07-07-2022 Searchable Packet — Cupertino City Council, July 7, 2022 (part 5 of 6)

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
located on the site, currently used as the Cupertino Bike Shop. The larger building on the site, currently used for a variety of commercial uses, was constructed by 1963.106 The Cupertino Bike Shop located on the site is known to use approximately 75 to 100 gallons of aqueous parts cleaner per year, which is considered hazardous waste. However, the Phase I ESA describes the materials as being used appropriately and no indications of spills, releases, or violations were noted in the Phase I ESA.107
The search of the DTSC’s EnviroStor Database and the GeoTracker database search did not reveal any hazardous materials or leaking underground storage tanks also referred to as “LUST” sites on the project site.108,109 According to GeoTracker, there is a completed/closed soil contamination site approximately 500 feet to the northeast of the project site at a residential property. There is also one completed/closed voluntary cleanup site 0.5 miles to the northeast of the project site at the Blackberry Farm Play Area.110 Lead-Based Paints and Asbestos-Containing Materials
Based on the age of the buildings, there is a potential for asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and leadbased paint (LBP), which were not regulated in construction until the early 1970’s. Neither ACM or LBP are known to have been used during construction of the existing structures.111 ACMs and LBPs do not qualify as RECs regulated by the DTSC.112
Sensitive Receptors
Public schools near the project site are Monta Vista High School and John F. Kennedy Middle School and Abraham Lincoln Elementary School, each approximately 1 mile to the east of the site. Private schools 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 106 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, pages 8 and 9, January 12. 107 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, page 7. 108 Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2019. EnviroStor. Accessed May 28, 2019 at https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. 109 State Water Resources Control Board. 2015. GeoTracker. Accessed May 28, 2019 at https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ 110 Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2019. EnviroStor. Accessed May 28, 2019 at https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. 111 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, page 14. 112 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California.
880
CC 07-07-2022
880 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-49

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Bay Area Retirement Community approximately 0.75 miles to the north, and Cupertino Senior Center approximately 1.5 miles to the northeast.

Airports
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 within the boundaries of an airport land use plan.

Wildfire
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (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 State Responsibility Area (SRA), which are areas of the state where the State of California is financially responsible for the prevention and suppression of wildfires. SRA’s do not include lands within city boundaries or in federal ownership. The SRA is approximately 0.5 miles to the west of the project site.113 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).114

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?
Construction Impacts
Construction activities at the project site would involve the use of larger amounts of hazardous materials than would operation of the proposed project, such as petroleum-based fuels for maintenance and construction equipment, and coatings used in construction, which would be transported to the site periodically by vehicle and would be present temporarily during construction. These potentially hazardous materials would not be of a type or occur in sufficient quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety or the environment, and their use during construction would be short-term. As with proposed project operation, the use, transport, and disposal of construction-related hazardous materials would be required to conform to existing laws and regulations. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials would ensure that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner, and would minimize the potential for safety impacts to occur. Consequently, associated impacts from construction of the proposed project would be less than significant.
113 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 114 CAL FIRE. 2018. Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Threat. http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=d45bf08448354073a26675776f2d09cb, accessed May 7, 2019. 881
CC 07-07-2022
881 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-50 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Operational Impacts
The proposed mixed-use development would not involve the routine transport or disposal of hazardous materials. Project operation would involve the use of small amounts of hazardous materials for cleaning and maintenance purposes, such as cleansers, degreasers, pesticides, and fertilizers. These potentially hazardous materials would not be of a type or be present in sufficient quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety or the environment. Furthermore, such substances would be used, transported, stored, and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local laws, policies, and regulations. Any businesses that transport, generate, use, and/or dispose of hazardous materials in Cupertino are subject to existing hazardous materials regulations, such as those implemented by Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Compliance Division, and hazardous materials permits from the Santa Clara Fire Department (SCCFD). The SCCFD also conducts inspections for fire safety and hazardous materials management of businesses and multi-family dwellings, in accordance with the City of Cupertino Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance in Title 9, Health and Sanitation, Chapter 9.12, Hazardous Materials Storage. Thus, associated impacts from the operational phase of the project would be less than significant.
b) Would the project 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?
As described under criterion (a), above, construction and operation of the proposed project would involve the storage and use of common cleaning substances, building maintenance products, paints, and solvents, as well as petroleum-based fuels for maintenance and construction equipment, and coatings used in construction. As described in the existing conditions, the existing buildings were developed in 1948 and 1963, and the Phase I ESA identified that, although all suspect ACMs and LBP are in good condition and do not currently pose a health or safety concern, the demolition of the buildings could release these hazardous materials. An impact could occur if construction and operation of the proposed project creates conditions where these hazardous materials could easily contaminate surrounding soil, water, or air. The most likely scenarios would be from rainwater runoff spreading contaminated waste. Stormwater runoff is discussed in Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Initial Study and impacts were found to be less than significant.

