31 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions........................................................................................ 4-37 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials............................................................................. 4-46 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................................... 4-53 X. Land Use and Planning............................................................................................... 4-61 XI. Noise ..........................................................................................................................4-63 XII. Population and Housing............................................................................................. 4-71 XIII. Public Services ........................................................................................................... 4-74 XIV. Parks and Recreation ................................................................................................. 4-76 XV. Transportation............................................................................................................ 4-78 XVI. Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... 4-89 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems..................................................................................... 4-91 783
CC 07-07-2022
783 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
XVIII. Wildfire.....................................................................................................................4-101 XIX. Mandatory Findings of Significance.........................................................................4-104

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data Appendix B: Health Risk Assessment
Appendix C: Noise Data
Appendix D: Transportation Data
Appendix E: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
In addition to these appendices, all documents cited in this report and used in its preparation are hereby incorporated by reference into this Initial Study. Copies of documents referenced herein are available for review at the City of Cupertino Community Development Department at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014.

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1 Regional and Vicinity Map..................................................................................................3-2 Figure 3-2 Aerial View of Project Site and Surroundings.....................................................................3-3 Figure 3-3 Existing Conditions .............................................................................................................3-5 Figure 3-4 Conceptual Site Plan.........................................................................................................3-15 Figure 3-5 Mixed-Use Building Ground Floor....................................................................................3-16 Figure 3-6 Mixed-Use Building Second Floor Apartments and Roof.................................................3-17 Figure 3-7 Mixed-Use Building Subterranean Parking Level .............................................................3-18 Figure 3-8 Mixed-Use Building Elevation...........................................................................................3-19 Figure 3-9 Detached Single-Family Homes Elevation........................................................................3-21 Figure 3-10 Attached Single-Family Homes Elevation.........................................................................3-22 Figure 3-11 Attached Single-Family Homes Elevation.........................................................................3-23 Figure 3-12 Circulation Map ................................................................................................................3-25 Figure 3-13 Proposed Landscape Plan................................................................................................. 3-27 Figure 3-14 Proposed Lighting Plan .....................................................................................................3-28 Figure 3-15 Utility Plan ........................................................................................................................3-30 Figure 4-1 Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities..........................................................................4-82 784
CC 07-07-2022
784 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLACEWORKS iii

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 General Plan EIR, General Plan, and the Proposed Project Comparison Table .................2-3 Table 3-1 Demolition and Construction ...........................................................................................3-31 Table 4-1 Existing Operation-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions..............................................4-7 Table 4-2 Construction-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Estimates....................................4-11 Table 4-3 Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Estimates ...................................................4-12 Table 4-4 Construction Risk Summary – Unmitigated .....................................................................4-14 Table 4-5 Construction Risk Summary – Mitigated..........................................................................4-15 Table 4-6 Existing GHG Emissions ....................................................................................................4-38 Table 4-7 Project Operation and Construction GHG Emissions.......................................................4-38 Table 4-8 Cupertino Climate Action Plan Consistency Matrix .........................................................4-43 Table 4-9 Project-Related Construction Noise, Energy-Average (Leq) Noise Levels, dBA.................4-66 Table 4-10 Construction Equipment Vibration Levels........................................................................4-70 Table 4-11 Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled.........................................................................................4-81 Table 4-12 Proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled......................................................................................4-83 Table 4-13 Project Trip Generation ....................................................................................................4-83 Table 4-14 Water Demand for the Proposed Project.........................................................................4-95 Table 4-15 WasteWater Demand for the Proposed Project ..............................................................4-96 Table 4-16 Reasonably Foreseeable Development Projects in Cupertino.......................................4-106 Table 5-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ................................................................. 5-2 785
CC 07-07-2022
785 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
This page intentionally left blank.
786
CC 07-07-2022
786 of 1038
PLACEWORKS 2-1

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Introduction
This document is an Initial Study for the Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project (proposed project) prepared by the City of Cupertino (City) to determine if the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. This Initial Study was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code sections 21000 et seq.). Pursuant to Section 15051 of the State CEQA Guidelines,1 the City is the lead agency for the proposed project.

The project site is located on a 1.57-acre site that is proposed for redevelopment by SCR Enterprises (the project applicant). The site is located at 10625 South Foothill Boulevard, 2 where South Foothill Boulevard
meets Stevens Canyon Road. The project site is surrounded by single-family residential uses. The site is currently developed with three buildings, a surface parking lot, and associated landscaping. The proposed project would involve demolishing the existing structures and redeveloping the site with 4,536 square feet of commercial space and up to 18 residential units comprised of apartments, eight attached, and five detached single-family units. All proposed structures would have a maximum building height of 30 feet (two stories) and would include parking and associated landscaping. One level of below-grade parking garage would be located under the mixed-use building.

The project site is assigned Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 342-16-087 and 342-16-088. The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Commercial/Residential and the Zoning District is Planning Development with General Commercial (P(CG)). The Commercial/Residential land use designation allows primarily commercial uses and secondarily residential uses, or a compatible combination of the two. The proposed project includes rezoning the project site to Planning Development with General Commercial and Residential (P(CG,Res), to support the proposed residential uses intended to support commercial development. A detailed description of the proposed project is provided in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study.

1.1 INITIAL STUDY
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, an Initial Study is a preliminary environmental analysis that is used by the lead agency as a basis for determining what form of environmental review is required for a project. The CEQA Guidelines require that an Initial Study contain a project description, description of environmental setting, identification of environmental effects by checklist or other similar form, explanation of environmental effects, discussion of mitigation for significant environmental effects, 1 The CEQA Guidelines are found in California Code of Regulations, Title, 14, Section 15000 et seq. 2 There are several addresses assigned to the project site, but for the purposes of this Initial Study, a single address (10625 South Foothill Boulevard) is used to represent the entire project site. 787
CC 07-07-2022
787 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

INTRODUCTION
2-2 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
evaluation of the project’s consistency with existing and applicable land use controls, and the name of persons who prepared the study.

1.2 TIERING PROCESS
The CEQA concept of "tiering" refers to the evaluation of general environmental matters in a broad program-level EIR, with subsequent focused or project-level environmental documents for individual projects that implement the program. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15152 this Initial Study is tiered from the City’s General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and associated Rezoning Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that was certified by the Cupertino City Council in December 2014,3 and the subsequent addenda to the EIR that were approved by the City Council in October 2015,4 August 2019,5 and December 2019,6 together hereinafter “General Plan EIR.” Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 this Initial Study incorporates by reference the discussions in the General Plan EIR.7 As previously stated, copies of documents referenced herein are available for review at the City of Cupertino Community Development Department at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014.

The analysis in this Initial Study concentrates on the project-specific issues pertaining to the proposed Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use project. CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines encourage the use of tiered environmental documents to reduce delays and excessive paperwork in the environmental review process. This is accomplished in tiered documents by eliminating repetitive analyses of issues that were adequately addressed in the program EIRs and by incorporating those analyses by reference.

In order to determine whether the proposed project was part of the development that was examined in the General Plan EIR, the following questions must be answered:
 Is the proposed project included in the scope of the development projected and analyzed in the General Plan EIR?
 Is the project site in an area designated for Commercial/Residential land uses in the General Plan and Planned Development with General Commercial and Residential Zoning District?  Are the changes to population and employment associated with the proposed project included within the scope of the projections accounted for in the General Plan EIR?  Is the proposed project within the scope of the cumulative analysis in the General Plan EIR? The General Plan EIR included an evaluation of the project site as potential Housing Element Site 9 (Foothill at McClellan Center – Foothill Market), although the adopted General Plan did not designate this 3 City of Cupertino, certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. December 2014. 4 City of Cupertino, approved First Addendum to the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. October 2015. 5 City of Cupertino, approved Second Addendum to the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. August 2019. 6 City of Cupertino, approved Third Addendum to the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. December 2019. 7 Discussions are in Chapter 3, Project Description, and Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, of this Initial Study. 788
CC 07-07-2022
788 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

INTRODUCTION
PLACEWORKS 2-3

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
site as a Priority Housing Element Site. The evaluation in the General Plan EIR assumed potential redevelopment of commercial and residential uses with 27 maximum dwelling units and a maximum building height of 30 feet. The General Plan EIR evaluated a Zoning District change from Planned Development with General Commercial (P(CG)) to Planned Development with General Commercial and Residential (P(CG,Res)) to accommodate the construction of residential uses on-site. The project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation, but because the City Council did not identify this as a Housing Element site, the Zoning Map was not amended following the certification of the General Plan EIR. The approval of the proposed project would require an amendment to the Zoning Map to allow residential uses on the project site as proposed. The cumulative impacts of past, present, and probable future development, in conjunction with overall General Plan buildout, including residential development of the project site, were evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, this Initial Study tiers from the General Plan EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15152 (Public Resources Code Section 21094).

Table 1-1 identifies the development potential that was analyzed for the project site in the General Plan EIR, what type of development the General Plan currently anticipates for the project site, and what is proposed for the site as part of the project.

TABLE 1-1 GENERAL PLAN EIR, GENERAL PLAN, AND THE PROPOSED PROJECT COMPARISON TABLE General Plan EIR a General Plan
b Proposed Project
Reference Name
Housing Element Site 9
(Foothill at McClellan Center
– Foothill Market)
Neighborhoods: Inspirational
Heights Neighborhood Canyon Crossings
General Plan Land Use Commercial/Residential Commercial/Residential c Commercial/Residential Zoning District
Planned Development with
General Commercial and
Residential (P(CG, Res)) d
Planned Development with
General Commercial (P(CG))
Planned Development with
General Commercial and
Residential (P(CG, Res))
Density 25 du/ac 15 du/ac e 11.5 du/ac
Maximum Height 30 feet 30 feet e 30 feet
Development Potential Up to 27 net residential units f Up to 24 net residential units 4,536 square feet commercial 18 residential units
Population
g
80 70 52
Employees
h N/A N/A 10
Notes: du/ac = dwelling units per acre
a. Certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR and Addenda, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007.

December 2014, October 2015, August 2019, and December 2019. b. City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015 – 2040). c. City of Cupertino Land Use Map adopted November 15, 2005 and amended August 20, 2019. d. Although the General Plan EIR evaluated an amendment to the Zoning District from Planned Development with General Commercial (P(CG)) to Planned Development with General Commercial and Residential (P(CG,Res)), the City did not change the Zoning Map at that time. e. Chapter 2, Planning Areas, page PA-22 and PA-23; Chapter 3, Land Use and Community Design Element, page LU-16 and LU-17. f. Although the site could accommodate up to 39 units based the 25 du/ac density, the General Plan EIR evaluated a realistic yield of 27 net units. g. Estimates are based on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) 2019 projections that show an average household size of 2.87 persons for Cupertino in 2020. This is the standard approach for population estimates in Cupertino. Note that the 2.94 persons per household rate for year 2040 was applied in the General Plan EIR.
h. The General Plan EIR applied a generation rate of 450 square feet of commercial space per employee.

Source: City of Cupertino, PlaceWorks, 2020.
789
CC 07-07-2022
789 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

INTRODUCTION
2-4 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION
This Initial Study is organized into the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter provides an introduction and overview of the Initial Study document.

Chapter 2: Executive Summary. A summary of the pertinent details for the proposed project, including lead agency contact information, proposed project location, and General Plan land use designation and Zoning Districts are in this chapter. This chapter also summarizes the significant impacts that could occur from construction and operation of the proposed project and identifies the mitigation measures recommended to reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Chapter 3: Project Description. This chapter describes the location and setting of the proposed project, along with its principal components, as well as a description of the policy setting and implementation process for the proposed project.

Chapter 4: Environmental Analysis. Making use of the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, this chapter identifies and discusses anticipated impacts from the proposed project, providing substantiation of the findings made.

Chapter 5: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. This chapter lists the impacts found to be significant and identifies the recommended mitigation measures categorized by impact area.

Chapter 6: Organizations and Persons Consulted. This chapter presents a list of City and other agencies and consultant team members that contributed to the preparation of the Initial Study. 790
CC 07-07-2022
790 of 1038
PLACEWORKS 2-1

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Executive Summary

2.1 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

1. Project Title: Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Cupertino Community Development Department 10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Erick Serrano
Senior Planner
408-777-3205

4. Location: 10625 South Foothill Boulevard
Cupertino, CA 95014

5. Applicant’s Name and Address: SCR Enterprises LLC
15700 Winchester Boulevard
Los Gatos, CA 95030

6. General Plan Land Use Designations: Commercial/Residential

7. Zoning: Planned Development with General Commercial P(CG)

8. Description of Project: See Chapter 3, Project Description

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: See page 3-8 of Chapter 3, Project Description

10. Other Required Approvals: See page 3-32 of Chapter 3, Project Description

11. Have California Native American Tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun?: The City has not received any request from any Tribes in the geographic area with which they are traditionally and culturally affiliated, or otherwise, to be notified about projects in Cupertino. The 791
CC 07-07-2022
791 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-2 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
City received a request to be notified about projects in the city of Cupertino from the Tamien Nation on May 28, 2021, as the city is within the geographic area with which they are traditionally and culturally affiliated. The request was received following the release of the Public Review Draft IS/MND in March 2021. The City conducted the consultation process with the Tamien Nation and changes to Mitigation Measure CULT-1 were reflected in the Final IS/MND in October 2021. This Revised Final IS/MND reflects additional text changes to Mitigation Measure CULT-1 requested by the Tamien Nation after the preparation of the Final IS/MND. These changes do not constitute a substantial revision as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5; therefore, the IS/MND does not need to be recirculated.

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by the proposed project, involving at least one impact that is a potentially significant impact, as shown in Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, of this Initial Study.

Aesthetics Agriculture & Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology & Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology & Water Quality Land Use & Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population & Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities & Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

2.3 DETERMINATION
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.

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.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially 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. 792
CC 07-07-2022
792 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLACEWORKS 2-3

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately 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.

Approved by: ___________________
Erick Serrano, Senior Planner Date

2.4 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Due to the location of the project site, the proposed project would have no impact on Agriculture, Forestry, or Mineral Resources; therefore, these topics are not discussed in detail in the Initial Study. The following lists the potentially significant impacts by topic that could occur from construction and operation of the proposed project and identifies mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to a lessthan-significant level. All other topic areas were identified to have less-than-significant impacts. A detailed discussion of the project’s impacts is provided in Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, of this Initial Study.

AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-1: Fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) generated by the proposed project during construction could potentially result in significant regional short-term air quality impacts without implementation of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s best management practices related to reducing fugitive dust emissions.

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-4 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas.  Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt/sand).  Limit vehicle traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.  Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible and water appropriately until vegetation is established.
 Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff from public roadways.  All exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe.

Impact AQ-2: The proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during construction.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: During construction, the construction contractor(s) shall:
 Use construction equipment that have engines that meet either the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for off-road diesel-powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Cupertino Building Division that such equipment is not available.

Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the CARB’s regulations.
 Prior to issuance of any construction permit, ensure that all construction plans submitted to the City of Cupertino Planning Department and/or Building Division clearly show the requirement for Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for construction equipment more than 50 horsepower.  Maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the project site for verification by the City of Cupertino Building Division official or their designee. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, and number of construction equipment on site.  Ensure that all equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.
 Communicate with all sub-contractors in contracts and construction documents that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to 5 minutes or less in compliance with CARB Rule 2449 and is responsible for ensuring that this requirement is met.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: Demolition and construction activities could disturb active nests in trees and/or otherwise interfere with nesting of birds protected under federal and State law.

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLACEWORKS 2-5

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 Be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to tree removal or grading, demolition, or construction activities. Note that preconstruction surveys are not required for tree removal or construction, grading, or demolition activities outside the nesting period.  Be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of tree removal or construction.  Be repeated at 14-day intervals until construction has been initiated in the area after which surveys can be stopped.
 Document locations of active nests containing viable eggs or young birds.  Protective measures for active nests containing viable eggs or young birds shall be implemented under the direction of the qualified biologist until the nests no longer contain eggs or young birds, and the young have left the nest and are foraging independently, or the nest is no longer active.

Protective measures shall include:
 Establishment of clearly delineated exclusion zones (i.e., demarcated by identifiable fencing, such as orange construction fencing or equivalent) around each nest location as determined by the qualified biologist, taking into account the species of birds nesting, their tolerance for disturbance and proximity to existing development. In general, exclusion zones shall be a minimum of 300 feet for raptors and 75 feet for passerines and other birds.  Monitoring active nests within an exclusion zone on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance and confirm nesting status.  An increase in the radius of an exclusion zone by the qualified biologist if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified biologist only in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CULT-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

Mitigation Measure CULT-1: A tribal representative from the Tamien Nation shall be retained and permitted on-site at all times during ground disturbance (including grading, demolition and/or construction) to monitor for potential prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources. Notice shall be given to the Tribe Tamien Nation in a manner requested by the Tribe Tamien Nation at least 48 hours five (5) days before any ground disturbing activity. Prior to ground disturbance activities, construction workers conducting the ground disturbing activities shall undergo cultural resource sensitivity training conducted by the on-site tribal Tamien Nation representative.

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-6 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 The qualified archaeologist shall prepare a report for the evaluation of the resource to the California Register of Historical Places and the City Building Department. The report shall also include appropriate recommendations in collaboration with a tribal Tamien Nation representative regarding the significance of the find and appropriate mitigations as follows:
 If the resource is a non-tribal resource, the archaeologist shall assess the significance of the find according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
 If the resource is a tribal resource – whether historic or prehistoric – the consulting archaeologist shall consult with the appropriate tribe(s) Tamien Nation to evaluate the significance of the resource and to recommend appropriate and feasible avoidance, testing, preservation, or mitigation measures, in light of factors such as the significance of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) may be implemented.
 All significant non-tribal cultural materials recovered shall be, as necessary, and at the discretion of the consulting archaeologist, subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and documentation according to current professional standards.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact GEO-1: Construction of the proposed project would have the potential to directly or indirectly affect an unknown unique paleontological resource.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1: The construction contractor shall incorporate the following in all grading, demolition, and construction plans:
 In the event that fossils or fossil-bearing deposits are discovered during grading, demolition, or building, excavations within 50 feet of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted.  The contractor shall notify the City of Cupertino Building Department and a City-approved qualified paleontologist to examine the discovery.
 The paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed, in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995), evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the finding under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
 The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find.  If the project applicant determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the proposed project based on the qualities that make the resource important. The excavation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to implementation.
796
CC 07-07-2022
796 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLACEWORKS 2-7

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
NOISE
Impact NOISE-1: The proposed project could result in the generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site during the construction phase that would be in excess of standards established in the City of Cupertino Municipal Code.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: The following shall be incorporated in all activity phases and construction plans, as required by the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC). Construction activities shall take place only during daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and due to the close proximity of the adjacent residential land use to the west, construction may occur on the weekends, holidays or nighttime only if a special exception has been granted by the City. In addition, the construction crew shall adhere to the following best management practices:
 At least 90 days prior to the start of any construction, demolition or grading activities, all off-site businesses and residents within 300 feet of the project site will be notified of the planned activities.

The notification will include a brief description of the project, the activities that would occur, the hours when activity would occur, and the construction period’s overall duration. The notification should include the telephone numbers of the contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint.  The project applicant and contractors shall prepare and submit a Construction Noise Control Plan to the City’s Building Department and Code Enforcement for review and approval prior to issuance of any grading, demolition, and/or building permits. The Construction Noise Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the 80-dBA limit in the CMC. The details of the Construction Noise Control Plan, including those details listed herein, shall be included as part of the permit application drawing set and as part of the construction drawing set, shall be implemented by the on-site Construction Manager, and shall include, but not be limited to, the following available controls to comply with the 80 dBA performance standard:
 At least 10 days prior to the start of construction activities, a sign will be posted at the entrance(s) to the job site, clearly visible to the public, which includes permitted construction days and hours, as well as the telephone numbers of the City’s and contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. If the authorized contractor’s representative receives a complaint, they will investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City.
 During the entire active construction period, equipment and trucks used for project construction will utilize the best available noise control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures, and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds), wherever feasible.
 Include noise control requirements for equipment and tools, including concrete saws, to the maximum extent feasible. Such requirements could include, but are not limited to, erecting temporary plywood noise barriers between construction areas and nearby sensitive receptors; performing work in a manner that minimizes noise; and undertaking the noisiest activities during times of least disturbance to nearby sensitive receptors. 797
CC 07-07-2022
797 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-8 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 During the entire active construction period, stationary noise sources will be located as far from sensitive receptors as possible, and they will be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, or insulation barriers or other measures will be incorporated to the extent feasible.  During the entire active construction period, noisy operations will be conducted simultaneously to the degree feasible in order to reduce the time periods of these operations.  Select haul routes that avoid the greatest amount of sensitive use areas and submit to the City of Cupertino Public Works Department for approval prior to the start of the construction phase.  Signs will be posted at the job site entrance(s), within the on-site construction zones, and along queueing lanes (if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. All other equipment will be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes.  During the entire active construction period and to the extent feasible, the use of noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells will be for safety warning purposes only. The construction manager will use smart back-up alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm level based on the background noise level or switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters in compliance with all safety requirements and laws.