Construction Impacts
Similar to the operation of the proposed project, the types of construction materials and equipment would be considered standard for this type of development. All spills or leakage of petroleum products during construction activities are required to be immediately contained, the hazardous material identified, and the material remediated in compliance with applicable State and local regulations. All contaminated waste would be required to be collected and disposed of at an appropriately licensed disposal or treatment facility. Furthermore, strict adherence to all emergency response plan requirements set forth by the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Compliance Division 882
CC 07-07-2022
882 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-51

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
would be required through the duration of the construction of each individual development project.115 Therefore, substantial hazards to the public or the environment arising from the routine use of hazardous materials during project construction would not occur.

While the Phase I ESA identifies the potential for ACMs and LBPs on the project site, removal of these types of hazardous materials would require licensed contractors to remove and handle these materials in accordance with existing federal, State, and local regulations. These regulations include the USEPA’s National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (Code of Federal Regulation Part 61), Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Regulation 11, Title 8 of the California Codes of Regulations, the Unified Program, and the City’s General Plan Health and Safety Element Policy HS-6.1, which would insure that risks associated with the transport, storage, use, and disposal of such materials would be reduced to the maximum extent practical. Consequently, associated impacts from demolition phase of the project would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required.

Operational Impacts
The proposed mixed-use development is not considered the type of project that would create a hazardous materials threat to the users of the site or the surrounding land uses. The Santa Clara County Hazardous Materials Compliance Division (HMCD) is the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for Santa Clara County including the City of Cupertino and is responsible for enforcing Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. As the CUPA, Santa Clara County HMCD is required to regulate hazardous materials business plans (HMBP) and chemical inventory, hazardous waste and tiered permitting, underground storage tanks, and risk-management plans. The HMBP is required to contain basic information on the location, type, quantity, and health risks of hazardous materials stored, used, or disposed of on development sites. The HMBP also contains an emergency-response plan, which describes the procedures for mitigating a hazardous release, procedures and equipment for minimizing the potential damage of a hazardous materials release, and provisions for immediate notification of the California Emergency Management Agency and other emergency-response personnel, such as the SCCFD.

Implementation of the emergency response plan facilitates rapid response in the event of an accidental spill or release, thereby reducing potential adverse impacts. Furthermore, Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health, Hazardous Materials Compliance Division is required to conduct ongoing routine inspections to ensure compliance with existing laws and regulations; to identify safety hazards that could cause or contribute to an accidental spill or release; and to suggest preventative measures to minimize the risk of a spill or release of hazardous substances. Compliance with these regulations would ensure that the risk of accidents and spills is minimized to the maximum extent practicable during the operation of the proposed project. Consequently, associated impacts would be less than significant. 115 Santa Clara County Ordinance Code, Division B11, Chapter XIII (Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance), Chapter XIV (Toxic Gas Ordinance).
883
CC 07-07-2022
883 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-52 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? There are no schools within 0.25 miles of the project site, but the Cupertino Healthcare and Wellness nursing home is approximately 0.25 miles to the north. As discussed in criterion (a) and (b), the proposed project would not involve the storage, handling, or disposal of hazardous materials in sufficient quantities to pose a significant risk to the public. Thus, no impact related to hazardous emissions or hazardous material handling to schools or other sensitive receptors that are within 0.25 miles of the project site would occur and no mitigation measures are required.

Also see Section II, Air Quality, criterion (c), which concludes that the potential for impacts to sensitive receptors due to the release of hazardous materials during construction would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) Would the project 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?
As stated in the existing conditions above, the project site was not identified as being on a listed site pursuant to California Government Code Section 65952.5. The Phase I ESA revealed no indications of RECs on the project site and concluded that hazardous materials used by the existing bike shop are being used appropriately, with no indications of spills, releases, or violations.116 Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant.
e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area?
The project site is not within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public use airport. Thus, there would be no impact related to public airport hazards.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Services is responsible for coordinating agency response to disasters or other large-scale emergencies in the City of Cupertino with assistance from the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services and the SCCFD. The Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan (EOP)117 establishes policy direction for emergency planning, mitigation, response, and recovery activities within the city. The Cupertino EOP addresses interagency coordination, procedures to maintain communications with county and State emergency response teams, and methods to assess the extent of damage and management of volunteers.
116 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill Boulevard, Cupertino, California, page 14. 117 City of Cupertino, Office of Emergency Services. Emergency Operations Plan. September 2005. 884
CC 07-07-2022
884 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-53

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The proposed project would not block roads and would not impede emergency access to surrounding properties or neighborhoods. As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, emergency vehicle access would be provided at two points on the project site, with ingress and egress located at the intersections of Stevens Canyon Road and McClellan Road and Stevens Canyon Road and St.