Impact NOISE-2: The proposed project could result in the generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project during the operation phase that could be in excess of standards established in the local noise ordinance.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the Cupertino Municipal Code noise limits of 60 dBA and 50 dBA at residential uses during daytime and nighttime, respectively, and 65 dBA and 55 dBA at non-residential sensitive uses during daytime and nighttime, respectively. A qualified acoustical consultant shall be retained to review mechanical noise as these systems are selected to determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City’s noise level requirements. Mechanical equipment shall be selected and designed to reduce impacts on surrounding uses to meet the City’s noise level requirements.

Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to:
 Selection of equipment that emits low noise levels;
 Installation of noise dampening techniques, such as enclosures and parapet walls, to block the line-ofsight between the noise source and the nearest receptors; or  Locating equipment in less noise-sensitive areas, where feasible.

Impact NOISE-3: The proposed project could result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration in the vicinity of the project site during the construction phase that would be in excess of established thresholds.

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLACEWORKS 2-9

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact TRC-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse impact to an unknown Tribal Cultural Resource.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1.

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Impact UTIL-1: Implementation of the proposed project may result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the proposed project, that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

Mitigation Measure UTIL-1: No building permits shall be issued by the City for the proposed Canyon Crossing Mixed-Use Project that would result in exceeding the permitted peak wet weather flow capacity of 13.8 mgd through the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system. The project applicant shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Cupertino and Cupertino Sanitary District (CSD), that the proposed project would not exceed the peak wet weather flow capacity of the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system by implementing one or more of the following methods:

Reduce inflow and infiltration in the CSD system to reduce peak wet weather flows; or Increase on-site water reuse, such as increased grey water use, or reduce water consumption of the fixtures used within the proposed project, or other methods that are measurable and reduce sewer generation rates to acceptable levels, to the satisfaction of the CSD.

The proposed project’s estimated wastewater generation shall be calculated using the generation rates used by the CSD in the Flow Modeling Analysis for the Homestead Flume Outfall to the City of Santa Clara, prepared by Mark Thomas & Co. Inc., dated December 6, 2019, unless alternative (i.e., lower) generation rates achieved by the proposed project are substantiated by the project applicant based on evidence to the satisfaction of the CSD. To calculate the peak wet weather flow for a 10-year storm event, the average daily flow rate shall be multiplied by a factor of 2.95 as required by CSD pursuant to their December 2019 flow modeling analysis.
799
CC 07-07-2022
799 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-10 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
This page intentionally left blank.
800
CC 07-07-2022
800 of 1038
PLACEWORKS 3-1

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Project Description
The project applicant, SCR Enterprises, is proposing the Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project (proposed project) that would involve the construction of a commercial and residential development on a 1.57-acre site. The site is currently developed with three buildings, a surface parking lot, and associated landscaping. The largest building on the project site is a multi-tenant commercial building on the southwestern portion of the site. A smaller commercial building, with an attached, unoccupied residential unit that is used for storage, is on the northeast portion of the site. In addition, a detached and unoccupied single-family residential unit is on the northwest portion of the project site. The proposed project would involve demolishing all the existing structures and redeveloping the site with a mixed-use building including 4,536 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial space and five apartments, as well as a mix of 13 attached and detached single-family units, for a combined total of 18 residential units.

All proposed structures would have a maximum building height of 30 feet (two stories). All parking would be at the ground level except for a single-level subterranean parking garage located under the mixed-use building.

This chapter provides a detailed description of the proposed project, including the location, setting, and characteristics of the project site, the principal project features, construction phasing and schedule, as well as a list of the required permits and approvals.

3.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

3.1.1 REGIONAL LOCATION
As shown on Figure 3-1, the project site is in the City of Cupertino located in the northwestern portion of Santa Clara County. Cupertino is roughly 45 miles south of San Francisco and 13 miles west of downtown San José. Interstate 280 (I-280) and State Route 85 (SR-85) provide regional access to the project site.

3.1.2 LOCAL SETTING
The project site is located at 10625 South Foothill Boulevard8 in the southwest region of the city. The project site is on the west side of South Foothill Boulevard, where South Foothill Boulevard meets Stevens Canyon Road. The project site is intersected by McClellan Road to the north and St. Andrews Avenue to the south. As shown on Figure 3-2, the project site is bounded by single-family residential units to the north, south, and west, and the two-lane South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road to the east. 8 There are several addresses assigned to the project site, but for the purposes of this Initial Study, a single address (10625 South Foothill Boulevard) is used to represent the entire project site. 801
CC 07-07-2022
801 of 1038
280
280
880
680
85 85
237
17 87
101
Palo Alto
Fremont
San Jose
Santa Clara
Sunnyvale
Mountain
View
Los Altos
Los Altos
Hills
Milpitas
Campbell
Los
Gatos
Saratoga

SAN MATEO
COUNTY

ALAMEDA
COUNTY
SANTA
CLARA
COUNTY
SANTA
CRUZ
COUNTY
Cupertino
Oakland
Berkeley
Palo
Alto
Fremont
San Jose
Santa
Clara
Sunnyvale
Mt.

View
Los
Altos
Menlo
Park
Milpitas
Hayward
Dublin
Redwood
City
San Mateo
Daly
City
Union
City
Campbell
Los
Gatos
Saratoga

ALAMEDA
COUNTY
CITY &
COUNTY
OF
SAN

FRANCISCO

SAN MATEO
COUNTY
SANTA
CLARA
COUNTY

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARIN
COUNTY

SANTA CRUZ
COUNTY
San
Francisco
Bay
Pacific
Ocean
Cupertino
0 0.5 12 34 5 Miles
Legend
City Boundary
Urban Service Area Boundary
Unincorporated Areas Within
Boundary Agreement Line
2-2 Land Use/Community Design
City of Cupertino General Plan
Figure 2-A. Cupertino Regional Location
Regional Location
Figure 3-1
Regional and Vicinity Map
Source: City of Cupertino General Plan; PlaceWorks, 2020.

Approximate Project
Site Location

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 802
CC 07-07-2022
802 of 1038
Figure 3-2
Aerial View of Project Site and Surroundings
Source: Google Earth, 2019. PlaceWorks, 2020. 0
Scale (Feet)
500
Project Site
Deep Cliff
Golf Course
McClellan
Ranch
Preserve
S. Foothill Blvd
Alcalde Road
Santa Luca RoadMefriman Road
Stevens Canyon Blvd
McClellan Road
St. Andrews Ave
Riverside Drive

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 803
CC 07-07-2022
803 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-4 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The City parks nearest to the project site are Monta Vista Park to the northwest; McClellan Ranch Preserve to the northeast; and Linda Vista Park to the southeast. Additional information on parks is provided in Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, in Section XIV, Parks and Recreation.

Public schools near the project site are Monta Vista High School in the Fremont Union High School District, and John F. Kennedy Middle School and Abraham Lincoln Elementary School in the Cupertino Union School District, each approximately 1 mile to the east of the site. Private schools and/or educational facilities near the project site include Saint Joseph of Cupertino School approximately 2 miles to the east, Futures Academy of Cupertino approximately 3 miles to the east, Bethel Lutheran School approximately 4 miles to the east, and Waldorf School of the Peninsula approximately 4 miles to the northwest. Other sensitive land uses near the project site include the Cupertino Healthcare and Wellness nursing home approximately 0.25 miles to the north, Namo Day Care approximately 0.30 miles to the north, Sunny View Bay Area Retirement Community approximately 0.75 miles to the north, and Cupertino Senior Center approximately 1.5 miles to the northeast.

The major employment centers within approximately 1 to 2 miles of the project site are the Bubb Road Special Area, and the De Anza College to the northeast, and the Permanente Quarry (Lehigh Cement Company), the Stevens Creek Quarry, Inc. to the southwest.

The nearest public airports are San José International Airport, approximately 8.5 miles to the northeast, and Palo Alto Airport, approximately 10 miles to the north. The nearest heliports are McCandless Towers Heliport, approximately 7 miles to the northeast, and County Medical Center Heliport, approximately 7.5 miles to the east. The nearest private (military/corporate) airport is Moffett Federal Airfield, approximately 7 miles to the north. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan.

3.1.3 EXISTING SITE SETTING

SITE CHARACTER
As shown on Figure 3-3, the site is currently developed with three structures: two commercial buildings and a vacant residential unit. The largest commercial building is a one-story building that is partially occupied by neighborhood-serving land uses on the west side of the project site. The second commercial building is a one-story building on the northeast corner of the project site. It is occupied by the Cupertino Bike Shop, which has an attached two-story residential unit on the west side of the building that is unoccupied and currently used for additional bike storage. The third structure is a vacant one-story residential unit on the northwest corner of the project site, with a detached shed and surrounding grassy areas. Combined, the existing commercial and residential buildings represent 13,225 square feet of building space. A concrete retaining wall separates the vacant, detached residential unit and associated shed from the rear of the Cupertino Bike Shop and parking lot. The site also contains surface parking. 804
CC 07-07-2022
804 of 1038
Source: Google Earth Professional, 2018; PlaceWorks, 2020.

Figure 3-3
Existing Conditions
S. Foothill Blvd
Stevens Canyon Road
Project Site
McClellan Road
St. Andrews Ave
0 Scale (Feet)
100

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 805
CC 07-07-2022
805 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-6 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The site was used for orchards and associated buildings in 1939. The orchards were removed in 1948.

According to the Department of Toxic Substance Control, when orchards have been removed or became inactive prior to 1950 organic pesticides are not an issue warranting further testing.9 Following the removal of the orchards, the project site was developed with the existing smaller mixed-use building located on the site. The larger building on the site was constructed by 1963.10 Due to the age of the existing buildings, they may contain asbestos-containing materials or lead-based paint, which were not regulated in construction until the early 1970’s.

Because the smaller building on the project site was developed in 1948, it has the potential to be considered a historic building; however, it is not currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the list of California Historical resources.11
Surrounding uses in the vicinity of the project site include one-story and two-story single-family residential units.

VEGETATION AND LANDCOVER
Using data from the Classification and Assessment with Landsat of Visible Ecological Groupings (CALVEG)12 habitat mapping program, the site is classified as an “urban area.” Property with this classification tends to have low to poor wildlife habitat value due to replacement of natural communities, fragmentation of remaining open space areas and parks, and intensive human disturbance. According to the Vegetation Map shown in the Environmental Resources and Sustainability Element of the General Plan, the project site is within the urban forest (i.e., trees in the city). 13 The City recognizes that every tree on both public
and private property is an important part of Cupertino's urban forest and contributes significant economic, environmental, and aesthetic benefits of the community.14 Landscaping on-site includes two mature and non-native trees over 70 feet tall, a Redwood tree on the northeast corner that is proposed for removal, and a Palm tree on the southeast corner that would remain. The trees on-site are considered protected development trees pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Section 14.18.050(c).
15 9 California Department of Toxic Substances Control California Environmental Protection Agency, Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties, page 3, August 7, 2008. 10 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, pages 8 and 9, January 12. 11 California Office of Historic Preservation. 2019. California Historical Resources. Accessed May 6, 2019 at http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=43. 12 The CALVEG system was initiated in January 1978 by the Region 5 Ecology Group of the US Forest Service to classify California’s existing vegetation communities for use in statewide resource planning. CALVEG maps use a hierarchical classification on the following categories: forest; woodland; chaparral; shrubs; and herbaceous. 13 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 6, Environmental Resources and Sustainability Element, Figure ES-1. 14 City of Cupertino, Tree Protection and Tree Removal link on the City’s website, Accessed May 6, 2019 at https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/community-development/planning/residential-development/tree-protectiontree-removal. 15 City of Cupertino, Municipal Code, Section 14.18.050 Protected Trees, Accessed May 6, 2019. 806
CC 07-07-2022
806 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-7

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) has no record of special-status plant or animal species on the project site but does show there are special-status plant and animal species within a 5-mile area surrounding the project site. Special-status species have been recorded in the open space areas in the project vicinity.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Projection (CAL FIRE) has designated the project site as a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and a non-very high fire hazard severity zone. The project site is near lands that CAL FIRE designates as a State Responsibility Area (SRA), which are approximately 0.5 miles to the west of the site.16 The project site is located within the wildland-urban interface, which is an area of transition between wildland (unoccupied land) and land with human development (occupied land). 17 The site is generally flat with elevation of 429 feet above mean sea level with a regional topographic slope downward to the east.18 The surficial geology is young, unconsolidated Quaternary alluvium,19 which is described as Holocene-age younger alluvium and coarse-grained alluvium that are composed of unconsolidated, poorly sorted gravel, silt, sand, clay, and organic matter. No paleontological resources have been identified on the project site; however, the presence of Pleistocene deposits that are known to contain fossils indicates that the overall city, including the project site, could contain paleontological resources.20
The existing impervious surface totals 46,584 square feet. Stormwater from the site drains to a network of City-maintained storm drains in Stevens Canyon Road and South Foothill Boulevard that collect runoff from city streets and carry it to the creeks that run through Cupertino to the San Francisco Bay. The project site is within an area where some of the storm drains are deficient in conveying the water from a 10-year storm, based on the 2018 Storm Drain Master Plan. 16 CAL FIRE. 2008. Cupertino, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps/FHSZ/santa_clara/Cupertino.pdf 17 CAL FIRE. 2018. Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Threat. http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=d45bf08448354073a26675776f2d09cb, accessed May 7, 2019. 18 Applied Water Resources, 2018, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard/ Stevens Canyon Road, Cupertino, California, page 8, January 12. 19 US Geological Survey, 1994, Preliminary Quaternary Geologic Maps of Santa Clara Valley, Santa Clara, Alameda, and San Mateo Counties, California: A Digital Database, Open-File Report 94-231, by E.J. Helley, R.W. Graymer, G.A. Phelps, P.K.

Showalter, and C.M. Wentworth. 20 City of Cupertino, certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, (December 2014) State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007 (October 2015), and approved Addenda (October 2015, July 2019, August 2019, and December 2019).
807
CC 07-07-2022
807 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-8 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

3.1.4 LAND USE DESIGNATION AND ZONING

GENERAL PLAN
The site is located in the Other Non-Residential/Mixed-Use Special Area21 and a Neighborhood Center. 22 The site is located in the Inspiration Heights Neighborhood abutting the Monta Vista North Neighborhood.
23 The site has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial/ Residential.24 A description of these designations is provided below.

Other Non-Residential/Mixed-Use Special Areas
The City has designated Special Areas along one of the four major mixed-use corridors in the city, which represent key areas within Cupertino where future development and reinvestment is generally focused.

The Other Non-Residential/Mixed-Use Special Area include four key areas and all other nonresidential properties not referenced in an identified commercial area. The project site is at one of the four key areas identified as the west side of Stevens Canyon Road. 25 The Other Non-Residential/Mixed-Use Special Area describes the vision for Neighborhood Centers and states that such locations should be redeveloped using the “Neighborhood Commercial Center” concept described in the Land Use and Community Design Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2).26 However, developing using this concept is not required. The vision statement describes that buildings in the Neighborhood Centers should be typically one to two stories tall but may be up to three stories in some instances where it is allowed.27 The maximum residential density within Neighborhood Commercial Centers identified in the Community Form Diagram is 15 dwelling units per acre.28
Inspiration Heights Neighborhood
Cupertino has 12 distinct neighborhoods that are each unique in their location, development pattern, identity, and access to community services. While the Inspiration Heights neighborhood is situated in the western foothills of Cupertino, the project site is located in the lower elevation portions of the neighborhood that is urbanized. The project site is on the western border of this neighborhood on Stevens Creek and Foothill Boulevards, which provides a transition with the adjoining neighborhoods on the valley floor. The vision for this neighborhood, as described in the General Plan, is to continue to be a 21 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, page PA-15. 22 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 3, Land Use and Community Design Element, Figure LU-2, Community Form Diagram, page LU-17. 23 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, Figure PA-2, Neighborhoods, page PA-18. 24 City of Cupertino Land Use Map adopted November 15, 2005 and amended August 20, 2019. 25 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 3, Land Use and Community Design Element, page LU-65.
26 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, page PA-15. 27 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, Vision, page PA-15. 28 City of Cupertino General Plan, Community Vision 2040, Chapter 3, Land Use, Figure LU-2, Community Form Diagram, pages LU-16 and LU-17.
808
CC 07-07-2022
808 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-9

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
low-intensity and hillside residential area.
29 Future development should consider preservation of hillsides, riparian corridors, and plant and animal wildlife habitat through sensitive site and building design.30 Commercial/Residential Land Use Designation
The Commercial/Residential land use designation allows primarily commercial uses and secondarily residential uses or a compatible combination of the two uses. 31 Commercial use means retail sales,
businesses, limited professional offices, and service establishments with direct contact with customers.

This land use designation applies to commercial activities ranging from neighborhood convenience stores to regionally oriented specialty stores. Retail stores that would be a nuisance for adjoining neighborhoods or harmful to the community identity would be regulated by CMC Chapter 19.60, General Commercial Zones, and the associated commercial zoning ordinance use permit procedures. Smaller commercial parcels in existing residential areas, such as the project site, may be needed to provide local neighborhood serving retail; otherwise, they may be redeveloped at residential densities compatible with the surroundings. As previously stated, the maximum residential density on the project site is 15 dwelling units per acre.32

ZONING DISTRICT
The project site is within the Planned Development with General Commercial (P(CG)) zoning district. As described in CMC Section 19.80.010, the Planned Development zoning district is intended to provide a means of guiding land development or redevelopment of the city that is uniquely suited for planned coordination of land uses. Development in this zoning district provides for a greater flexibility of land use intensity and design because of accessibility, ownership patterns, topographical considerations, and community design objectives.33 CMC Chapter 19.80 also allows a project proponent to propose development standards for their specific project.

All Planned Development districts are identified on the zoning map with the letter coding "P" followed by a specific reference to the general type of use allowed in the particular planning development zoning district. The type of use allowed on the project site is General Commercial (CG), which allows commercial uses such as retail food, drug, apparel, or hardware stores, full-service restaurants, professional and commercial office services, laundry facilities, non-auto related repair services, and personal services, along with several other specialty uses.
34 29 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, Vision, page PA-24 and PA-25. 30 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 3, Land Use and Community Design Element, Inspiration Heights Neighborhood, page LU-75. 31 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Appendix A: Land use definitions, Planning Areas, page A4. 32 City of Cupertino General Plan, Community Vision 2040, Chapter 3, Land Use, Figure LU-2, Community Form Diagram, pages LU-16 and LU-17. 33 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 19, Zoning, Chapter 19.80, Planned Development, Section 19.80.010, Purpose. 34 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 19, Zoning, Chapter 19.60, General Commercial, Section 19.60.030, Permitted, Conditional and Excluded Uses in General Commercial Zoning Districts. 809
CC 07-07-2022
809 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-10 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The proposed designation of General Commercial with Residential uses (CG, Res), which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site, is a district in which uses are intended to be a mix of general commercial and residential.35 The proposed project requires a zoning amendment to allow residential uses on the project site. This is discussed further, below, in Section 3.2, Project Components.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Setback Standards
Because the property is zoned Planned Development, any proposed commercial project would have to meet the specific front, side, or rear yard setbacks required when a lot abuts residential or agricultural zones based on CMC Chapter 19.64, General Commercial (CG) zoning district. However, in the event, the commercial property does not abut these zones, there are no stated setbacks, in which case, setback requirements for commercial property would be determined by City staff during project review.

The proposed project is a mixed-use single-family development on a small lot (1.57 acres). The City’s Zoning Code does not have any adopted standards for the development of projects similar to the proposed project. However, pursuant to CMC Chapter 19.80, the Planned Development Zoning District allows a project proponent to propose zoning setbacks different from those required in the underlying Zoning District to allow flexibility in the project, as long as these are approved by the City Council. In any case, the setbacks in the Zoning Code or the setbacks proposed by the project, the project site must adhere to the General Plan requirement of maintaining sufficient space for adequate light, requirement for air and visibility at intersections, and the requirement for general conformity to yard requirements of adjacent or nearby zones, lot or parcels. The General Plan does not have any applicable setback requirements for this property.

Landscaping
CMC Chapter 14.15, Landscape Ordinance, implements the California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 by establishing new water-efficient landscaping and irrigation requirements. Any building or landscape project that involves more than 2,500 square feet of landscape area is required to submit a Landscape Project Submittal to the Director of Community Development for approval. Existing and established landscaped areas greater than 1 acre in size, including cemeteries, are required to submit water budget calculations and audits of established landscapes.36 Tree Requirements
CMC Chapter 14.12, Trees, establishes regulations for the planting, care, and maintenance of public trees, and provides for the continuous maintenance of the public trees, with the goal of encouraging 35 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 19, Zoning, Chapter 19.80, Planned Development, Section 19.80.030, Establishment of Districts- Permitted and Conditional Uses. 36 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 14, Streets, Sidewalks and Landscaping, Chapter 14.15, Landscape Ordinance. 810
CC 07-07-2022
810 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-11

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
preservation of trees. The City funds the planting and maintenance of public trees through payment of reimbursement costs as a conditions of building permit issuance.37 CMC Chapter 14.18, Protected Tree Ordinance, provides regulations for the protection, preservation, and maintenance of trees of certain species and sizes.38 Removal of a protected tree requires a permit from the City. “Protected” trees include trees of a certain species and size on private property in all zoning districts; heritage trees whether on private or public property in all zoning districts; any tree required to be planted or retained as part of an approved development application, building permit, tree removal permit, or code enforcement action in all zoning districts; and approved privacy protection planting in single-family residential (R-1) zoning districts. Since the existing development is on property that requires a development application, all existing trees on the site are considered protected.39 Bird Safe Design Ordinance
The City of Cupertino draft Bird Safe Design Ordinance, CMC Chapter 19.102, Glazing and Lighting Standards, which contains specific building and site design measures to reduce bird mortality from windows or other specific glass features known to increase the risk of bird collisions and to reduce light pollution known to contribute to bird mortality and reduced visibility of the night sky. These guidelines, once adopted, would be applicable to any project that is required to obtain a building permit or a Permit pursuant to Title 19, Zoning, including the proposed project.

CMC Section 19.102.030, Bird-safe Development Requirements, includes:
 Glass requirements for new or replacement windows of twelve square feet or more and facades requiring no more than 10 percent of the surface area of the façade be untreated glass between the ground and 60 feet above ground. Treatments can include opaque glass, window muntins, exterior insect screens, exterior netting, or special glass treatments such as fritting to provide visual cues and reduce the likelihood of bird collisions.
 Indoor lighting requirements to program automatic sensors and timer to turn off at 11:00 p.m., within two hours after business closes, or the addition of filtering with the use of interior or exterior blinds.  Design requirements to avoid funneling of flight paths along buildings or trees to building facades; avoid use of highly reflective glass or highly transparent glass; and avoid glass skyways or walkways, freestanding glass walls, transparent building corners, or other design elements where trees, landscaping, water features, or the sky is visible form the exterior.

CMC Section 19.102.140, Outdoor Lighting Requirements, includes requirements to reduce light pollution throughout the city. These requirements prohibit outdoor lighting that blinks, flashes, or rotates; outdoor lighting that projects above the horizontal plan; lighting that unnecessarily illuminates other lots or interferes with the enjoyment of that lot; high-intensity discharge lighting for recreation courts or private property; and spotlights. Outdoor lighting that is not prohibited, must abide by the following:
37 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 14, Streets, Sidewalks and Landscaping, Chapter 14.12, Trees. 38 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 14, Streets, Sidewalks and Landscaping, Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees. 39 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 14, Streets, Sidewalks and Landscaping, Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees. 811
CC 07-07-2022
811 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-12 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 All outdoor light much be fully shielded fixtures directed downward to meet the particular need and away from adjacent properties.
 Illumination levels cannot exceed one foot-candle onto an adjacent property and maximum light intensity cannot exceed a maintained value of ten foot-candles when measured at finished grade.  All light sources must have a maintained correlated color temperature of 3,000 Kelvin or less.  All outdoor lighting must be turned off by 11:00 p.m. or when people are no longer present in exterior areas, except for security lighting required and designed according to the California Building Code.
 Automated control systems should be used to meet lighting requirements.  Lighting design must compliment building and landscaping, and fixtures must be appropriate in height, intensity, and scale to the use.

UTILITIES AND ENERGY
Energy Conservation
The California Green Building Standards Code (Part 11, Title 24, known as “CALGreen”) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations) to apply to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure, unless otherwise indicated in the California Building Standards Code, throughout the State of California.40 CALGreen established planning and design standards for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation requiring new buildings to reduce water consumption by 20 percent, material conservation, and internal air contaminants. The local building permit process enforces the building efficiency standards. CMC Chapter

16.58, Green Building Standards Code, adopts the CALGreen requirements and makes it part of the CMC along with local amendments for projects in the city. The City’s Green Building Ordinance contains mandatory, minimum required green building techniques, including measures affecting water use efficiency and water conservation.

CMC Sections 16.58.100 through 16.58.220 sets forth the standards for green building requirements by type of building. As shown on Table 101.10 in CMC Section 16.58.220, mixed-use project with residential and non-residential components shall comply by either: (1) meeting the applicable requirements for each use; or (2) meeting the applicable requirements for the use that comprises the majority of the project’s square footage where uses are attached and/or combined in a building. For the residential component, new construction greater than nine homes is required to be Green Points Rated certified at minimum 50 points, Silver in Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED), or Alternate Reference Standard per Section 101.10.2.
41 For the non-residential component, development less than 25,000 square-feet is 40 California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11, January 1, 2020, California Green Buildings Standards Code, https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAGBSC2019/copyright. 41 Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) is a green building certification program that recognizes best-in-class building strategies and practices that reduce consumption energy, and water, and reduce solid waste directly diverted to landfills. LEED certified buildings are ranked in order of efficiency from Certified, Silver, Gold and Platinum being the highest 812
CC 07-07-2022
812 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-13

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
required to comply with the CALGreen Building Code per Chapter 5 of the California Green Building Standards Code. CMC Section 16.58.230 permits applicants to apply an alternate green building standard for a project in lieu of the minimum standards outlined in CMC Section 16.58.220 that meet the same intent of conserving resources and reducing solid waste.

The California Energy Code (Part 6, Title 24) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24) to reduce wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption in newly constructed and existing buildings. The City of Cupertino has adopted the California Energy Code, with local amendments into, as CMC Chapter 16.54, Energy Code. CMC Section 16.54.100(2), Scope for Newly Construction Building, requires all newly constructed buildings to be All-Electric Buildings. All-Electric Buildings are defined as a building that has no natural gas or propane plumbing installed within the building, and that uses electricity as the sole source of energy for its space heating, water heating.42 The City is currently in the process of approving reach codes, which will go above California Energy Code requirements to reduce energy and water, and associated greenhouse gas emissions.

Solid Waste Reduction
Consistent with CALGreen, CMC Chapter 16.72, Recycling and Division of Construction and Demolition Waste, requires that a minimum of 65 percent of all non-hazardous construction and demolition debris must be recycled or salvaged and that all applicants have a waste management plan for on-site sorting of construction debris. Additionally, in December 2017, the City adopted a Zero Waste Policy.43 According to the Zero Waste Policy, the City will require, through the City’s waste hauling franchise agreement, steadfast and ongoing efforts by the City’s franchisee to maintain a minimum residential and commercial waste diversion rate of 75 percent with a goal of reaching and maintaining 80 percent by 2025.

Water Quality
CMC Chapter 9.18, Storm Water Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection provides regulations and gives legal effect to the Municipal Regional Storm Water National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (MRP) issued to the City. This chapter also ensures ongoing compliance with the most recent version of the City’s MRP regarding municipal storm water and urban runoff requirements. This chapter applies to all water entering the storm drain system generated on any private, public, developed, and undeveloped lands within the city. The CMC contains permit requirements for construction projects and new development or redevelopment projects to minimize the discharge of storm water runoff. ranking with the greatest efficiency standard. LEED Silver certified buildings typically reduce is the third highest ranking out of the four, with just being certified being the lowest and Gold and Platinum being the second highest. 42 CMC Section 16.54.110, Definitions and Rules of Construction. 43 City of Cupertino, Public Works, Garbage & Recycling, https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/environmentsustainability/waste, accessed November 30, 2018. 813
CC 07-07-2022
813 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-14 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

3.2 PROJECT COMPONENTS
The project applicant proposes to redevelop the project site with a mixed-use commercial and residential development consisting of one mixed-use building with commercial and residential uses and a mix of residential buildings with associated amenities, infrastructure, and landscaping. Combined the project would have 18 residential units and 4,536 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial space. The conceptual site plan for the proposed project is shown on Figure 3-4. The following provides a detailed description of the key project components. A complete set of preliminary site plans are available on the City’s website at www.cupertino.org/canyoncrossing and at the City of Cupertino Community Development Department at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014.

3.2.1 PROPOSED BUILDINGS

MIXED-USE BUILDING
The proposed project’s mixed-use building would have 4,536 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial space on the ground floor and five apartment units on the second floor. Apartments would be comprised of two one-bedroom units between 918 square feet and 1,003 square feet, and three twobedroom units ranging between 1,240 square feet and 1,500 square feet. The mixed-use building would front South Foothill Boulevard/ Stevens Canyon Road. See Figures 3-5 through 3-6.

A trash and recycling enclosure would be located on the ground floor on the southern side of the mixeduse building and would be accessed by the waste management company on trash day from the internal roadway network. See Figure 3-4.

One-level of subterranean parking would be provided below the mixed-use building and surface parking spaces would be provided on the northeast corner of the site. Vehicular parking would meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Class 2 bicycle racks44 would be included at the ground level and Class 1 bicycle lockers45 would be provided for residents in the subterranean parking area. See Figure 3-7. The surface parking spaces are illustrated on Figure 3-4.

As shown in Figure 3-8, the proposed mixed-use building would be a maximum of 30 feet tall (two stories). The mechanical equipment and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) unit would be located on the roof of the mixed-use building and would be screened by a parapet46 facing Stevens Canyon Road.

44 Class 2 parking facilities include bicycle racks to which the frame and at least one wheel can be secured with a userprovided lock. 45 Class 1 facilities protect the entire bicycle from theft, vandalism, and inclement weather and are appropriate for longterm storage. 46 A parapet is a low protective wall along the edge of a roof, bridge, or balcony. 814
CC 07-07-2022
814 of 1038
Source: TS Civil Engineering, 2020.

Figure 3-4
Conceptual Site Plan
0 Scale (Feet)
60 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 815
CC 07-07-2022
815 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-028

CANYON CROSSINGS
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-5
Mixed-Use Building Ground Floor
0 Scale (Feet)
32 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 816
CC 07-07-2022
816 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281
CANYON CROSSINGS Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-6
Mixed-Use Building Second Floor Apartments and Roof
0 Scale (Feet)
32 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 817
CC 07-07-2022
817 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-7
Mixed-Use Building Subterranean Parking Level
0 Scale (Feet)
32 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 818
CC 07-07-2022
818 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS

FRONT ELEVATION

REAR ELEVATION

SIDE ELEVATIONS
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-8
Mixed-Use Building Elevation

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 819
CC 07-07-2022
819 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-20 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
The proposed project would include a mix of attached and detached single-family residential buildings with a total of 13 single-family dwelling units. Each single-family dwelling unit would have a private driveway with an attached two-car garage that would front the internal roadway network and would be separated from the adjacent residential properties with back- and side-yard areas. The five detached single-family homes would have three bedrooms. The single-family homes are identified as numbers six through ten on Figure 3-4. The units range between 2,624 square feet and 2,642 square feet with floor area ratios between 1.11 and 1.15. The eight attached single-family homes would have three bedrooms each. The attached single-family homes are identified as numbers one through five and 11 through 13 on Figure 3-4. Two of these units are smaller at about 2,065 square feet, while the rest range between 2,481 square feet and 2,692 square feet in size. The proposed residential buildings would be a maximum of 30 feet tall (two stories). Figures 3-9 through 3-11 illustrate the elevations of each unit type.

RESIDENT AND PUBLIC AMENITIES
Each residential building would have its own private open space at the back of each unit. The backyards range in size from 264 square feet to 591 square feet in area. Each apartment unit includes a private deck that ranges from 61 square feet to 126 square feet. The proposed project also includes three common open space areas totaling 5,691 square feet. The common open space areas are labeled as Areas 1, 2, and Public Plaza on Figure 3-4. Area 1 is located on the southeastern corner of the site and is 1,044 square feet. Area 2 is located west of the mixed-use building near the center of the site and is 1,990 square feet.

Area 3 is a public plaza to the north of the mixed-use building and is 2,657 square feet. The common open space areas and the public plaza would include landscaping and areas for gathering (i.e., tables, umbrellas, benches, etc.).

3.2.2 POPULATION AND EMPLOYEE ESTIMATES
Based on an average household size of 2.87 persons,47 the proposed project would generate 52 residents.48 Applying the generation rate of one job for every 450 square feet of commercial uses, the proposed project would generate 10 employees.49 The single residential unit on site is not occupied at this time and the approximately 10,500 square feet of commercial buildings are partially occupied. Applying the same generation rates as the proposed project, the current uses at full occupancy could generate about 3 residents and 23 employees. Therefore, the net new occupants of the site would be 49 residents and minus 13 employees. It is anticipated that future residents and employees would be drawn largely from Cupertino and other communities in the San Francisco Bay Area.

47 This analysis is based on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) 2019 projections of the average household size of 2.87 persons for Cupertino in 2020. This is the standard approach for population and housing analysis in Cupertino. 48 18 new units multiplied by 2.87 persons per unit equals 51.66 new residents. 49 4,356 square feet of commercial land use/450 square feet per employee = 9.68 employees. 820
CC 07-07-2022
820 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS

FRONT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION

SIDE ELEVATION
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-9
Detached Single-Family Homes Elevation

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 821
CC 07-07-2022
821 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS

FRONT ELEVATION

REAR ELEVATION
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-10
Attached Single-Family Homes Elevation

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 822
CC 07-07-2022
822 of 1038
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS

SIDE ELEVATION

FRONT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.

Figure 3-11
Attached Single-Family Homes Elevation

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 823
CC 07-07-2022
823 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-24 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

3.2.3 CIRCULATION AND ACCESS

VEHICULAR ACCESS
As shown on Figure 3-12, the project would have two-lane entrance/exit circulation pattern with the access points at the South Foothill Boulevard/McClellan Road intersection and the Stevens Canyon Road/ St. Andrews Avenue intersection. The project access points would modify the existing three-way (or “t”) intersections at South Foothill Boulevard/McClellan Road and Stevens Canyon Road/St. Andrews Avenue.

The proposed project would extend McClellan Road and St. Andrews Avenue onto the project site; however, the on-site roadway extensions would be for use by future residents and customers only and would be privately maintained (i.e., not the responsibility of the City). The proposed attached single-family homes would be accessed via these roadway extensions, which would allow for two-way travel in and out of the single-family homes. The proposed single-family homes would be accessed via either driveway that would run along a north-south axis on the property. Entry to the subterranean parking under the mixeduse building would be accessed from the proposed on-site roadway.

Proposed emergency access routes are similar to the proposed vehicle access routes. Emergency personnel would also have access to the backyard areas of the residential buildings via gates or partitioned fences on the side yards or backyard of the residential buildings, that would remain unlocked.

Waste management vehicles would follow the same vehicle route, with access to the two residential roads on the west side of the project site.

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACCESS
Class II bike lanes currently exist on both sides of South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road along the length of the project site. Bicyclists would access the project site from the existing Class II bike lanes via the internal roadway network. Class III Bikeway or Bike Route designated signs and pavement markings for automobile and bicycle shared use are provided along McClellan Road on both sides of the roadway. 50 Pedestrian access to the site would be via the proposed monolithic sidewalk along the eastern border of the project site along the west side of South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road, which would connect with the internal sidewalks on the project site. The proposed sidewalk would also connect to the existing sidewalk to the north of the project site on west side of South Foothill Boulevard. Pedestrians would also have access to the site via the existing crosswalks marked with ladder stripping on Stevens Canyon Road connecting to McClellan Road and St. Andrews Avenue.

50 Class II Bikeways are bike lanes for bicyclists that are generally adjacent to the outer vehicle travel lanes and have special lane markings, pavement legends, and signage. Class III Bike Routes are designated roadways for bicycle use by signs or other markings may or may not include additional pavement width for cyclists 824
CC 07-07-2022
824 of 1038

STEVENS CANYON ROAD
S. FOOTHILL BLVD. ST ANDREWS AVE
10625 S. FOOTHILL BLVD.

CUPERTINO - CALIFORNIA
Architects
1288 Kifer Road, Suite 206
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Telephone : 408-992-0280
Fax : 408-992-0281

CANYON CROSSINGS
Figure 3-12
Circulation Map
Source: LPMD Architects, 2020.
0 Scale (Feet)
80 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 825
CC 07-07-2022
825 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-26 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

3.2.4 LANDSCAPING
The proposed project would include 16,602 square feet of pervious landscaped surfaces. Figure 3-13 illustrates the proposed landscaping plan. The project site includes landscaping throughout the project site’s interior and the surrounding perimeter, and additional landscaping in the common open space areas. For neighborhood privacy and to help reduce bird collisions, 5-foot screening shrubs would be planted along the north, south, and western borders of the project site, where the adjacent land use is residential. Trees and other landscaping would be planted along South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road as well as along the internal project roadway network. As stated above in Section 3.1.4, Land Use and Zoning, the project is required to submit a Landscape Project Submittal for approval by the City.

The proposed landscaping would be consistent with the surrounding Northern California landscape and would include native and/or adaptive, and drought resistant plant materials of similar water use grouped by hydrozones, which are areas where plants are organized based on similar water use.51 The majority of plantings would be drought tolerant grasses, shrubs, and trees that, once established, are adapted to a dry summer and intermittent rain in the winter season. There would also be appropriate landscaping in the bioretention areas required by the City’s Municipal Regional Permit.

3.2.5 LIGHT AND GLARE
As shown in by Figure 3-14, the source, intensity, and type of exterior lighting for the project site would generally be provided for the purpose of orienting site users and for safety needs. All permanent on-site lighting would be low-level illumination, downward directed, and shielded to reduce light spill or glare into surrounding residential homes. There would be no up-lighting on the mixed-use building exterior. In landscaped and paved areas, light sources would be concealed and not visible from a public viewpoint.

Unless used for safety, all outside lighting would be turned off by 11:00 p.m. All exterior surface and above-ground mounted fixtures would be complementary to the architectural theme and to the surrounding residential units.