Andrews Avenue, as shown in Figure 3-12. The emergency circulation plan includes a fire truck circulation route in addition to designated fireman access routes to reach the rear of the structures.

During demolition and construction, vehicles, equipment, and materials would be staged and stored on a portion of the project site. The construction site and staging areas would be clearly marked, and construction fencing would be installed to prevent disturbance and safety hazards. No staging would occur in the public right-of-way. A combination of on- and off-site parking facilities for construction workers would be identified during demolition, grading, and construction. The proposed project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan, or emergency evacuation plan; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
The project site is fully developed and is surrounded by built-out urban uses. The project site is located approximately 0.25 miles from the Urban Wildland Interface area designated in the City’s adopted Urban Wildland Interface Fire Area map.
118 The very high fire hazard severity zone located within the LRA is located in the central southern portion of the Cupertino, which is approximately 1.75 miles southeast of the project site. Because the project is located outside of a designated fire hazard area, the proposed project would not subject people or structures to wildfire hazards and impacts would be less than significant.

IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
   
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
   
118 City of Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 16, Building and Construction, Chapter 16.74. Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area. 885
CC 07-07-2022
885 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-54 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor off-site; iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
   
d) In a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation?    
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the hydrology- and water quality-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, and no mitigation measures were required. The following is a summary of Section, 4.8.1.2, Existing Conditions, of Chapter 4.8.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site lies within the Stevens Creek Watershed,119 approximately 0.25 miles west of Stevens Creek, and approximately 1 mile north of Stevens Creek Reservoir. No creeks or natural drainage features are present on the project site. In addition to the natural drainage system within the watershed, a network of storm drains collects runoff from city streets and conveys it to four creeks, including Stevens Creek with ultimate discharge into San Francisco Bay.

The City of Cupertino Department of Public Works is responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of City-owned facilities including public streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and storm drains.

The capacity of the storm drain facilities within the City of Cupertino was evaluated and documented in the 2018 Storm Drain Master Plan, which identifies areas within the system that do not have the capacity to handle runoff during a 10-year storm event, which is the City’s design standard. 119 City of Cupertino, certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, State Clearinghouse Number 2014032007. December 4, 2014, Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, Figure 4.8-1, Watersheds. 886
CC 07-07-2022
886 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-55

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
As described in the 2018 Storm Drain Master Plan, the project site is in an area where some of the storm drains are deficient in conveying water from a 10-year storm. The project site would discharge stormwater to the City’s storm drain system at two locations. Stormwater from the south portion of the site would discharge to the 18-inch storm drain that runs beneath St. Andrews Avenue, which currently does not have any capacity issues. However, the northern portion of the site would discharge to the City’s existing 18-inch storm drain near the intersection of South Foothill Boulevard and McClellan Road. The storm drain beneath Stevens Canyon Road/South Foothill Boulevard that continues to Stevens Creek Boulevard is currently under capacity and is designated as high priority for replacement.120 The City’s proposed storm drain improvement to reduce flooding impacts would be to increase the storm drainpipe diameter to increase its carrying capacity.

The project site, as well as the entire city, is within the Santa Clara Subbasin of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin. In 2017, approximately 42 percent of the water used in Santa Clara County was pumped from groundwater.121 The depth of groundwater is estimated to be about 25 to 30 feet below ground surface or deeper.122 Therefore, construction dewatering will not be required. Most of the water supplied to the County is purchased from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), which receives surface water from the State Water Project (SWP) and the Central Valley Project. Additional details on water usage and local water purveyors are provided in Section XVII, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Initial Study.

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program was established by the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States from their municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). Municipal storm water discharges in the City of Cupertino are subject to the Waste Discharge Requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP; Order Number R2-2015-0049, as amended by Order No. R2-2019-0004) and NPDES Permit Number CAS612008.

Construction activities that disturb one or more acres of land that could impact hydrologic resources must comply with the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Construction General Permit (2009-0009-DWQ) as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ. Under the terms of the permit, applicants must file Permit Registration Documents (PRDs) with the SWRCB prior to the start of construction. The PRDs include a Notice of Intent, risk assessment, site map, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), annual fee, and a signed certification statement. The PRDs are submitted electronically to the SWRCB via the Stormwater Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS) website.