The proposed project would not include reflective glass. Where glass features such as windows and doors are proposed, glazing treatments would vary; however, none of the exterior glass would have a light reflectance value of more than 15 percent.52
51 The California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance defines a hydrozone as a portion of the landscaped area having plants with similar water needs. 52A light reflectance value or LRV is a measure of visible and usable light that is reflected from a surface when illuminated by a light source. LRV is expressed as a percentage from 0 to 100; the higher the number the more visible light that is reflected. 826
CC 07-07-2022
826 of 1038
Figure 3-13
Proposed Landscape Plan
0 Scale (Feet)
80 Source: Reed Associates Landscape Architecture, 2020.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 827
CC 07-07-2022
827 of 1038

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.17 1.53 0.73 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.09 1.28 0.87 0.24 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00

0.00 1.76 0.81 0.00 0.00 2.29 0.95 0.00

0.00 2.01 0.45 0.01 0.01 2.96 0.79 0.00

0.00 1.93 0.79 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.13 0.00

0.00 1.64 0.95 0.03 0.03 0.03 1.11 0.00

0.00 1.58 0.92 0.33 0.13 0.12 0.14 0.11 0.08 2.42 0.92 0.00

0.00 0.32 1.59 0.88 0.40 0.22 0.21 0.34 0.27 0.26 0.80 0.00

0.00 0.41 0.97 1.28 0.58 0.61 0.50 0.39 0.64 0.82 0.89 0.62 0.71 0.98 0.95 0.76 0.85 1.15 1.29 1.25 2.10 0.95 0.00

0.01 0.11 0.60 2.71 2.71 2.74 5.40 3.63 4.05 4.14 6.21 3.80 2.11 0.52 0.01

0.01 0.02 0.16 3.10 3.64 0.81 2.81 0.33 0.08 0.03 0.01 0.01

0.34 0.02 2.41 0.22 0.14

2.11 2.32 0.60 0.19

1.32 0.86 0.37 0.12

1.61 1.19 0.36 0.07 0.02 0.02

1.18 1.41 0.33 0.06 0.03 0.02

0.93 1.22 0.24 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00

0.10 0.23 0.46 0.94 0.14

3.62 4.11

3.95 4.81

3.95 4.95

3.86 4.52

3.49 3.87

3.44 3.58

4.60 3.77 3.79 3.97 6.16 4.52 4.12 4.89 4.22 3.01 4.28

4.17 3.98 2.66 3.16 3.92 4.25 4.24 4.06 4.06 3.51 4.01 4.08 4.25 3.82 4.02 4.00 2.64 3.35 3.83

4.50 1.10 3.49 2.83 1.51 1.97

2.89 2.20 3.42

1.45 2.12 4.22

3.52 1.99 3.85

1.21 2.12

STEVENS CANYON ROAD
C C CC
E1
GENERAL NOTES:

TYPE A TYPE B

LIGHTING CUTSHEETS

PHOTOMETRIC DATA
Luminaire Schedule
Symbol Qty Label Arrangement LLF Description Arr. Watts 11 Type A SINGLE 0.900 Lithonia DSXO LED P11 30K T3M MVOLT HS L90, 14ft. Pole 72 4 Type B SINGLE 0.900 Lithonia DSXB LED 12C 530 30K ASY D-SERIES 22 Archit
1288 Kifer Road
Sunnyvale, CA 9
Telephone : 40
Fax : 40
Calculation Surface
Designation CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min
Driveway / Parking Lot Illuminance Fc 3.75 21.0 0.55 6.8 38

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.17 1.53 0.73 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.09 1.28 0.87 0.24 0.02

0.00 1.76 0.81 0.00 0.00 2.29 0.95

0.00 2.01 0.45 0.01 0.01 2.96 0.79

0.00 1.93 0.79 0.01 0.02 0.02 1.13

0.00 1.64 0.95 0.03 0.03 0.03 1.11

0.00 1.58 0.92 0.33 0.13 0.12 0.14 0.11 0.08 2.42 0.92

0.00 0.32 1.59 0.88 0.40 0.22 0.21 0.34 0.27 0.26 0.80

0.00 0.41 0.97 1.28 0.58 0.61 0.50 0.39 0.64 0.82 0.89 0.62 0.71 0.98 0.95 0.76 0.85 1.15 1.29 1.25 2.10 0.95

0.01 0.11 0.60 2.71 2.71 2.74 5.40 3.63 4.05 4.14 6.21 3.80 2.11 0.52

0.01 0.02 0.16 3.10 3.64 0.81 2.81 0.33 0.08

0.34 0.02 2.41 0.22 0.14

2.11 2.32 0.60 0.19

3.62 4.11

3.95 4.81

3.95 4.95

3.86 4.52

3.49 3.87

3.44 3.58

4.60 3.77 3.79 3.97 6.16 4.52 4.12 4.89 4.22 3.01 4.28

4.17 3.98 2.66 3.16 3.92 4.25 4.24 4.06 4.06 3.51 4.01 4.08 4.25 3.82 4.02 4.00 2.64 3.35 3.83

4.50 1.10 3.49 2.83 1.51 1.97
C C CC
GENERAL NOTES:

TYPE A TYPE B

LIGHTING CUTSHEETS

PHOTOMETRIC DATA
Luminaire Schedule
Symbol Qty Label Arrangement LLF Description Arr. Watts 11 Type A SINGLE 0.900 Lithonia DSXO LED P11 30K T3M MVOLT HS L90, 14ft. Pole 72 4 Type B SINGLE 0.900 Lithonia DSXB LED 12C 530 30K ASY D-SERIES 22 Calculation Surface
Designation CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min
Driveway / Parking Lot Illuminance Fc 3.75 21.0 0.55 6.8 38 Figure 3-14
Proposed Lighting Plan
Source: Source: LPMD Architects, 2020; MR Engineering Consultants, 2020. 0 Scale (Feet)
80 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 828
CC 07-07-2022
828 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-29

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The HVAC system would be shielded from view by a parapet facing Stevens Canyon Road (see Figure 3-8) at least 3 feet in height, which would also serve as a noise attenuation feature. The proposed project would not include reflective glass. Where glass features are proposed, glazing treatments would vary, and none of the exterior glass would have a light reflectance value of more than 15 percent.53 The first floor of the mixed-use building and the second-floor apartments, including balcony railing elements, could have a combination of UV coatings, frosting, and fritting, which reduces glare and makes the glass visible to birds to reduce collisions.

3.2.6 UTILITIES AND ENERGY
The proposed utility infrastructure would connect to the existing water, sewer, storm drain system, natural gas and electricity network in the area, and would be served by an existing solid waste landfill.

WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION
To support the proposed project, a new water line would be installed along the new main internal road to connect to the existing water lines along Stevens Canyon Road. Any new connections or replaced water lines would not encroach on undisturbed areas. All landscape zones would be irrigated as required by the Cupertino Landscape Ordinance, and water uses would be tailored to meet CALGreen Building Standards, which as described above in Section 3.1.4.2, Zoning, requires water conservation and requires new buildings to reduce water consumption by 20 percent.

SANITARY SEWER SERVICE
As shown on Figure 3-15, connections to the existing sanitary sewer system would be made on South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The proposed project would result in 43,419 square feet of impervious surfaces coverage. Compared to 47,975 square feet of impervious coverage in existing conditions, this would be a decrease of 4,556 square feet or 9 percent. The proposed project would include 16,602 square feet of pervious surfaces in the form of landscaping and two on-site bioretention facilities (1,540 square feet) that would hold and treat stormwater before it is released into the City’s off-site storm drain infrastructure). As a result, the proposed project would result in a decrease in the amount of runoff from the project site. The project is required to comply with the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program C.3 requirements, which include minimization of impervious surfaces, measures to detain or infiltrate runoff from peak flows to match pre-development conditions, and agreements to ensure that the stormwater treatment and flow control facilities are maintained in perpetuity. The project also must comply with CMC Chapter 9.18 described above in Section 3.1.4.2, Zoning, which is intended to provide regulations and give legal effect to certain requirements of the NPDES permit issued to the City. 53A light reflectance value or LRV is a measure of visible and usable light that is reflected from a surface when illuminated by a light source. LRV is expressed as a percentage from 0 to 100; the higher the number the more visible light that is reflected. 829
CC 07-07-2022
829 of 1038
Figure 3-15
Utility Plan
0 Scale (Feet)
60 Source: TS Civil Engineering, 2020.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

C A N Y O N C R O S S I N G S M I X E D - U S E P R O J E C T I N I T I A L S T U D Y

CITY OF CUPERTINO
PLACEWORKS 830
CC 07-07-2022
830 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-31

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

SOLID WASTE SERVICES
Recology South Bay (Recology) would provide curbside recycling, garbage, and compost and landscaping waste service to the project.
54 All non-hazardous solid waste collected under the Recology franchise agreement is taken to Newby Island Sanitary Landfill for processing. Under the agreement between the City and Recology, Recology also handles recyclable materials (at no cost to customers). The proposed waste management for the proposed project would focus on waste, recycling, and composting.

OTHER UTILITIES (GAS, ELECTRIC, AND CABLE)
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) would supply natural gas and electricity infrastructure to the project site. 55 The source of electricity would be provided through a partnership of Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE), which provides a standard electricity offering from a 50 percent renewable portfolio,56 and PG&E. SVCE also offers a 100 percent renewable option that electricity customers can opt into. The proposed development would achieve LEED Silver, or equivalent Alternative Reference Standard, consistent with the City’s requirements.57 Telephone service would be provided by AT&T and other providers. Cable television service would be available from a number of providers, including Comcast.

3.2.7 DEMOLITION, SITE PREPARATION, AND CONSTRUCTION
Demolition and construction would take place over a 10-month period, which is anticipated to begin in June 2021 and end in March 2022, subject to regulatory approval.58 The project applicant proposes to demolish the existing buildings and remove almost all the existing on-site vegetation. Table 3-1 shows the approximate demolition and construction phasing.

Demolition would take place over a period of
approximately two weeks, while grading and site
preparation, including excavation for the subterranean
garage, would be completed over a two-month period.

Demolition and construction work would be conducted
between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, as provided for in CMC Section 10.48.053, Grading, Construction and Demolition. Demolition and construction is not permitted 54 City of Cupertino, Garbage and Recycling, https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/environmentsustainability/waste, accessed on January 16, 2019. 55 City of Cupertino. 2019. Other Service Providers. https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/other-serviceproviders. Accessed May 2, 2019. 56 Silicon Valley Clean Energy. 2019. Your Choices. https://www.svcleanenergy.org/choices/, accessed on May 2, 2019 at 57 Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design is a green building program that recognizes building strategies that reduce consumption energy, and water, and reduce solid waste directly diverted to landfills. Silver typically reduce is the third highest ranking, with just being certified being the lowest and Gold and Platinum being the second highest. 58 New buildings would be constructed to the California 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (effective January 1, 2020).

TABLE 3-1 DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION
Activity Phase 1 (Workdays)
Demolition 11
Site Preparation 17
Grading 33
Building Construction 195
Paving 12
Landscaping 10
Source: Based on information from the project applicant, California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2016.3.25, and PlaceWorks, 2019.
831
CC 07-07-2022
831 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-32 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
on weekends or holidays for sites within 750 feet of other residential properties.59 Demolition debris, including soil, would be off-hauled for disposal in accordance with the City of Cupertino’s Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste Ordinance.60 Debris to be hauled would include shrubs and trees that were planted as part of the existing urbanized landscape, 1,616 square feet of building demolition debris, 294 tons of asphalt/concrete material, and 14,100 cubic yards of grading and soil export. Typical equipment to be used for demolition and site preparation would include excavators, a skid steer loader, a grader, a rubber-tired dozer, scrapers, and an off-highway truck.

The project construction would consist of approximately 23,990 square feet of building space, 16,602 square feet of landscaped areas, and 20,395 square feet of hardscape (e.g., curb, gutters, planters, retaining walls, etc.). No pile driving, rock blasting, or crushing would occur during the construction phase.

Typical equipment to be used during construction of the project would include a backhoe, a crane, aerial lifts, a generator, a diesel pump, dumpers, rollers, and a paver.

During demolition and construction, vehicles, equipment, and materials would be staged and stored on a centrally located portion of the project site when practical. No long-term staging of equipment would occur around the perimeter of the site where adjacent to existing residential uses. No staging would occur in the public right-of-way. The construction site and staging areas would be clearly marked, and construction fencing would be installed to prevent disturbance and safety hazards. A combination of onand off-site parking facilities for construction workers would be identified during demolition, grading, and construction.

3.3 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Following approval of this Initial Study and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the following discretionary permits and approvals from the City would be required for the proposed project:
 Zoning Map Amendment
 Development Permit
 Architectural and Site Approval Permit
 Final Map for Subdivision
In addition, permits for demolition, grading and building, and the certificate of occupancy would be required from the City. Encroachment permits from the City would also be required for any work performed in the public right-of-way.

59 Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 10, Public Peace, Safety and Morals, Chapter 10.48, Community Noise Control, Section

10.48.053, Grading, Construction and Demolition. 60 Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 16, Building and Construction, Chapter 16.72, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste.
832
CC 07-07-2022
832 of 1038
PLACEWORKS 4-1

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Environmental Analysis

4.1 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The General Plan EIR included an analysis of the project site as potential Housing Element Site 9 (Foothill at McClellan Center – Foothill Market), although the adopted General Plan did not designate this site as a Priority Housing Element Site. The evaluation in the General Plan EIR assumed potential redevelopment of the existing commercial development to commercial and residential uses with 25 dwelling units per acre (or 27 net residential units) with a maximum of 30 feet in height. 61 The cumulative impacts of past, present, and probable future development, in conjunction with overall General Plan buildout, including residential development of the project site, were evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project is anticipated to be completed in 2022 (subject to regulatory approval); thus, this Initial Study presents an analysis of the near-term impacts of the proposed project under existing conditions and 2025 cumulative conditions. Although the project site was evaluated as Housing Element Site 9 in the General Plan EIR, the adopted General Plan does not designate this site as a Priority Housing Element Site in the Housing Element.62
Consistent with the analysis presented in the General Plan EIR, and due to the proposed project’s location in an urbanized city setting, the project would not have a significant effect on agriculture, forestry or mineral resources. Maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency categorize land within Cupertino as Urban and Built-Up Land.63 In addition, according to the 2006 mapping data from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the city does not contain any woodland or forestland cover.64 Finally, the city does not contain land zoned for farmland or timberland production.65 Consequently, there would be no impacts with regard to agriculture and forestry resources. The project site is not within an area designated as Mineral Resource Zone, which is an area containing mineral deposits.
66 Consequently, because the site has been developed and is not considered suitable for protection or conservation, there would be no impacts to mineral resources. For these reasons, these topics are not discussed further in this Initial Study. After the General Plan EIR was certified, the CEQA Guidelines were amended by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, which is the entity charged with developing guidelines to help agencies implement CEQA, and adequacy of parking 61 PlaceWorks. 2015. City of Cupertino General Plan EIR, Chapter 3, Project Description, page 3-88. 62 City of Cupertino. 2015. City of Cupertino General Plan, Housing Element. Page H-16. 63 California Resources Agency, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2010, accessed on May 9, 2019. 64 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire and Resource Assessment Program, Land Cover Map, accessed on May 9, 2019. 65 City of Cupertino, Zoning Map, http://www.cupertino.org/index.aspx?page=291, accessed on May 9, 2019. 66 City of Cupertino, General Plan Community Vision 2015–2040, Chapter 6, Environmental Resources and Sustainability, Figure ES-2, Mineral Resources.
833
CC 07-07-2022
833 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-2 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
is no longer considered to be a significant environmental impact. Accordingly, parking adequacy is not discussed further in this Initial Study.

I. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 (transit priority area/major transit stop), would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?     b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
   
c) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
   
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to visual resources associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. The impacts were found to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site contains partially vacant commercial buildings, a converted residential unit, and a vacant residential unit, bordered by surface parking and associated landscaping. The largest commercial building is a one-story building located on the west side of the project site and the second commercial building is a one-story building on the northeast corner of the project site. There is also a vacant, detached one-story residential unit on the northwest corner of the project site, with a detached shed and surrounding grassy areas. Surrounding uses include one to two-story single-family homes to the north, south, and west, with additional one to two-story homes across Stevens Canyon Road to the east. Landscaping on-site consists of one mature redwood tree and one mature palm tree in the southeast corner of the site, shrubs along Stevens Canyon Road, and mature trees and plantings surrounding the Cupertino Bike Shop and vacant residential unit.
834
CC 07-07-2022
834 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-3

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

DISCUSSION
a) Would the proposed project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? As discussed in Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics, of the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would have the potential to affect scenic vistas and/or scenic corridors if the redevelopment on the project site blocked views of areas that provide or contribute to such vistas. Potential effects could include blocking views of a scenic vista/corridor from specific publicly accessible vantage points or the alteration of the scenic vista/corridor. Such alterations could be positive or negative.

Public views of scenic corridors are views seen along a linear transportation route and public views of scenic vistas are views of specific scenic features. Scenic vistas are considered to be long-range views, while scenic corridors are comprised of short-, middle-, and long-range views. The General Plan does not have designated scenic corridors or vistas. However, for the purposes of this analysis, the westward views of the foothills and ridgelines of the Santa Cruz Mountains are considered scenic vistas, and the segment of I-280 from Santa Clara County line on the west to I-880 on the east also is considered a scenic corridor.

The analysis in the General Plan EIR found that building heights remaining at 30 feet would result in a lessthan-significant impact to the long-range views of the Santa Cruz Mountain Range and foothills because the maximum heights of the existing on-site and surrounding buildings and mature trees currently limit the opportunity for views of scenic vistas from street-level public viewing. The project location is not considered a destination public viewing point nor is it visible from scenic vistas.

As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the existing buildings would be removed and replaced by the proposed mixed-use development with surface and underground parking, with all structures being 30 feet tall at the highest point. Of the two mature trees on the site, the Redwood tree on the northeast corner is proposed for removal, and the Palm tree on the southeast corner would remain.

Because the proposed project would not involve height increases above the surrounding development and are the same as what was evaluated in then General Plan EIR and currently permitted in the General Plan, and because existing conditions currently limit views of scenic resources combined with the fact that the site and surrounding areas are not public viewing locations, impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant. b) Would the proposed project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? As discussed in Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics, of the General Plan EIR, the segment of I-280 in Cupertino is not an officially designated State Scenic Highway but is considered eligible for listing as a designated State Scenic Highway. The project site is approximately 1.4 miles to the south of the I-280/North Foothill Boulevard interchange, which is the arterial that connects the project site to I-280. The project site is not visible from I-280. Therefore, there would be no changes to the I-280 viewshed. 835
CC 07-07-2022
835 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-4 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Impacts to views of scenic resources from the I-280 view corridor were determined to be less than significant in the General Plan EIR. Because the project proposes building heights that are consistent with what was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and the surrounding development, and are permitted in the General Plan, and because the site is not visible from the I-280 viewshed, project impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant. c) If the proposed project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
The project site is in an urbanized area that is not designated or otherwise identified as a public viewing location for surrounding scenic views. Public views of scenic resources including the westward views of the foothills and ridgelines of the Santa Cruz Mountains and the segment of I-280 from the Santa Clara County line on the west to I-880 on the east are partially obstructed under existing conditions due to the natural topography and the existing buildings in the project area.

The proposed project would result in a change from the existing one-story commercial and residential buildings to multiple two-story residential buildings and a mixed-use building, none of which would exceed the permitted height limit of 30 feet.

The project site is within the Commercial/Residential General Plan land use designation, which is intended to provide local neighborhood serving retail with residential densities compatible with the surroundings.67 The proposed project includes a zoning amendment to change the existing Planned Development with General Commercial (P(CG)), to Planned Development with General Commercial and Residential (P(CG,Res)). The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map would allow residential development on the site which would not conflict with any land use or zoning regulations governing scenic quality.

The proposed development would be required to provide suitable setbacks from public rights-of-way and appropriate buffers and/or height transitions for buildings adjacent to the surrounding low-density residential developments. Furthermore, the proposed project would increase the landscaping to include at least 19 new trees in addition to the one mature Palm tree that is located on the southeast corner of the project site which will remain as part of the project. The proposed landscaping would include planting 15-gallon screening Kohuhu shrubs (Pittosporum Tenuifolium) along the entire western and eastern project boundary, and approximately half of the rear project boundary. Additional landscaping along the northern boundary of the site along South Foothill Boulevard will partially screen the proposed development and would enhance the visual quality of the sidewalk abutting the property where no landscaping currently exists. Combined, the existing and proposed trees would help to preserve the existing visual setting.

Furthermore, the project is subject to the City’s discretionary review processes for the proposed Development Permit and Architectural and Site Approval Permit, in accordance with Chapters 19.12 and

19.168 of the Zoning Ordinance, which would ensure the proposed project would harmonize with adjacent development and not degrade the existing visual quality of the site and surrounding land uses. 67 City of Cupertino. 2015. City of Cupertino General Plan, Appendix A, Land Use Definitions. 836
CC 07-07-2022
836 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-5

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Accordingly, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings, or conflict with an applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant. d) Would the proposed project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Nighttime illumination and glare impacts are the effects on adjoining uses and areas from a project’s exterior lighting. Light and glare impacts are determined through a comparison of the existing light sources with the proposed lighting plan or policies. As discussed in Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics, of the General Plan EIR, the project site and surrounding areas contain existing sources of nighttime illumination. These include street and parking area lights, and exterior lighting on existing commercial buildings. Additional light and glare in the overall all area would be caused by surrounding land uses and traffic on surrounding roadways. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the proposed project would redevelop the project site and replace the existing sources of light and glare with new sources that are similar to the existing uses and consistent with the surrounding land uses. The source, intensity, and type of exterior lighting for the project site would be typical for single-family homes and for orienting site residents and customers of the mixed-used building, and for overall safety needs (i.e., lighting on signs, sidewalks, and parking). All permanent on-site lighting would be low-level illumination, downward directed, and shielded to reduce light spill or glare onto surrounding residential homes as shown on Figure 3-14. There would be no up-lighting on the mixed-use building exterior. In landscaped and paved areas, light sources would be concealed and not visible from a public viewpoint. All exterior surface and aboveground mounted fixtures would be complementary to the architectural theme and to the surrounding residential uses.

The proposed project would not include reflective glass. Where glass features are considered, glazing treatments would vary and none of the exterior glass would have a light reflectance value of more than 15 percent.68 The second-floor balconies for the apartments would include railing elements, which could have a combination of UV coatings, frosting, and fritting, which reduces glare. The existing roadway and proposed landscaping surrounding the project would act as a buffer to prevent light spilling on to adjacent land uses. For these reasons, impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant.
68A light reflectance value or LRV is a measure of visible and usable light that is reflected from a surface when illuminated by a light source. LRV is expressed as a percentage from 0 to 100; the higher the number the more visible light that is reflected. 837
CC 07-07-2022
837 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-6 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
II. AIR QUALITY
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?    
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project area is in non-attainment under applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards?     c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?    
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.2, Air Quality, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the air quality impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. Air quality impacts were found to be significant and unavoidable in the General Plan EIR because the project-specific details of future development were not available. The City adopted and incorporated mitigation measures into the General Plan to reduce air quality impacts. Mitigation Measures AQ-2a and AQ-2b are specific measures that are to be implemented by future projects, such as the proposed project, to reduce construction-related air quality impacts.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2a require applicants for future development projects to comply with the current Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) basic control measures for reducing fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) during construction and Mitigation Measure AQ-2b provides additional measures if there are significant construction exhaust emissions.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The environmental setting normally constitutes the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(a)). However, lead agencies have discretion to consider conditions over a range of time periods to account for a temporary lull or spike in operations. As with any commercial use, the buildings on the project site experience periodic transitions in tenants and occupancy. Therefore, this analysis considers full occupancy associated with historic operations of the existing commercial use as the baseline.

The existing commercial uses generate criteria air pollutants from transportation sources, energy use (natural gas and purchased energy), and area sources such as landscaping equipment and architectural 838
CC 07-07-2022
838 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-7

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
coatings. The current land use generates approximately 454 gross average daily trips on a weekday. 69 Existing emissions associated with the proposed project site are included in Table 4-1 below.

TABLE 4-1 EXISTING OPERATION-RELATED CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS Category
Criteria Air Pollutants (tons per year)
ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Existing 2019 Emissions
Area 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
On-Road Mobile 0.16 0.71 0.51 0.14
Total 0.23 0.71 0.51 0.14
Category
Criteria Air Pollutants (average pounds per day)
ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Area 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
On-Road Mobile .88 3.90 2.80 0.77
Total 1.21 3.90 2.80 0.77
Notes: Emissions may not total to 100 percent due to rounding; Reactive Organic Gases = ROG; Nitrogen Oxides = NOx; Coarse Inhalable Particulate Matter = PM10; Fine Inhalable Particulate Matter = PM2.5 Source: California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.25.

Air Pollutants of Concern
Criteria Air Pollutants
Pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated by federal and State law under the federal Clean Air Act (National) and California Clean Air Act, respectively. Air pollutants are categorized as primary and/or secondary pollutants. Primary air pollutants are those that are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb) are primary air pollutants. Of these, all of them except for ROGs are “criteria air pollutants,” which means that ambient air quality standards (AAQS) have been established for them. The National and California AAQS are the levels of air quality considered to provide a margin of safety in the protection of the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to further respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy 69 TJKM Transportation Consultants. October 2019, Technical Memorandum (see Appendix D of this Initial Study). 839
CC 07-07-2022
839 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-8 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed.

Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to criteria air pollutants, both the State and federal government regulate the release of TACs.

The California Health and Safety Code Section 39655 defines a TAC as “an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.” A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to Section 112(b) of the federal Clean Air Act (42 United States Code Section 7412[b]) is a toxic air contaminant. Under State law, the California Environmental Protection Agency, acting through the California Air Resources Board (CARB), is authorized to identify a substance as a TAC if it determines that the substance is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.

Where available, the significance criteria established by the BAAQMD are relied upon to make the determinations discussed below.

DISCUSSION
This section analyzes the types and quantities of air pollutant emissions that would be generated by the construction and operation of the proposed project at a project level. An update to the background discussion in the General Plan EIR of the air quality regulatory setting, meteorological conditions, existing ambient air quality in the vicinity of the project site, and air quality modeling is in Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Initial Study. The construction health risk assessment (HRA) for this project is in Appendix B, Health Risk Assessment, of this Initial Study. a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? BAAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) to achieve National and California AAQS. In April 2017, BAAQMD adopted its 2017 Clean Air Plan, which is a regional and multiagency effort to reduce air pollution in the SFBAAB. Regional growth projections are used by BAAQMD to forecast future emission levels in the SFBAAB. For the Bay Area, these regional growth projections are provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and transportation projections are provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and are partially based on land use designations in city/county general plans. Typically, only large, regionally significant projects have the potential to affect the regional growth projections.

The proposed project would construct 18 residential units resulting in a density of 11.5 dwelling units per acre and, therefore, would not exceed the 15 dwelling units per acre limit designated in the General Plan or the 25 dwelling units per acre maximum that was evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly result in any additional new population growth or employment growth beyond what was analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project is not considered a 840
CC 07-07-2022
840 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-9

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
regionally significant project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15206 that would affect regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and warrant intergovernmental review by ABAG and MTC.

As discussed in Section XII, Population and Housing, below, the proposed project would not exceed the level of population or housing projected in City or regional planning efforts (Plan Bay Area) through 2040, and it would not have the potential to substantially affect housing, employment, and population projections within the region, which is the basis of the 2017 Clean Air Plan projections. Furthermore, the proposed project would create a net decrease in emissions on-site and would not exceed the BAAQMD’s emissions thresholds (see Operational Impacts discussion in criterion (b) below). The BAAQMD emissions thresholds were established to identify projects that have the potential to generate a substantial amount of criteria air pollutants. Because the proposed project would result in an air quality benefit, the proposed project would not be considered by the BAAQMD to be a substantial emitter of criteria air pollutants.

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2017 Clean Air Plan and impacts would be considered less than significant. b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project area is in non-attainment under applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards? This section analyzes potential impacts related to air quality that could occur from a combination of the proposed project with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects within the SFBAAB. The SFBAAB is currently designated a nonattainment area for California and National O3, California and National PM2.5, and California PM10 AAQS. Any project that produces a significant project-level regional air quality impact in an area that is in nonattainment adds to the cumulative impact. Due to the extent of the area potentially impacted by cumulative plus project emissions (the SFBAAB), a project’s contribution to a cumulative impact is cumulatively considerable when project-related emissions exceed the BAAQMD emissions thresholds.

BAAQMD has identified thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions and criteria air pollutant precursors, including ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. Development projects below the significance thresholds would not generate sufficient criteria pollutant emissions to violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The following describes changes in regional impacts from short-term construction activities and long-term operation of the proposed project.

Regional Short-Term Construction Impacts
Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources, such as on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Site preparation activities produce fugitive dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) from demolition and soil-disturbing activities, such as grading and excavation. Air pollutant emissions from construction activities on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. Construction activities associated with the project would result in emissions of ROG, NOx, CO, PM10, and fine PM2.5. 841
CC 07-07-2022
841 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-10 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Construction Fugitive Dust
Ground disturbing activities during construction would generate fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5). The amount of dust generated during construction would be variable and is dependent on the amount of material being disturbed, the type of material, moisture content, and meteorological conditions. If uncontrolled, PM10 and PM2.5 levels downwind of actively disturbed areas could possibly exceed State standards. BAAQMD considers all impacts related to fugitive dust emissions from construction to be less than significant with implementation of BAAQMD’s best management practices shown in Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which is required pursuant to General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure AQ-2a.

Impact AQ-1: Fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) generated by the proposed project during construction could potentially result in significant regional short-term air quality impacts without implementation of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s best management practices related to reducing fugitive dust emissions.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1: The project’s construction contractor shall comply with the following best management practices for reducing construction emissions of fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) as required by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Revised California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines:
 Water all active construction areas at least twice daily, or as often as needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Increased watering frequency may be necessary whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed water should be used whenever possible.
 Pave, apply water twice daily or as often as necessary to control dust, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites.  Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials.  Sweep daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) or as often as needed all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at the construction site to control dust.  Sweep public streets daily (with water sweepers using reclaimed water if possible) in the vicinity of the project site, or as often as needed, to keep streets free of visible soil material.  Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas.  Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt/sand).  Limit vehicle traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.  Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible and water appropriately until vegetation is established.
 Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff from public roadways.  All exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe.

Construction Exhaust Emissions
Analysis of construction emissions is based on the preliminary construction duration and normalized California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) default schedule developed for the proposed project.

The proposed project would produce demolition debris and would require soil export for the underground 842
CC 07-07-2022
842 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-11

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
parking that would occur near existing sensitive land uses. Construction emissions were quantified using the CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2.25 based on information provided by the project applicant, which was reviewed and approved by PlaceWorks and the City. The approximately 10-month construction period is assumed to begin in June 2021 and end in March 2022, subject to regulatory approval.

Potential construction-related air quality impacts are determined by comparing the average daily criteria air pollutants emissions generated by the proposed project-related construction activities to the BAAQMD significance thresholds in Table 4-2. Average daily emissions are based on the annual construction emissions divided by the total number of active construction days.

TABLE 4-2 CONSTRUCTION-RELATED CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ESTIMATES Year
Criteria Air Pollutants (tons/year)
a

ROG NOx
Fugitive
PM10
b
Exhaust
PM10 b
Fugitive
PM2.5
b
Exhaust
PM2.5
b
2021 0.13 1.45 0.08 0.06 0.03 0.05
2022 0.11 0.36 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.02
Total 0.24 1.81 0.09 0.07 0.03 0.07
Criteria Air Pollutants (average lbs/day)
a

Average Daily Emissions
c

2.34 17.30 0.86 0.70 0.29 0.67
BAAQMD Average Daily ProjectLevel Threshold 54 54 BMPs 82 BMPs 54 Exceeds Average Daily Threshold No No N/A No N/A No
Notes: Emissions may not total to 100 percent due to rounding. BMP = Best Management Practices; NA = not applicable; Reactive Organic Gases = ROG; Nitrogen Oxides = NOx; Coarse Inhalable Particulate Matter = PM10; Fine Inhalable Particulate Matter = PM2.5 a. Construction phasing and equipment mix are based on the preliminary information provided by the project applicant. Where specific information regarding project-related construction activities was not available, construction assumptions were based on CalEEMod defaults, which are based on construction surveys conducted by South Coast Air Quality Management District of construction equipment and phasing for comparable projects. b. Includes implementation of BMPs for fugitive dust control required by BAAQMD as mitigation, including watering disturbed areas a minimum of two times per day, reducing speed limit to 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces, and street sweeping. c. Average daily emissions are based on the total construction emissions divided by the total number of active construction days. The total number of construction days is estimated to be about 209.

Source: California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.2.25 As shown in Table 4-2, criteria air pollutant emissions from construction equipment exhaust would not exceed the BAAQMD average daily pounds per day thresholds and impacts from project-related construction activities to the regional air quality would be less than significant and implementation of General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure AQ-2b is not required.

Operational Impacts
Typical long-term air pollutant emissions are generated by area sources (e.g., landscape fuel use, aerosols, architectural coatings, and asphalt pavement), energy use (natural gas), and mobile sources (i.e., on-road vehicles). The proposed project would result in new housing units, a parking garage, commercial space, and paved and landscaped surfaces, and associated vehicular trips. 843
CC 07-07-2022
843 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-12 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Table 4-3 identifies a net decrease in criteria air pollutant emissions associated with the proposed project compared to the baseline operation. As shown in Table 4-3, the operational emissions generated by the project would not exceed the BAAQMD daily pounds per day or annual tons per year project level threshold.70 Therefore, the proposed project would not cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SFBAAB and would result in an air quality benefit, by providing less criteria air pollutant emissions than existing conditions. Project-related operation activities to the regional air quality would be less than significant.

TABLE 4-3 OPERATIONAL CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ESTIMATES Category
Criteria Air Pollutants (tons per year)
ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Existing Land Use 2021 Projected Emissions
Area 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
On-Road Mobile 0.14 0.59 0.53 0.14
Total 0.20 0.60 0.53 0.14
Proposed Land Use 2021 Emissions
Area 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00
On-Road Mobile 0.08 0.33 0.29 0.08
Total 0.27 0.35 0.29 0.08
Net Change 2021 Emissions
Area 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00
On-Road Mobile -0.06 -0.26 -0.23 -0.06
Total 0.07 -0.25 -0.23 -0.06
BAAQMD Annual Project-Level tons/yr Threshold 10 10 15 10 Exceeds BAAQMD’s lbs/day Threshold? No No No No
Category
Criteria Air Pollutants (average pounds per day)
ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5
Existing Land Use 2021 Projected Emissions 1 3 3 1
Proposed Land Use 2021 Emissions 1 2 2 0
Net Change 0 -1 -1 -1
BAAQMD Average Daily Project-Level lbs/day Threshold 54 54 82 54 Exceeds BAAQMD’s lbs/day Threshold? No No No No
Notes: Emissions may not total to 100 percent due to rounding; Reactive Organic Gases = ROG; Nitrogen Oxides = NOx; Coarse Inhalable Particulate Matter = PM10; Fine Inhalable Particulate Matter = PM2.5 Source: California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.25. 70 Further details are shown in Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Initial Study. 844
CC 07-07-2022
844 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-13

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Summary
As described, the proposed project would not have a significant long-term operational phase impact, however, without incorporation of fugitive dust control measures, construction activities could potentially result in significant regional short-term air quality impacts. Mitigation Measure AQ-1, required by the General Plan Mitigation Measure AQ-2a, would ensure that required fugitive dust control measures are implemented to control project-related fugitive dust generated during construction activities. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Development of the proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations. Unlike the construction emissions shown in Table 4-2 in criterion (b), described in pounds per day, localized concentrations refer to an amount of pollutant in a volume of air (parts per millions [ppm] or micrograms per cubic meter [µg/m3
]) and can be correlated to potential health effects.

Construction Off-Site Community Risk and Hazards
The proposed project would elevate concentrations of TACs and PM2.5 in the vicinity of sensitive land uses during construction activities. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site include the adjacent onestory and two-story single-family residences approximately 20 to 50 feet from the site property lines to the north, west, and south. BAAQMD has developed screening tables for air toxics evaluation during construction that evaluate construction-related health risks associated with residential, commercial, and industrial projects.71 According to the screening tables, the surrounding residences are closer than the distance of 100 meters (328 feet) that would screen out potential health risks, and therefore, could be potentially impacted from the proposed construction activities. Consequently, a site-specific construction health risk assessment (HRA) of TACs and PM2.5 has been prepared (see Appendix B of this Initial Study).

A quantified analysis of the project’s construction emissions was conducted using the CalEEMod, Version 2016.2.25. Construction emissions were based on a 10-month construction duration, construction schedule, and off-road equipment list provided by the project applicant. The United States Environmental Protection Agency AERMOD, Version 9.7, dispersion modeling program was used to determine flagpole level pollutant concentrations, which were used to estimate excess lifetime cancer risk, chronic noncancer hazard index for non-carcinogenic risk, and the PM2.5 maximum annual concentrations at the nearest sensitive receptors. Results of the analysis are shown in Table 4-4. 71 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Screening Tables for Air Toxics Evaluation During Construction, Version

1.0, May 2010.
845
CC 07-07-2022
845 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-14 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-4 CONSTRUCTION RISK SUMMARY – UNMITIGATED
Receptor
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Chronic
Hazards
PM2.5
(µg/m3)
a
Maximum Exposed Receptor -
Off-site Residences 58.4 0.27 0.68
BAAQMD Threshold 10 1.0 0.30
Exceeds Threshold? Yes No Yes
Note: micrograms per cubic meter = µg/m3; PM2.5 – fine particulatematter Source: Cancer risk calculated using 2015 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Health Risk Assessment Guidance Manual; Lakes AERMOD View, 9.7.

The results of the HRA are based on the maximum receptor concentration over a 10-month construction exposure duration for off-site receptors.72 Risk is based on the updated Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Guidance Manual:73
 Cancer risk for the maximum exposed off-site resident from only construction activities related to the proposed project were calculated to be 58.4 in a million and would exceed the BAAQMD’s 10 in one million significance threshold. Utilizing the latest 2015 OEHHA Guidance Manual, the calculated total cancer risk conservatively assumes that the risk for the maximum exposed receptor (MER) consists of a pregnant woman in the third trimester that subsequently gives birth to an infant during the approximately 10-month construction period; therefore, all calculated risk values were multiplied by a factor of 10. In addition, it was conservatively assumed that the residents were outdoors 8 hours a day, 260 construction days per year, and were exposed to all of the daily construction emissions.  For non-carcinogenic effects, the hazard index identified for each toxicological endpoint totaled less than one for off-site sensitive receptors from the proposed project. Therefore, chronic noncarcinogenic hazards are within acceptable limits.  The highest PM2.5 annual concentrations at the maximum exposed off-site sensitive resident would exceed the BAAQMD significance threshold of 0.3 µg/m3
. Therefore, PM2.5 emissions are not within
acceptable limits.

Because the incremental cancer risk and maximum annual PM2.5 concentrations for the maximum exposed receptor would exceed BAAQMD’s significance thresholds due to construction activities associated with the proposed project, impacts are potentially significant, and the following mitigation is required.

Impact AQ-2: The proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations during construction.
72 Under the 2015 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual, the exposure duration has changed from 70 years to 30 years for operational risk to residents; however, the risk is still averaged over a 70-year lifetime. 73 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments.
846
CC 07-07-2022
846 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-15

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Mitigation Measure AQ-2: During construction, the construction contractor(s) shall:
 Use construction equipment that have engines that meet either the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for off-road diesel-powered construction equipment with more than 50 horsepower, unless it can be demonstrated to the City of Cupertino Building Division that such equipment is not available. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the CARB’s regulations.  Prior to issuance of any construction permit, ensure that all construction plans submitted to the City of Cupertino Planning Department and/or Building Division clearly show the requirement for Tier 4 Interim emissions standards for construction equipment more than 50 horsepower.  Maintain a list of all operating equipment in use on the project site for verification by the City of Cupertino Building Division official or their designee. The construction equipment list shall state the makes, models, and number of construction equipment on site.  Ensure that all equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.
 Communicate with all sub-contractors in contracts and construction documents that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to 5 minutes or less in compliance with CARB Rule 2449 and is responsible for ensuring that this requirement is met.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure, would reduce the project’s localized construction emissions, as shown in the Table 4-5 below. The results indicate that, with mitigation, cancer risk and PM2.5 impacts would be less than the BAAQMD’s significance thresholds for residential-based receptors. Therefore, the project would not expose off-site sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of air pollutant emissions during construction and impacts would be less than significant.

TABLE 4-5 CONSTRUCTION RISK SUMMARY – MITIGATED
Receptor
Cancer Risk
(per million)
Chronic
Hazards
PM2.5
(µg/m3)
a

Maximum Exposed Receptor – Offsite Residences 7.5 0.036 0.09 BAAQMD Threshold 10 1.0 0.3
Exceeds Threshold? No No No
Notes: micrograms per cubic meter = µg/m3; PM2.5 – fine particulatematter; Risks incorporate Mitigation Measure AQ-2, which requires all equipment of 50 horsepower or more be fitted with engines that meet the EPA’s Tier 4 Interim emissions standards.