All new development or redevelopment projects that create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces would be required to incorporate source control, site design, and stormwater treatment measures into the project, pursuant to the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention 120 Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers. 2018. Cupertino Storm Drain Master Plan. 121 Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2017. Annual Groundwater Report for Calendar Year 2017, page ES-1. 122 Applied Water Resources, 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10625-10637 South Foothill/Stevens Canyon Road, Cupertino, CA.
887
CC 07-07-2022
887 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-56 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Program C.3 requirements. The requirements include minimization of impervious surfaces, measures to detain or infiltrate runoff from peak flows, and agreements to ensure that the stormwater treatment and flow control facilities are maintained in perpetuity.

The San Francisco Bay RWQCB monitors surface water quality through implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan) and designates beneficial uses for surface water bodies and groundwater within the Santa Clara Valley. The Basin Plan also contains water quality criteria for groundwater. Groundwater quality in the Santa Clara subbasin is generally considered to be good, and water quality objectives are met in at least 95 percent of the County water supply wells without the use of treatment methods.123
The project site is not located in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain or Special Flood Hazard Area. The project site is not within a dam inundation zone of Stevens Creek Reservoir or any other dams. 124 The City
of Cupertino is more than 8 miles south of the San Francisco Bay and is more than 100 feet above mean sea level, which places the City at a distance beyond the impacts of a tsunami.125 There are no large bodies of water within the City of Cupertino or near the project site; thus, the project site would not be impacted by a seiche.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Because the project would disturb one or more acres during construction, the project applicant would be required to comply with State’s Construction General Permit and submit PRDs to the SWRCB prior to the start of construction. The PRDs include a Notice of Intent and a site-specific construction SWPPP that describes the incorporation of best management practices to control sedimentation, erosion, and hazardous materials contamination of runoff during construction. In addition, the City of Cupertino requires preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan and submittal with the site map/grading plan, pursuant to CMC Section 16.08.110, Interim Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. With implementation of these best management practices, water quality impacts during construction would be less than significant.

The proposed project would create and/or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces, and therefore would be required to incorporate source control, site design, and stormwater treatment measures into the project, pursuant to the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program C.3 requirements. A Stormwater Management Plan must also be prepared and submitted to the City for 123 Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2016. Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2016. 2016 Groundwater Management Plan. 124 Santa Clara County Fire Department. 2012. Joint Stevens Creek Dam Failure Plan. https://www.cupertino.org/home/showdocument?id=7424 accessed on September 26, 2019. 125 Association of Bay Area Governments, 2019. Interactive Tsunami Inundation Map. http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/Hazards/?hlyr=tsunami , accessed September 26, 2019. 888
CC 07-07-2022
888 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-57

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
approval prior to the start of construction. The plan will detail how runoff and associated water quality impacts resulting from the proposed project will be controlled and managed.

The low impact development (LID) requirements include the preservation of open space and reduction of impervious surfaces, measures to detain or infiltrate runoff from peak flows during the 0.2 inches per hour storm event, and agreements to ensure that the stormwater treatment and flow control facilities are maintained in perpetuity. The proposed project would include 16,602 square feet of pervious area in the form of landscaping and two bioretention areas totaling 1,540 square feet. Bioretention areas percolate stormwater through the bioretention soil media, which acts as a filter removing pollutants such as suspended solids, metals, and nutrients and eventually discharging the runoff to the City’s storm drain system. Implementation of these measures and compliance with the C.3 requirements of the MRP would ensure that post-development impacts to water quality would be less than significant.

The project must also comply with CMC Chapter 9.18, Storm Water Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, which is intended to provide regulations and give legal effect to certain requirements of the MRP permit issued to the City. CMC Chapter 9.18 also ensures ongoing compliance with the most recent version of the MRP regarding municipal storm water and urban runoff requirements and 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.

The City of Cupertino also requires submittal and approval of a Stormwater Management Plan (SMP) prior to the start of construction (CMC Section 9.18.120, Stormwater Management Plan Required for Regulated Projects). The SMP must include the C.3 impervious surface form, LID feasibility worksheets, site design measures to limit impervious surfaces, numeric sizing criteria for stormwater treatment facilities, source control measures to limit the discharge of pollutants to the storm drain system, and an operation and maintenance (O&M) plan, including certification that the treatment measures will be maintained for perpetuity.