Source: Cancer risk calculated using 2015 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Health Risk Assessment Guidance Manual; Lakes AERMOD View, 9.7.

Operation On-Site Community Risk and Hazards
Types of land uses that typically generate substantial quantities of criteria air pollutants and TACs include industrial (stationary sources), manufacturing, and warehousing (truck idling) land uses. These types of major air pollutant emissions sources are not included as part of the proposed mixed-use project. The 847
CC 07-07-2022
847 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-16 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
proposed project would not include stationary sources that emit TACs and would not generate a significant amount of heavy-duty truck trips (a source of diesel particulate matter [DPM]). Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of air pollutant emissions during operation, and impacts would be less than significant.

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Hotspot Analysis
Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of carbon monoxide (CO), which are called hotspots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the State 1-hour standard of 20 ppm or the 8- hour standard of 9 ppm. The proposed project would not conflict with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program (CMP) because it would not hinder the capital improvements outlined in the CMP or alter regional travel patterns. VTA’s CMP must be consistent with MTC’s/ABAG’s Plan Bay Area. An overarching goal of the regional Plan Bay Area 2040 is to concentrate development in areas where there are existing services and infrastructure rather than locate new growth in outlying areas where substantial transportation investments would be necessary to achieve the per capita passenger vehicle, vehicle miles traveled, and associated GHG emissions reductions. The proposed project is an infill residential development that is in close proximity to existing employment centers, roadways, transit, and bicycle and pedestrian routes, and for these reasons would be consistent with the overall goals of Plan Bay Area 2040.

Furthermore, under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited—in order to generate a significant CO impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (see Section XV, Transportation, below). 74 Therefore, impacts
associated with CO hotspots would be less than significant. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Construction and operation of mixed-use developments would not generate odors that would affect a substantial number of people. The type of facilities that are considered to have objectionable odors include wastewater treatments plants, compost facilities, landfills, solid waste transfer stations, fiberglass manufacturing facilities, paint/coating operations (e.g., auto body shops), dairy farms, petroleum refineries, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing, and food manufacturing facilities. While residential uses are not associated with foul odors that constitute a public nuisance, the proposed mixeduse building would have 4,536 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial space on the ground floor that could include a food service such as a small coffee shop or a bakery that could generate odors to nearby off-site residents. For these types of uses, the City may require charcoal activated filters to be 74 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2011 Revised. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines.
848
CC 07-07-2022
848 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-17

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
installed depending on what tenants lease the space over the life of the building operation. However, these are not the types of uses that lead to odors that affect a substantial number of people.

During construction activities, construction equipment exhaust and application of asphalt and architectural coatings would temporarily generate odors. Any construction-related odor emissions would be temporary and intermittent. Additionally, noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the construction equipment. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites, they would be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern.

Odors are also regulated under BAAQMD Regulation 1, Rule 1-301, Public Nuisance, which states that “no person shall discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or the public; or which endangers the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which causes, or has a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.” Therefore, because construction-related odor emissions would be temporary and intermittent, mixed-use developments such as the proposed project are not considered the type of use that would generate odors that would affect a substantial number of people, and the proposed project is required to comply with BAAQMD Regulation 7, odor-related impacts to off-site land uses would be less than significant.

III. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on a plant or animal population, or essential habitat, defined as a candidate, sensitive or specialstatus species?    
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community type?    
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
   
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, their wildlife corridors or nursery sites?
   
e) Conflict with any local ordinances or policies protecting biological resources?    
f) Conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
   
849
CC 07-07-2022
849 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-18 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.3, Biological Resources, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to biological resources associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. Impacts to biological resources were found to be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures to ensure impacts to birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) would not be significant. The project is required to comply with General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1, previously adopted and incorporated into the General Plan, to ensure the protection of nesting raptors and other birds when in active use, as required by the federal MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code (CFG Code).

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site and surrounding area is urbanized and contains roadways, structures, and other impervious surfaces. There are two mature trees on site, a Redwood tree proposed for removal, and a Palm tree that will remain. Existing conditions on and adjacent to the project site are developed and primarily dominated by landscaped and non-native vegetation. Based on a review of historical aerial photographs, the project site has been subject to historic disturbance, including mass grading. These conditions do not lend themselves to presence of rare plant and animal populations, and such species are not anticipated to be present prior to or during project construction.

As previously described in Chapter 3, Project Description, the CALVEG75 habitat mapping program classifies the site as an “urban area” that tends to have low to poor wildlife habitat value due to replacement of natural communities, fragmentation of remaining open space areas and parks, and intensive human disturbance. The diversity of urban wildlife depends on the extent and type of landscaping and remaining open space, as well as the proximity to natural habitat. Trees and shrubs used for landscaping provide nest sites and cover for wildlife adapted to developed areas. Typical native bird species in the city of Cupertino include the mourning dove, scrub jay, northern mockingbird, American robin, brown towhee, American crow, and Anna’s hummingbird, among others. Introduced species include the rock dove, European starling, house finch, and house sparrow. Urban areas can also provide habitat for several species of native mammals such as the California ground squirrel and striped skunk, as well as the introduced eastern fox squirrel and eastern red fox. Introduced pest species such as the Norway rat, house mouse, and opossum are also abundant in developed areas.

A recent search of the CNDDB shows that the project site does not contain any known special-status species on-site. However, special-status plant and animal species have been recorded within 5 miles of the project site. All of these special-status species were recorded outside of or near the city limits except for the Western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis), Woodland woollythreads (Monolopia congdonii), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperi), White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense, and the Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides 75 The CALVEG system was initiated in January 1978 by the Region 5 Ecology Group of the US Forest Service to classify California’s existing vegetation communities for use in statewide resource planning. CALVEG maps use a hierarchical classification on the following categories: forest; woodland; chaparral; shrubs; and herbaceous. 850
CC 07-07-2022
850 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-19

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
flavipunctatus niger). These special-status species were not recorded near the site but at least 1 mile away.

The nests of most bird species are protected under the MBTA when in active use and there is a remote possibility that one or more species protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, could nest in the two existing trees and other landscaping on the project site. These include both the Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperi) and white-tailed kite (Elanus leuocurus), which have reported CNDDB occurrences within the city boundary, together with more common raptors such as red-tailed hawk, great horned owl, and American kestrel, all of which are protected by the MBTA and CFG Code when their nests are in active use. However, no essential habitat for these or other special-status species is present on the site due to its developed condition.

Numerous bat species found in the Cupertino area, most of which are relatively common, and are not considered special-status species. As previously stated, the CNDDB does not show any occurrences of special-status bats on the site vicinity but does show records within several miles of Cupertino. The records include occurrences of Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis). These three species have no legal protected status under the State or federal Endangered Species Acts, but Townsend’s big-eared bat is considered a Species of Special Concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. These species have various priority rankings with the Western Bat Working Group, ranging from “High” for Townsend’s big-eared bat, “Medium” for hoary bat, to “Low-Medium” for Yuma myotis. Bat species found in the Cupertino vicinity may forage and occasionally roost in the site vicinity, but suitable habitat conditions for maternity roots does not exist on the site.

Wetlands and jurisdictional waters within the city boundary include creek corridors and associated riparian scrub and woodland, and areas of freshwater marsh around ponds, seeps, springs, and other waterbodies. Some remnant stands of riparian scrub and woodland occur along segments of the numerous creeks through the urbanized valley floor. The project site does not contain these creek corridors or contain other regulated waters; however, the Stevens Creek Corridor is approximately 0.25 miles to the east of the project site. Single-family residential neighborhoods act as a barrier between Stevens Creek and the project site.

There is no existing wildlife movement corridor designation on the site by any agency, including the United States Fish and Wildlife or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Furthermore, there are no open space areas or natural lands adjacent to the project site.

The existing palm tree located on the southeastern of the project site would remain as part of the proposed project. The redwood tree on the northern part of the project site would be removed. 851
CC 07-07-2022
851 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-20 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on a plant or animal population, or essential habitat, defined as a candidate, sensitive or special-status species?
As stated above in the existing conditions discussion, there are no known occurrences of special-status plant or animal species and no suitable habitat for such species on the project site, but there is a possibility that birds that are protected by the MBTA and CFG Code could nest in trees and other landscaping on the project site. However, no essential habitat for these or other special-status species is present on the site due to its developed condition. The analysis in the General Plan EIR found that impacts to special-status species, including nesting birds, would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.

Accordingly, the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which is required by General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1, would also be required for the project to reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level.

Nesting Birds
The analysis in the General Plan EIR found that impacts to special-status species, including nesting birds, would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. Accordingly, the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which is required by General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1, would also be required for the project to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-1: Tree removal and demolition activities during site clearance could destroy active nests, and/or otherwise interfere with nesting of birds protected under federal and State law.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nests of raptors and other birds shall be protected when in active use, as required by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code. The construction contractor shall indicate the following on all construction plans, if construction activities and any required tree removal occur during the breeding season (February 1 and August 31).  Preconstruction surveys shall:
 Be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to tree removal or grading, demolition, or construction activities. Note that preconstruction surveys are not required for tree removal or construction, grading, or demolition activities outside the nesting period.  Be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of tree removal or construction.  Be repeated at 14-day intervals until construction has been initiated in the area after which surveys can be stopped.
 Document locations of active nests containing viable eggs or young birds.  Protective measures for active nests containing viable eggs or young birds shall be implemented under the direction of the qualified biologist until the nests no longer contain eggs or young birds, and the young have left the nest and are foraging independently, or the nest is no longer active.

Protective measures shall include:
852
CC 07-07-2022
852 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-21

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 Establishment of clearly delineated exclusion zones (i.e., demarcated by identifiable fencing, such as orange construction fencing or equivalent) around each nest location as determined by the qualified biologist, taking into account the species of birds nesting, their tolerance for disturbance and proximity to existing development. In general, exclusion zones shall be a minimum of 300 feet for raptors and 75 feet for passerines and other birds.  Monitoring active nests within an exclusion zone on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance and confirm nesting status.  An increase in the radius of an exclusion zone by the qualified biologist if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified biologist only in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Bird Collision
Avian injury and mortality resulting from collisions with buildings, towers and other man-made structures is a common occurrence in city and suburban settings. Some birds are unable to detect and avoid glass and have difficulty distinguishing between actual objects and their reflected images, particularly when the glass is transparent and views through the structure are possible. Night-time lighting can interfere with movement patterns of some night-migrating birds, causing disorientation or attracting them to the light source. The frequency of bird collisions in a particular area is dependent on numerous factors, including:
characteristics of building height, fenestration (the arrangement of windows and doors on the elevations of a building) and exterior treatments of windows and their relationship to other buildings and vegetation in the area; local and migratory avian populations, their movement patterns, and proximity of water, food and other attractants, time of year; prevailing winds; weather conditions; and other variables.

The proposed mixed-use building and residential buildings would alter the physical characteristics of the site; however, this change is not expected to contribute to a substantial increase in the risk of collisions to local and migratory birds. This is due to several reasons, including the fact that the site is currently developed with residential buildings of a similar height (30 feet), bulk, and surface treatment, as is the current surrounding area; that the existing site has few trees; and the proposed structures would have limited transparency (i.e., no large uninterrupted windows in the new buildings). Because the site vicinity is already developed with urban use and the site is currently developed with occupied structures, most birds, as under existing conditions, would likely acclimate to the presence of the new building once completed. The potential risk of bird collision with the new buildings would be extremely low.

While the design of the exterior treatment of the proposed buildings is in the conceptual phase and has not yet been finalized, and must still go through Design Review, there are design options to minimize the risk of bird collisions by using well-documented bird-safe designs for window treatments, roof top equipment, and night-time lighting. While any bird collisions that do occur should not have a substantial adverse effect on special-status bird species or more common bird species that may be flying through the vicinity, the applicant, as described in Chapter 3, Project Description, has committed to implementing bird-safe design measures in the new buildings, which would further address the low risk of collision.

These include the following measures that would be part of the design of the new building:
853
CC 07-07-2022
853 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-22 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 Non-Reflective Glass: No reflective glass would be used in the building consistent with the San Francisco Bird Safe Recommendations76 that state that reflective glass should be avoided, because some birds in certain circumstances might see vegetation in the reflection and fly into a building.

None of the exterior glass in the new buildings will have a light reflectance value of more than 15 percent.
 Fritted Glass: Fritted glass is a non-reflective glass that is used to reduce glare and lower the danger to birds. Using fritted glass on the ground floor and second story windows and balcony railing elements, of the new mixed-use building would help prevent possible bird strikes. Fritting helps diminish the transparency of glass and is a documented approach to helping reduce the probability of bird collisions. Transparent glass used in “design traps” such as glass bridges or parapets can also be problematic. The project proposes glass railing elements on the second-floor balconies, which would incorporate UV coatings, frosting, and fritting to make them visible to birds to reduce collisions.  Building Lighting: Overly lit buildings can be problematic, especially if there is up-lighting. The project is required to meet City code minimum standards on exterior lighting, and the new building would have no up-lighting. The source, intensity, and type of exterior lighting for the project site would generally be provided for the purpose of orienting site users and for safety needs. All on-site lighting would be low-level illumination and shielded to reduce light spill or glare.  Tree Screening: The proposed project includes new 5-foot screening shrubs to be planted along the north, south, western, and the northern and southern edges of the eastern borders of the project site and 15 new trees, including one Miami crape myrtles (Lagerstroemia I. ‘Miami’), seven Saratoga bay laurels (Laurus ‘Saratoga’), and seven Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). Shrubs, including Cape rush (Chondropetalum tectorum) and Dwarf yeddo hawthorn (Rhaphiolepis U. ‘Minor’) would be planted along the eastern portion of the site, shielding the glass façade. These trees would help shield the first floors, which shielding would increase as the new trees grow over time.

The location of the project site, the building design features and selected materials, were determined to adequately address the remote potential for special-status bird species dispersing through the site vicinity to collide with the new structure and be injured or killed. These measures would serve to minimize the potential for bird strikes through the use of bird-friendly design guidelines in the treatment of windows and other aspects of the proposed buildings, and would ensure any potential impact would be less than significant for special-status birds and more common bird species.

Additionally, should the draft City of Cupertino draft Bird Safe Design Ordinance described in Chapter 3, Project Description, in Section 3.1.4.3, Other Requirements, be adopted by the City Council prior to project construction, the project applicant would be required to comply with the standards in the Ordinance which would also ensure any potential impact would be less than significant for special-status birds and more common bird species.
76 San Francisco Planning Department, 2011. Standards for Bird-Safe Buildings, San Francisco, California. Adopted July 14; 854
CC 07-07-2022
854 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-23

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Roosting Bats
As described in the existing conditions, the CNDDB records were recently searched for, among other species, occurrences of Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), and Yuma myotis bat (Myotis yumanensis). These three species have no legal protected status under the State or federal Endangered Species Acts, but Townsend’s big-eared bat is considered a Species of Special Concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Bat species found in the Cupertino vicinity may forage and occasionally roost in the site vicinity, but suitable habitat conditions for maternity roosts is absent from the site. The potential for any special-status bat species to be present on the site is considered highly remote, given the urbanization of the site vicinity and intensity of human activity, which typically discourages possible occupation by special-status bats. Accordingly, the construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in the inadvertent loss of any bats and impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community type?
As discussed in the existing conditions above, the proposed project is located in an urbanized area where no sensitive natural communities are found. The nearest creek is Stevens Creek, located approximately

0.25 miles to the east of the project site. The existing single-family residential neighborhoods act as a barrier between Stevens Creek and the project site. Based on the existing conditions and the fact that the proposed project would redevelop and underdeveloped site, impacts would be consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would remain less than significant. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
As discussed in the existing conditions and determined in the General Plan EIR, development of the proposed project would occur in urbanized areas where no wetlands or jurisdictional waters occur on or near the project site; therefore, no impact would occur directly. Indirect impacts to wetlands and jurisdictional or other waters include: 1) an increase in the potential for sedimentation due to construction grading and ground disturbance, 2) an increase in the potential for erosion due to increased runoff volumes generated by impervious surfaces, and 3) an increase in the potential for water quality degradation due to increased levels in non-point pollutants. However, indirect impacts would be largely avoided through effective implementation of best management practices during construction and compliance with water quality controls. As discussed in Impact HYDRO-1, water quality impacts from construction and operation of the proposed project would be less than significant. Accordingly, indirect impacts to wetlands and jurisdictional waters would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant.
855
CC 07-07-2022
855 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-24 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, their wildlife corridors or nursery sites? Development on the project site would occur in an urbanized area where sensitive wildlife resources and important wildlife movement corridors are no longer present because of the existing development.

Wildlife species common to urban and suburban habitat could be displaced where existing structures are demolished and landscaping is removed as part of future development, but these species are relatively abundant, and adapted to human disturbance. As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the proposed project would remove one mature Redwood tree on-site and most landscaping, and would replace the landscaping with additional trees and plants that would provide replacement habitat for wildlife species that may have adapted to the project site. Proposed project landscaping includes native, drought tolerant landscaping that is beneficial to the environment. Therefore, project impacts on the movement of fish and wildlife, wildlife corridors, or wildlife nursery sites would be would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant. e) Would the project conflict with any local ordinances or policies protecting biological resources? As discussed in criteria (a) through (d), above, the project site is located in an urbanized area where sensitive biological and wetland resources are considered to be absent, and no major conflicts with the relevant policies or ordinances related to biological resources in the General Plan and/or CMC would occur. One tree is proposed to be removed as part of the project. However, because the existing development is on property that requires a development application, all existing trees on the site are considered protected.77 Therefore, compliance with the City’s Tree Ordinances (CMC Chapter 14.12 and Chapter 14.18), which requires replacement trees, would ensure impacts related to the removal of trees would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant. f) Would the project conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? No adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved conservation plan includes the city or the project site, and the proposed project would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved conservation plan. Impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and no impact would occur.
77 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 14, Streets, Sidewalks and Landscaping, Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees. 856
CC 07-07-2022
856 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-25

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
IV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?     b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?     c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.4, Cultural Resources, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. The impacts were found to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required. The following is a summary of Section, 4.4.1.2, Existing Conditions, of Chapter 4.4, which is based on the cultural resource analysis conducted by Tom Origer & Associates on July 24, 2013, included as Appendix D, Cultural Resources Data, of the General Plan EIR. The cultural resources study consists of archival research at the Northwest Information Center at Sonoma State University, examination of the library and files, field inspection, and contact with the Native American community. As shown in Table 4.4-2, Cultural Resources in the Project Study Area and Vicinity, and on Figure 4.4-1, Cultural Resources, of the General Plan EIR, there are no identified cultural resources on the project site.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
As shown in Table 4.4-2, Cultural Resourcesin the Project Study Area and Vicinity, and Figure 4.4-1, Cultural Resources, of the General Plan EIR, there are no identified cultural resources on the project site.

Structures on the project site were developed in 1948 and 1968, 78which is within the 45-year age limit
established by the State Office of Historic Preservation for buildings that may be of historical value.79 However, neither of the existing buildings have been designated on a federal, State, or local registry. Nor are the existing buildings associated with significant cultural events, persons in California’s past, and they do not have any distinctive historical characteristics, and as such do not have any qualifying historical value.
78 Applied Water Resources. 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard/Stevens Canyon Road Cupertino, California. 79 Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. 857
CC 07-07-2022
857 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-26 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
Under CEQA, both prehistoric and historic-period archaeological sites may qualify as historical resources.80 Archaeological resources are addressed in criterion (b), and human remains are addressed below in criterion (c), below.

As discussed above in the existing conditions, the project site was developed in 1948 and again in 1968.

As further described above, the existing buildings do not meet the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. The General Plan EIR did not identify the project site as having existing buildings that are considered historic resources, and the existing buildings are not currently listed as California Historical Resources.81 Accordingly, impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and less-than-significant impacts to historical architectural resources would occur as a result of project development.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
While the project site is currently developed and the cultural resources study prepared for the General Plan EIR82 did not identify any known archaeological deposits on the project site, the site could still contain subsurface archaeological deposits, including unrecorded Native American prehistoric archaeological materials. If subsurface historical and pre-contact archaeological deposits that meet the definition of historical resource under CEQA Section 21084.1 or CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 are present at the project site, they could be damaged or destroyed by ground-disturbing construction activities (e.g., site preparation, grading, excavation, and trenching for utilities) associated with development allowed under the proposed project. Should this occur, the ability of the deposits to convey their significance, either as containing information about prehistory or history, or as possessing traditional or cultural significance to Native American or other descendant communities, would be materially impaired. Therefore, any project-related ground-disturbing activities have the potential to affect subsurface prehistoric archaeological resources that may be present. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure, would reduce impacts to unknown archaeological deposits to a less-than-significant level.

Impact CULT-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. 80 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(c), Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical and Unique Archeological Resources. 81 Office of Historic Preservation, Listed California Historical Resources. Accessed May 9, 2019 at http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=43. 82 City of Cupertino, certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. December 4, 2014, Appendix D, Cultural Resources Data, Tom Origer & Associates on July 24, 2013.
858
CC 07-07-2022
858 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-27

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Mitigation Measure CULT-1: A tribal representative from the Tamien Nation shall be retained and permitted on-site at all times during ground disturbance (including grading, demolition and/or construction) to monitor for potential prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources. Notice shall be given to the Tribe Tamien Nation in a manner requested by the Tribe Tamien Nation at least 48 hours five (5) days before any ground disturbing activity. Prior to ground disturbance activities, construction workers conducting the ground disturbing activities shall undergo cultural resource sensitivity training conducted by the on-site tribal Tamien Nation representative.

If any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground-disturbing (including grading, demolition and/or construction) activities:
 All work within 50 feet of the resources shall be halted, the City shall be notified, and a qualified archaeologist and tribal Tamien Nation representative shall be consulted. The contractor shall cooperate in the recovery of the materials. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation for tribal cultural resources, historical resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.
 The qualified archaeologist shall prepare a report for the evaluation of the resource to the California Register of Historical Places and the City Building Department. The report shall also include appropriate recommendations in collaboration with a tribal Tamien Nation representative regarding the significance of the find and appropriate mitigations as follows:
 If the resource is a non-tribal resource, the archaeologist shall assess the significance of the find according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
 If the resource is a tribal resource – whether historic or prehistoric – the consulting archaeologist shall consult with the appropriate tribe(s) Tamien Nation to evaluate the significance of the resource and to recommend appropriate and feasible avoidance, testing, preservation, or mitigation measures, in light of factors such as the significance of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) may be implemented.
 All significant non-tribal cultural materials recovered shall be, as necessary, and at the discretion of the consulting archaeologist, subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and documentation according to current professional standards. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? There are no known human remains on the project site; however, the potential to unearth unknown human remains during ground disturbing activities associated with the construction of the project could occur. Any human remains encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the proposed project would be subject to federal, State, and local regulations to ensure no adverse impacts to human remains would occur in the unlikely event human remains are found.

Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) contain the mandated procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains. According to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are encountered at the site, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease and necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the 859
CC 07-07-2022
859 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-28 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
immediate area shall be taken. The Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified immediately. The Coroner shall then determine whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, who would, in turn, notify the person the NAHC identifies as the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of any human remains. Further actions shall be determined, in part, by the desires of the MLD. The MLD has 48 hours to make recommendations regarding the disposition of the remains after having been allowed access to inspect the project site. If the MLD does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the MLD’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the NAHC. This would be included as a condition of approval of the project to ensure implementation.

Therefore, with the required statutory and regulatory procedures described above, potential impacts related to the potential discovery or disturbance of any human remains accidently unearthed during construction activities associated with the proposed project would impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant.

V. ENERGY
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
   
b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.14, Utilities and Services Systems, of the General Plan EIR addressed energy impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. Energy impacts were found to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
PG&E supplies electricity and natural gas to much of northern and central California – from Humboldt and Shasta counties in the north to Kern and Santa Barbara counties in the south – including the infrastructure for the City of Cupertino. Total electricity consumption in PG&E’s service area is forecast to increase from 104,868 gigawatt-hours (GWh) in 2015 to 119,633 GWh in 2027.83 The nearest PG&E substation to the 83 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2017. California Energy Demand Updated Forecast, 2017-2027. https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=214635, accessed on December 28, 2018. 860
CC 07-07-2022
860 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-29

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
project site is the Monta Vista Substation on California Oak Way approximately 0.75 miles northwest of the project site. The nearest electricity transmission lines to the project site are located above the project site along Stevens Canyon Road and South Foothill Boulevard. 84 The current project site is served by both electricity and natural gas connections. Electricity is supplied to the project site via infrastructure maintained by PG&E. Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE), a locally controlled public agency that has a partnership with PG&E, supplies the electricity to the project site.

SVCE provides a standard 50 percent renewable energy portfolio, in addition to a 100 percent renewable option that electricity customers can opt into. Natural gas and associated infrastructure are provided and maintained by PG&E.

Current energy demands are derived from the operation of multiple commercial uses located in the existing one-story buildings that were constructed around 1968 and 1948.85 The larger of the two existing buildings is currently occupied by neighborhood-serving restaurant, and commercial uses. However, some of the commercial spaces are currently vacant. The existing commercial building on the northern portion of the project site is currently occupied by the Cupertino Bike Shop, which specializes in bicycle parts, apparel, and accessories. The two-story residential unit is currently vacant and is used as storage by the Cupertino Bike Shop. Current energy demand includes energy demand from vehicle trips which include 454 gross average daily trips and 662 daily VMT.86

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Construction activities use energy from various sources, such as on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, vehicles hauling materials to and from the site, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew.

The operation of the proposed commercial buildings would use energy for cooling, heating, lighting, and landscape equipment, and for vehicle trips to and from the commercial building. According to the existing trip estimates described in Section XV, Transportation, at full occupancy the proposed project would generate fewer average daily weekday vehicle trips than the existing commercial use (322 project trips compared to 454 existing trips) and less VMT (631 project daily per capita VMT compared to 850 existing daily per capita VMT).87 This is further supported by the trip estimates generated by CalEEMod described in Section II, Air Quality, which shows fewer emissions from the transportation sector when comparing the project to existing conditions.
88 84 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2012, October 25. Local Reliability Maps for 2013: Enlargement Maps. http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/infrastructure/3part_enlargements.html. 85 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, pages 8 and 9. 86 TJKM Transportation Consultants. October 2019, Technical Memorandum (see Appendix D of this Initial Study). 87 TJKM. July 2019. Draft Traffic Impact Study Report, 10625 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, CA. Page 15 to 16, and supplemental memo dated October 16, 2019. See Appendix D of this Initial Study. 88 California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.25. See Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Initial Study.
861
CC 07-07-2022
861 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-30 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The proposed project is an infill development project that would result in the redevelopment of the project site in a currently developed portion of the city. The project site currently has access to existing infrastructure and services; however, the proposed project would require the construction or installation of new infrastructure and capacity enhancing alterations to existing on-site facilities to connect the new residential buildings to water, stormwater, sanitary sewer, electricity, and natural gas lines. The construction of new infrastructure and capacity enhancing alterations would be necessary as part of the construction of the residential buildings and would be consistent with the design and installation of typical utility infrastructure for new mixed-use or residential buildings. Therefore, the construction or installation of new infrastructure and capacity enhancing alterations would not be a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy.

The proposed project would improve connectivity to existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities and locates a commercial building with neighborhood serving retail and residential uses near existing residential neighborhoods. As described in Section X, Land Use and Planning, of this Initial Study, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation and as described in Section XII, Population and Housing, the proposed project would not result in new growth potential from what was considered in the General Plan EIR.

The proposed mixed-use and residential buildings would meet the 2019 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards of the California Public Resources Code, Title 24, Part 6, which applies to any project that is proposed to begin construction on or after August 2020. The 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards improve upon the 2016 Standards. The 2019 Standards require 53 percent or more energy efficiency for residential buildings, and 30 percent or more energy efficiency for non-residential buildings, respectively.
89 As described above in Chapter 3, Project Description, in Section 3.1.4.4, Utilities and Energy, the City enforces the CALGreen Building Standards, which establish planning and design standards for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), in CMC Chapter 16.58, Green Building Standards Code Adopted. CMC Chapter 16.58, Section 16.58.220, Table 101.10 requires that non-residential new construction under 25,000 square feet shall achieve a minimum green building requirement of CALGreen Building Code pursuant to Chapter 5 of the California Green Building Standards Code. CMC Chapter 16.58, Section 16.58.220, Table 101.10 also requires that residential new construction exceeding nine homes shall achieve a minimum green building requirement of Green Points Rated certified at minimum 50 points, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver, or an alternate green building standard that is as stringent as LEED or other cited standards and is subject to third party verification. Energy conserving features of the proposed project would include new landscaping that is native and/or adaptive, and drought resistant to conserve water and subsequently save energy.
89 California Energy Commission. March 2018. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Accessed May 24, 2019 at https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf. 862
CC 07-07-2022
862 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-31

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
New buildings constructed in accordance with the General Plan land use designation and to the standards identified above would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Accordingly, impacts would remain consistent with the conclusions in the General Plan EIR and would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
As discussed below in criterion (b) of Section VII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the proposed project would not conflict with the current CARB 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, Plan Bay Area, or the Cupertino Climate Action Plan, all which involve planning for us of renewable energy planning and energy efficiency standards. Also, as previously discussed, the proposed project would build to the most current 2019 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards of the California Public Resources Code, Title 24, Part 6.

Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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?
   
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?    
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?     iv) Landslides, mudslides or other similar hazards?     b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the 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?
   
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined by Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
   
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
   
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?    
863
CC 07-07-2022
863 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-32 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.5, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity, of the General Plan EIR, addressed geological and seismicrelated impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. Impacts were found to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required. The following discussion is based on project site information available in Section 4.5.1.2, Existing Conditions, of Chapter 4.5.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The following describes the existing conditions on the project site with respect to geology and soil:
 Geology. The City of Cupertino lies in the west-central part of the Santa Clara Valley, a broad, mostly flat alluvial plain that extends southward from San Francisco Bay. The site is generally flat with an average elevation of 429 feet above mean sea level and the depth of groundwater is estimated to be 25 to 30 feet below ground surface. The soil is Urban Land Flaskan Complex, which is a well-drained sandy loam, sandy clay loam, gravelly sandy clay loam and very gravelly sandy clay loam soil. 90 Surficial
geology is young, unconsolidated Quaternary alluvium,91 which is described as Holocene-age younger alluvium and coarse-grained alluvium that are composed of unconsolidated, poorly sorted gravel, silt, sand, and clay and organic matter.

Unique geologic features are those that are unique to the field of geology. Each rock unit tells a story of the natural processes operating at the time it was formed. The rocks and geologic formations exposed at the earth’s surface or revealed by drilling and excavation are our only record of that geologic history. What makes a geologic unit or feature unique can vary considerably. For example, a geologic feature may be considered unique if it is the best example of its kind and has distinctive characteristics of a geologic principle that is exclusive locally or regionally, is a key piece of geologic information important to geologic history, contains a mineral that is not known to occur elsewhere in the County, or is used as a teaching tool.

Unique geological features are not common in Cupertino. The geologic processes are generally the same as those in other parts of the state, country, and even the world. The geology and soils on the project site are common throughout the city and region and are not considered to be unique.  Soils. Web-accessible soil mapping data compiled by the USDA’s Soil Conservation Survey and the California Soil Resource Laboratory hosted by University of California at Davis was used to identify the major soil types on the project site. The predominant soil types for the project site are soils of the Urban Land-Flaskan and Urban Land-Botella complexes generally formed on slopes of 2 to 9 percent. 90 California Soil Resource Lab. Accessed May 24, 2019 at https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/gmap/. 91 US Geological Survey, 1994, Preliminary Quaternary Geologic Maps of Santa Clara Valley, Santa Clara, Alameda, and San Mateo Counties, California: A Digital Database, Open-File Report 94-231, by E.J. Helley, R.W. Graymer, G.A. Phelps, P.K.

Showalter, and C.M. Wentworth.
864
CC 07-07-2022
864 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-33

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
In almost all instances, these soils are reportedly deep and well drained, and are typified by low runoff.92
 Fault Rupture. The San Francisco Bay Area is one of the most seismically active regions in the United States. The significant earthquakes that occur in the Bay Area are generally associated with crustal movement along well-defined active fault zones such as the San Andreas Fault system. Many of these zones exhibit a regional trend to the northwest. The site is not located within a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (known formerly as a Special Studies Zone) or a Santa Clara County-designated Fault Rupture Hazard Zone.93 No active fault traces are known to cross the site; however, the San Andreas Fault passes a few miles west of the city of Cupertino.  Liquefaction. The site is not located within a seismically inducted liquefaction hazard zone, as mapped by the State of California and Santa Clara County. During cyclic ground shaking, such as seismic shaking during an earthquake, cyclically-induced stresses may cause increased pore water pressures within the soil matrix, resulting in liquefaction. Liquefied soil may lose shear strength that may lead to large shear deformations and/or flow failure. Liquefied soil can also settle as pore pressures dissipate following an earthquake.

Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are loose to moderately dense, saturated, non-cohesive soils with poor drainage, such as sands and silts with interbedded or capping layers of relatively low permeability soil.
 Lateral Spreading. Lateral spreading typically occurs as a form of horizontal displacement of relatively flat-lying alluvial material toward an open or “free” face such as an open body of water, channel, or excavation. In soils, this movement is generally due to failure along a weak plane and may often be associated with liquefaction. As cracks develop within the weakened material, blocks of soil are displaced laterally toward the open face. Cracking and lateral movement may gradually propagate away from the face as blocks continue to break free. Because of the low potential for liquefaction, the risk of lateral spreading at the site is also considered low.  Paleontological Resources. A review of the University of California’s Museum of Paleontology’s fossil locality database was conducted for the City of Cupertino. No paleontological resources have been identified on the project site; however, the presence of Pleistocene deposits that are known to contain fossils indicates that the overall city could contain paleontological resources.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause 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 92 UC Davis Soil Resource Laboratory, 2018. California Soil Resource Lab, Online Soil Survey, URL:
https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/gmap/, accessed May 24, 2019. 93 Santa Clara County, 2012. Santa Clara County Geologic Hazard Zones, Map 18, updated October 26, 2012. 865
CC 07-07-2022
865 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-34 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
on other substantial evidence of a known fault; (ii) Strong seismic ground shaking; (iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; (iv) Landslides, mudslides or other similar hazards? Fault Rupture
As discussed in the General Plan EIR, only one Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone has been mapped within the City of Cupertino, namely, the zone that flanks the San Andreas Fault in the southwestern most part of the city. Because the site is not located within a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or Santa Clara County-designated Fault Rupture Hazard Zone, and no active faults are known to traverse the site, the risk of surface fault rupture is considered low. The impacts from project development as they relate to surface fault rupture are considered less than significant.

Strong Seismic Ground Shaking
The hazards posed by strong seismic ground shaking during a major earthquake, while variable, are nearly omnipresent in the San Francisco Bay Area. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, in the event of a large, magnitude 6.7 or greater seismic event, much of the city is projected to experience “strong” ground shaking, with the most intense shaking forecast for the northeast part of the city where the project is located. Adherence to applicable building code, including conformance to the California Building Code (CBC) and the City’s building permit requirements would ensure that the impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking are minimized to the maximum extent practicable. The impacts of project development as they relate to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

Liquefaction
The project site is not located within an area mapped by the State of California or Santa Clara County as having a high potential for seismically induced liquefaction. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction in the vicinity appears low and is limited to a very narrow strip of alluvial deposits that flank Stevens Creek approximately 0.25 miles east of the project site.

Accordingly, impacts associated with project development as they may relate to seismically induced liquefaction would be less than significant.

Landslides
The site is generally flat with elevation an average of 429 feet above mean sea level.94 The project site is not located within an area mapped by the State of California or Santa Clara County as having a high potential for seismically induced landslides. Therefore, impacts associated with project development as they may relate to seismically induced landslides would be less than significant. 94 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, page 8.
866
CC 07-07-2022
866 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-35

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil during construction could, in theory, undermine structures and minor slopes during development of the project site. However, compliance with existing regulatory requirements, such as the implementation of grading erosion control measures specified in Appendix J, Grading of the CBC and CMC Section 16.08.110, Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, would reduce impacts from erosion and the loss of topsoil.

Examples of these control measures are best management practices such as hydroseeding or short-term biodegradable erosion control blankets; vegetated swales, silt fences, or other forms of protection at storm drain inlets; post-construction inspection of drainage structures for accumulated sediment; and post-construction clearing of debris and sediment from these structures.

Section 16.08.110 of the CMC requires the preparation and submittal of Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plans for all projects subject to City-issued grading permits, which would minimize the removal of topsoil, avoid overly steep cut and/or fill slopes, and protect existing vegetation during grading operations.

These requirements are broadly applicable to residential development projects. Adherence to these regulations would help ensure that the impacts of project development as they relate to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. c) Would the project 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?
As discussed in criterion (a), the project site is not located within an area mapped as having significant potential for seismically induced liquefaction. Because of the low potential for liquefaction, the risk of lateral spreading at the site would also be low. Therefore, the impacts of project development as they relate to liquefaction and lateral spreading would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.

The site is generally flat with an average elevation of 429 feet above mean sea level.95 The properties surrounding the project site are also at a similar elevation. The impacts of project development as they relate to landslides would be less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined by Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Expansive soils can undergo dramatic changes in volume in response to variations in soil moisture content.

When wet, these soils can expand; conversely, when dry, they can contract or shrink. Sources of moisture that can trigger this shrink-swell phenomenon can include seasonal rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, and/or perched groundwater. Expansive soil can develop wide cracks in the dry season, and 95 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, page 8.
867
CC 07-07-2022
867 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-36 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
changes in soil volume have the potential to damage concrete slabs, foundations, and pavement. Special building/structure design or soil treatment are often needed in areas with expansive soils. Expansive soils are typically very fine-grained with a high to very high percentage of clay, typically montmorillonite, smectite, or bentonite clay.

The proposed project would be subject to the CBC regulations and provisions, as adopted in CMC Chapter

16.04, Building Code, and enforced by the City during plan review prior to building permit issuance. The CBC contains specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls, and site demolition, and also regulates grading activities, including drainage and erosion control. Thus, compliance with existing regulations and policies would ensure that the potential future development impacts permitted under the proposed project would be reduced. Therefore, the impacts of project development as they relate to expansive soils are considered less than significant. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The development of the proposed project would not require the construction or use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would occur. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
As discussed above in existing conditions, the geology and soils on the project site are common throughout the city and region and are not considered to be unique. While no paleontological resources have been identified on the project site, because the proposed project requires substantial excavation for the subterranean parking garage that could reach significant depths below the ground surface where no such excavation has previously occurred, there could be fossils of potential scientific significance that have not been recorded. Such ground-disturbing construction associated with development under the proposed project could cause damage to, or destruction of, paleontological resources. Impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure.

Impact GEO-1: Construction of the proposed project would have the potential to directly or indirectly affect an unknown unique paleontological resource.

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-37

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
potential resource, and assess the significance of the finding under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
 The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find.  If the project applicant determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of the proposed project based on the qualities that make the resource important. The excavation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to implementation.

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?     b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
   

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts from greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program. GHG impacts under the General Plan EIR were found to be less than significant and no mitigation measures were required.

This section analyzes the GHG emissions from the construction and operation of the proposed project. An update to the background discussion of the GHG regulatory setting and air quality modeling in the General Plan EIR is in Appendix A, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Initial Study.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing commercial uses generate greenhouse gas emissions from transportation sources, energy (natural gas and purchased energy), and area sources such as landscaping equipment and architectural coatings. The existing land uses generate approximately 454 average daily weekday trips96 and 662 daily VMT. 97 Existing emissions based on full occupancy associated with historic operations associated with the existing commercial uses on the project site are included in Table 4-6 below. 96 TJKM Transportation Consultants. October 2019, Technical Memorandum (see Appendix D of this Initial Study). 97 Applies the same assumptions to existing conditions as TJKM Transportation Consultants applied in their October 2019 memo for the proposed project (see Appendix D of this Initial Study). 869
CC 07-07-2022
869 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-38 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-6 EXISTING GHG EMISSIONS
Category
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e/Year)
Existing Emissions Percent of Total
Area <1 <1%
Energy 5 1%
On-Road Mobile Sources 335 96%
Waste 7 2%
Water/Wastewater 1 <1%
Total 347 100%
Note: Emissions may not total to 100 percent due to rounding. MTCO2e/year = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.

Source: California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.25.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
A project does not generate enough GHG emissions on its own to influence global climate change; therefore, this section measures the project’s contribution to the cumulative environmental impact.

Development of the proposed project would contribute to global climate change through direct and indirect emissions of GHG from transportation sources, energy use (natural gas and purchased energy), water use and wastewater generation, and solid waste generation. In addition, construction activities would generate a short-term increase in GHG emissions. The change in emissions generated by the proposed project was evaluated using the CalEEMod, Version 2016.3.25, and are shown in Table 4-7.

TABLE 4-7 PROJECT OPERATION AND CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS Category
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e/Year)
Existing Emissions Project Emissions Percent of Total Net Change from Existing Area <1 2 1% 2
Energy 5 20 6% 16
On-Road Mobile Sources 335 294 88% -41
Waste 7 7 2% <1
Water/Wastewater 1 1 <1% <1
Amortized Construction Emissions a NA 11 3% 11
Total 347 255 100% 26.5%
BAAQMD Emissions Threshold (MTCO2e) 660
Exceeds BAAQMD Thresholds? No
Notes: Emissions may not total to 100 percent due to rounding. New buildings would be constructed to the 2019 Building & Energy Efficiency Standards (effective January 1, 2020). MTCO2e/year = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year. a. One-time, short-term emissions are converted to average annual emissions by amortizing them over the service life of a building, which is assumed to be 30 years.

Source: California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.25. 870
CC 07-07-2022
870 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-39

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Construction Impacts
BAAQMD does not have thresholds of significance for construction-related GHG emissions, however, the BAAQMD advises that the lead agency should quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction and make a determination on the significance of these construction-generated GHG emissions in relation to meeting Assembly Bill (AB) 32 GHG reduction goals. Therefore, this impact discussion applies BAAQMD’s project-level operation threshold of 660 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2e/year) for construction, which is based on BAAQMD’s operational-related threshold of 660 MTCO2e/year. 98 GHG emissions from construction activities are one-time, short-term emissions and, therefore, would not significantly contribute to long-term cumulative GHG emissions impacts from the proposed project. One-time, short-term emissions are converted to average annual emissions by amortizing them over the service life of a building. The total construction GHG emissions for the proposed project are estimated to be 253 MTCO2e/year (See Appendix A). For buildings in general, it is reasonable to look at a 30-year time frame, because this is a typical interval before a new building requires the first major renovation.99 As shown in Table 4-7 above, when amortized over a 30-year project lifetime, average annual construction emissions from the proposed project would represent a nominal source of GHG emissions and would not exceed BAAQMD’s operational-related threshold. Construction emissions would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Operational Impacts
As shown in Table 4-7 above, development of the proposed project would result in a net decrease of GHG emissions at opening year (2022). As previously described, the proposed project would generate fewer daily weekday trips and less daily VMT than the existing land uses on the project site. Because transportation emissions would generate the majority of GHG emissions associated with the proposed project, this reduction in daily trips and VMT would provide a project benefit in reducing GHG emissions.

Additionally, the new buildings would be more energy efficient than the existing structures and would be built to achieve the latest Title 24 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. Operation of the proposed project would result in a net decrease in GHG emissions and would not exceed the BAAQMD bright-line screening threshold of 660 MTCO2e.100 Because long-term GHG emissions associated with the proposed project are anticipated to decrease, resulting in a project benefit to GHGs, no impact would occur. 98 California Executive Order B-30-15 requires the state to reduce GHG emission 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. A 40% reduction from BAAQMD’s 1,100 MTCO2e/year threshold identified in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017, California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines, p.2-4, is 660 MTCO2e/per year. 99 International Energy Agency, 2008, Energy Efficiency Requirements in Building Codes, Energy Efficiency Policies for New Buildings, March. While the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines do not provide specific criteria in evaluating construction-related GHG emissions impacts, this methodology is consistent with the methodology utilized by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 100 California Executive Order B-30-15 requires the state to reduce GHG emission 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. A 40% reduction from BAAQMD’s 1,100 MTCO2e/year threshold identified in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2017, California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines, p.2-4, is 660 MTCO2e/per year. 871
CC 07-07-2022
871 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-40 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions include the CARB Scoping Plan, the MTC’s/ ABAG’s Plan Bay Area 2040, and Cupertino’s Climate Action Plan. A consistency analysis with these plans is presented below.

CARB’s Scoping Plan
In accordance with AB 32 and SB 32 the CARB 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan101 (Scoping Plan) contains the State’s strategy to achieve 1990 level emissions by year 2020 and a 40 percent reduction from 1990 emissions by year 2030. The Scoping Plan is applicable to State agencies and is not directly applicable to cities/counties and individual projects. Nevertheless, the Scoping Plan has been the primary tool that is used to develop performance-based and efficiency-based CEQA criteria and GHG reduction targets for climate action planning efforts.

Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions in the latest Scoping Plan (2017) include implementing SB 350, which expands the Renewables Portfolio Standard to 50 percent by 2030 and doubles energy efficiency savings; expanding the Low Carbon Fuel Standard to 18 percent by 2030; implementing the Mobile Source Strategy to deploy zero-electric vehicle buses and trucks; implementation of the Sustainable Freight Action Plan; implementation of the Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy, which reduces methane and hydrofluorocarbons 40 percent below 2013 levels by 2030 and black carbon emissions 50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030; continuing to implement Senate Bill 375; creation of a post-2020 Cap-and-Trade Program; and development of an Integrated Natural and Working Lands Action Plan to secure California’s land base as a net carbon sink. Statewide GHG emissions reduction measures that are being implemented as a result of the Scoping Plan would reduce the proposed project’s GHG emissions.

The proposed project would be constructed to achieve the standards in effect at the time of development and would not conflict with statewide programs adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. As stated above, while the measures in the State’s Scoping Plan are not directly applicable to individual development projects, the project’s GHG emissions would be reduced through compliance with statewide measures that have been adopted since AB 32 and SB 32 were adopted. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

MTC’s/ABAG’s Plan Bay Area
Plan Bay Area 2040 is the Bay Area’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS). To achieve MTC’s/ABAG’s sustainable vision for the Bay Area, the Plan Bay Area 2040 land use concept plan for the region concentrates the majority of new population and employment growth in the region in Priority Development Areas (PDAs). PDAs are transit-oriented, infill development opportunity areas within existing communities. An overarching goal of the regional plan is to concentrate development 101 Note that the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan is an update to the 2008 and 2014 Scoping Plans. 872
CC 07-07-2022
872 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-41

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
in areas where there are existing services and infrastructure rather than allocate new growth to outlying areas where substantial transportation investments would be necessary to achieve the per capita passenger vehicle, vehicle miles traveled, and associated GHG emissions reductions. Although the proposed project is not within a PDA, as discussed in Section XII, Population and Housing, growth associated with the proposed project is consistent with ABAG projections and would not exceed regional population and employment projections (see Chapter 4, General Plan EIR Consistency Analysis, of this Initial Study). The proposed project is an infill development project that would result in an increase in land use intensity in a portion of the city that has access to existing infrastructure and services, including transit service (see Section XV, Transportation). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the land use concept plan for the City of Cupertino identified in the Plan Bay Area 2040 and the impact would be less than significant.

City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan
The Cupertino Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a strategic planning document that identifies sources of GHG emissions within the city’s boundaries, presents current and future emissions estimates, identifies a GHG reduction target for future years, and presents strategic goals, measures, and actions to reduce emissions from the energy, transportation and land use, water, solid waste, and green infrastructure sectors.

The emissions reduction strategies developed by the City followed the BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines (2011) and the corresponding criteria for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Program as defined by the BAAQMD, which in turn were developed to comply with the requirements of AB 32 and achieve the goals of CARB’s 2008 Scoping Plan. Since the adoption of the CAP in January of 2015, the Legislature adopted SB 32 (September 2016) and CARB adopted the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (December 2017), aimed at meeting SB 32’s GHG reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy
A qualified GHG reduction strategy adopted by a local jurisdiction should include the following elements, described in the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. BAAQMD’s revised CEQA Guidelines provides the methodology to determine if a GHG reduction strategy meets these requirements. The following includes a description of the BAAQMD methodology and how the Cupertino CAP meets the requirement.

1. Quantify GHG emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area.
 Cupertino’s CAP identifies a baseline GHG emissions inventory for year 2010 and business-asusual forecasts for 2020, 2035, and 2050 for land uses within the City.

Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable.  Cupertino’s CAP has established a goal (or level) of 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 35 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. The 2020 GHG reduction goal is in line with AB 32. However, the 2030 goal was adopted prior to SB 32.
873
CC 07-07-2022
873 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-42 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Identify and analyze the GHG emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area.
 The GHG emissions sources calculated in the baseline GHG emissions inventory include commercial, residential, and industrial electricity and natural gas use, on-road transportation, solid waste disposal, energy use related to water and wastewater, agricultural off-road equipment and emissions associated with fertilizer application, and off-road equipment use for construction and lawn and garden activities. GHG emissions from these activities were calculated from activity data such as kilowatt hours of electricity, therms of natural gas, tons of waste disposed, and vehicle miles traveled from trips with an origin or destination in Cupertino.

Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level.
 The Cupertino CAP has identified groups of measures and performance standards aimed at achieving these targets: Reduce Energy Use/Improve Facilities; Encourage Alternative Transportation/Convert Vehicle Fleet; Conserve Potable Water; Reduce Solid Waste; and Expand Green Infrastructure. The Cupertino CAP strategies achieve the near-term (i.e., 2020) GHG reduction target. Strategies for the post-2020 targets were not quantified.

Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan’s progress toward achieving the target GHG emissions level and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels.  The City has a sustainability division that implements and tracks the City’s GHG reduction strategies and progress toward GHG reduction targets. The City’s sustainability division prepares annual reports on CAP implementation and progress as part of the monitoring program, including projects and policies, data and metrics, as well as inventory updates to determine if the CAP is achieving its targeted goals.

Be adopted in a public process following environmental review.  The City’s 2015 addendum to General Plan EIR102 demonstrated that that adoption of the Cupertino CAP would not create any new or substantially more severe significant effects on the environment that were not analyzed in the General Plan EIR certified in 2014.103 Based on the analysis above, the City’s CAP is a qualified GHG reduction plan for the AB 32 targets.

In addition, a specific project proposal is considered consistent with the Cupertino CAP if it does not conflict with the required GHG reduction measures contained in the adopted CAP. Project consistency with the adopted GHG reduction measures are shown in Table 4-8:
102 City of Cupertino, approved General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR Final Addendum, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. October 2015. 103 City of Cupertino, certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. December 2014.
874
CC 07-07-2022
874 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-43

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-8 CUPERTINO CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY MATRIX Measure Consistency
Measure C‐E‐1 Energy Use Data and Analysis
Increase resident and building
owner/tenant/operator knowledge about how,
when, and where building energy is used.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 850 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. This measure is not relevant because the proposed project receives energy through Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) and therefore utilizes renewable energy for the building. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, energy conservation measures would be used as part of interior lighting for the new building, such as various glazing treatments on exterior facades and efficient irrigation for landscape to reduce water consumption by 20 percent. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐E‐2 Retrofit Financing
Promote existing and support development of new
private financing options for home and commercial
building retrofits and renewable energy
development.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 10,525 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The project proposes new residential buildings that would comply with the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen, at minimum, as stated on pages 3-11 and 3-12 of Chapter 3, Project Description. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐E‐3 Home & Commercial Building
Retrofit Outreach
Develop aggressive outreach program to drive
voluntary participation in energy‐ and water‐
efficiency retrofits.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The proposed project includes the construction of new buildings and therefore these measures would not apply as a retrofit. Additionally, the proposed project would comply with the latest building code and utilize energy and water efficient fixtures. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐E‐4 Energy Assurance Plan
Develop a long‐term community‐wide energy
conservation plan that considers future
opportunities to influence building energy efficiency
through additional or enhanced building
regulations.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The proposed project includes buildings that would comply with the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen, at minimum, as stated on pages 3-15 of Chapter 3, Project Description.

Measure C‐E‐5 Community‐Wide Solar
Photovoltaic Development
Encourage voluntary community‐wide solar
photovoltaic development through regulatory
barrier reduction and public outreach campaigns.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 4,400 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐E‐6 Community‐Wide Solar Hot Water
Development
Encourage communitywide solar hot water
development through regulatory barrier reduction
and public outreach campaigns.

Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure. 875
CC 07-07-2022
875 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-44 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-8 CUPERTINO CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY MATRIX Measure Consistency
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 925 MT CO2e/yr
Measure C‐E‐7 Community Choice Energy Option
Partner with other Santa Clara County jurisdictions
to evaluate the development of a regional CCE
option, including identification of the geographic
scope, potential costs to participating jurisdictions
and residents, and potential liabilities.

2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 56,875 MT
CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The City of Cupertino is a member of Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) which partners with PG&E to provide clean electricity. The proposed project would receive energy from SVCE. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C-T-1 Bicycle & Pedestrian Environment
Enhancements
Continue to encourage multi-modal transportation,
including walking and biking, through safety and
comfort enhancements in the bicycle and
pedestrian environment.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As stated in Section XV, Transportation, of this Initial Study, the proposed project would not remove existing bicycle facilities along Stevens Creek Boulevard, nor would it conflict with the City’s 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan.

Pedestrians would also have access to the site via the existing crosswalks on South Foothill Boulevard connecting to Stevens Canyon Road.

Therefore, the proposed project would promote these alternative modes of transportation.

Measure C‐T‐2 Bikeshare Program
Explore feasibility of developing local bikeshare
program.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Class II bike lanes currently exist on both sides of South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road along the length of the project site. Bicyclists would access the project site from the existing Class II bike lanes via the internal roadway network.

Measure C‐T‐3 Transportation Demand
Management
Provide informational resources to local businesses
subject to SB 1339 transportation demand
management program requirements and
encourage additional voluntary participation in the
program.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 2,375 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As described in Section XV, Transportation, of this Initial Study, the proposed project is an infill and would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐T‐5 Transit Priority
Improve transit service reliability and speed.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As described in Section XV, Transportation, of this Initial Study, the proposed project is an infill project, but is not located near a transit stop. However, the proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐T‐6 Transit‐Oriented Development
Continue to encourage development that takes
advantage of its location near local transit options
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As described in Section XV, Transportation, of this Initial Study, the proposed project is an infill project and would not conflict with implementation of this measure.
876
CC 07-07-2022
876 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-45

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-8 CUPERTINO CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY MATRIX Measure Consistency
(e.g., major bus stops) through higher densities and
intensities to increase ridership potential.

Supporting Measure
Measure C-W-1 SB-X7-7

Implement water conservation policies contained
within Cupertino’s Urban Water Management Plan
to achieve 20 percent per capita water reductions
by 2020.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. The proposed project would comply with SB X7-7, which requires California to achieve a 20 percent reduction in urban per capita water use by 2020 and would implement best management practices for water conservation to achieve the City’s water conservation goals. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, the project incorporates water conservation features for on-site irrigation. All landscape zones would be irrigated as required by the Cupertino Landscape Ordinance, and water uses would be tailored to meet CALGreen Building Standards, which requires water conservation and requires new buildings to reduce water consumption by 20 percent. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐W‐2 Recycled Water Irrigation Program
Explore opportunities to use recycled water for
irrigation purposes to reduce potable water
demands.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. City must build the infrastructure to provide recycled water for projects to use. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, the project incorporates water conservation features for on-site irrigation. All landscape zones would be irrigated as required by the Cupertino Landscape Ordinance, and water uses would be tailored to meet CALGreen Building Standards, which requires water conservation and requires new buildings to reduce water consumption by 20 percent. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐SW‐1 Zero Waste Goal
Maximize solid waste diversion communitywide
through preparation of a zero‐waste strategic plan.

Supporting Measure
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, this Initial Study, pursuant to CMC Chapter 16.72, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste, during construction, the project would reduce construction waste and divert materials from landfill and promote recycling of construction waste. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐SW‐2 Food Scrap and Compostable
Paper Diversion
Continue to promote the collection of food scraps
and compostable paper through the City’s organics
collection program.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 750 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for implementing this measure. The proposed project would include compost and yard waste disposal services through the City’s contracts with Recology South Bay. The materials would be collected by the City garbage waste hauler. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐SW‐3 Construction & Demolition Waste
Diversion Program
Continue to enforce diversion requirements in City’s
Construction & Demolition Debris Diversion and
Green Building Ordinances.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 550 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the proposed project would comply with the City’s Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion Ordinance (CMC Chapter 16.72), which requires applicable construction projects to divert 65 percent of construction waste. Pursuant to CMC Section 16.72.050, Information Required Before Issuance of Permit, the project would create a construction waste management plan to reduce construction waste and divert materials from landfill and promote recycling of construction waste. Prior to receiving a final building inspection, a construction recycling report would be submitted to show 877
CC 07-07-2022
877 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-46 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-8 CUPERTINO CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY MATRIX Measure Consistency
the tons recycled and disposed by material type. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Measure C‐G‐1 Urban Forest Program
Support development and maintenance of a
healthy, vibrant urban forest through outreach,
incentives, and strategic leadership.
2035 GHG Reduction Potential: 725 MT CO2e/yr
Consistent. The City is the responsible party for this measure. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, there are no trees or other landscaping on the project site, and the proposed project would include the planting of approximately 15 trees and 16,602 square feet of pervious landscaped surfaces. The new landscaping reduces storm water run-off, increases carbon dioxide plantings, and reduces the heat sink profile of the site. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of this measure.

Source: City of Cupertino, PlaceWorks, 2020.

Development in Cupertino, including the proposed project, is required to adhere to City-adopted policy provisions, including those contained in the adopted CAP. The City ensures that the provisions of the Cupertino CAP are incorporated into projects and permits as part of development review and through conditions of approval. In general, the proposed project represents a benefit to GHG emissions compared to existing conditions because the mixed-use and infill development would locate housing and residential serving land uses in an existing neighborhood and would replace the older structures with newer, more energy efficient structures that achieve the 2019 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and water efficiency standards and would decrease GHG emissions by 26.5 percent. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal 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?
   
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
   
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
   
e) For a project 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, result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area?
   
878
CC 07-07-2022
878 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-47

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?     g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the hazards- and hazardous materials-related impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and a 30-foot height maximum at a program level. Impacts were found to be less than significant with mitigation measures to reduce impacts from development on sites with known hazardous contamination. General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures HAZ-4a and HAZ-4b, previously adopted and incorporated into the General Plan, are required to be implemented for sites with known contamination and potential residual contamination. As discussed in Chapter 4.7, the project site is not listed as a site with known contamination or potential residual contamination; therefore, the identified mitigation measures in the General Plan EIR do not apply to the proposed project.

The following is a summary of Section, 4.7.1.2, Existing Conditions, of Chapter 4.7, and project specific information from the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) dated January 12, 2019, prepared for the project site by Applied Water Resources Corporation and reviewed by PlaceWorks and the City.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Phase I ESA
The purpose of the Phase I ESA was to identify any recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in the vicinity of the project site. The Phase I ESA included a review of federal, State, tribal, and local databases, site reconnaissance, and a review of historical sources. The assessment revealed no indications of RECs on the project site.104 The site was used for orchards and associated buildings in 1939. The orchards were removed in 1948.

According to the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), when orchards have been removed or became inactive prior to 1950, organic pesticides are not an issue warranting further testing.105 Following the removal of the orchards, the project site was developed with the existing smaller mixed-use building 104 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, page 14. 105 California Department of Toxic Substances Control California Environmental Protection Agency, Interim Guidance for Sampling Agricultural Properties, page 3, August 7, 2008. 879
CC 07-07-2022
879 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-48 DECEMBER 2021

Cupertino City CouncilJuly 7, 2022

Cupertino City Council
July 7, 2022