The project applicant must also install full trash capture devices to collect litter and debris from the project site, prior to connecting to the City’s storm drain system, as pursuant to CMC Section 9.18.115, Trash Load Reductions to Storm Drain Collection System. and the provisions of the MRP. A list of approved devices is available from the Public Works Department. The trash capture devices must be located onsite and situated so that trash carried by stormwater from the site is collected onsite does not flow directly into the City’s storm drain system. The trash capture devices must be properly designed and sized to ensure that the devices do not cause an obstruction to onsite stormwater flow. The trash capture devices must also be maintained, following manufacturer’s recommendations, for the life of the project.

Implementation of these measures will improve the water quality of stormwater entering the City’s storm drain system.

Adherence to applicable water quality regulations, preparation of a SWPPP, implementation of best management practices during construction, and compliance with the CMC would ensure that water quality standards are not violated during construction. Implementation of stormwater site design, source control, and stormwater treatment measures, compliance with C.3 provisions of the MRP and the City of 889
CC 07-07-2022
889 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-58 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Cupertino’s stormwater requirements, and preparation of a SMP that describes the installation and operation and maintenance requirements for the bioretention areas would result in less-than-significant impacts during operation of the project. Consequently, potential impacts associated with water quality during construction and operation would be less than significant. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The project would be connected to municipal water supplies and does not propose any groundwater wells on the property. Water is supplied to the site by the San José Water (SJW), which obtains its water from groundwater production (40 percent), purchases of surface water from the SCVWD (50 percent), and local mountain surface water (10 percent).126 The 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for the SCVWD, which includes the area for the project site, states that there is sufficient water for SCVWD customers for normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years until 2025. The SCVWD identifies actions within the water shortage contingency plan in its UWMP that would ensure water demand is met through 2040.127 Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a depletion of groundwater supplies or result in a lowering of groundwater levels. Water supply is discussed in Section XVII, Utilities and Service Systems.

Groundwater beneath the site is more than 20 feet below ground surface (bgs). Therefore, no construction dewatering will be required. As a result, the development of the proposed project would not interfere with groundwater recharge that takes place in the McClellan Ponds recharge facility located within the City of Cupertino or the creeks and streams that run through the city. Therefore, the project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to groundwater recharge.

The proposed project would be located on a site that is already developed and currently has about 47,975 square feet of existing impervious surfaces. The proposed project would result in a decrease of 4,556 square feet of impervious surfaces. In addition, the project would install two bioretention facilities, as discussed in criterion a), and landscaped areas would be installed along the perimeter and throughout the site, which would contribute to groundwater recharge by infiltration. As a result, the project would result in a decrease in the amount of runoff from the property. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on groundwater supplies and groundwater recharge, and no mitigation measures are needed.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding on- or off-site; substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding 126 San José Water Company, For Your Information, Education and Safety, Water Supply, https://www.sjwater.com/for_your_information/education_safety/water_supply, accessed on September 26, 2019. 127 Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, https://www.valleywater.org/sites/default/files/SCVWD%202015%20UWMP-Report%20Only.pdf, accessed on September 26, 2019.
890
CC 07-07-2022
890 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-59

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
on- or off-site; create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or impede or redirect flood flows?
The proposed project would take place within the boundaries of a fully developed site that is currently connected to the City’s storm drain system. The proposed redevelopment does not involve the alteration of any natural drainage channels or any watercourse.

As described in the 2018 Storm Drain Master Plan, the project site is within an area where some of the storm drains are deficient in conveying water from a 10-year storm. The southern portion of the site would discharge to the City’s existing 18-inch storm drain that is located beneath St. Andrews Place. This storm drain currently does not have any capacity issues. However, the northern portion of the site would discharge to the City’s existing 18-inch storm drain near the intersection of South Foothill Boulevard and McClellan Road. The storm drain at this location that continues north to Stevens Creek Boulevard is currently under capacity, and is designated as high priority for replacement; 128 however, the proposed
project would not exacerbate this existing condition. The proposed project would provide two bioretention facilities on the project site. These would collect runoff from roof areas, parking lots, sidewalks and streets for treatment and flow control prior to discharge into the on-site storm drain system, which connects to the City’s storm drain system beneath Stevens Canyon Road/South Foothill Boulevard and St. Andrews Avenue. The City has determined that the on-site stormwater treatment areas would meet the C.3 requirements of the MRP. In addition, the proposed project would result in a decrease in impervious surface area, resulting in a decrease in stormwater runoff to the municipal storm drain system as compared to existing conditions.

During construction, the project applicant would be subject to the NPDES construction permit requirements, including preparation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP includes erosion and sediment control measures to stabilize the site, protect slopes and channels, control the perimeter of the site, minimize the area and duration of exposed soils, and protect receiving waters adjacent to the site. Erosion and siltation impacts are minimized through compliance with these requirements and submittal of an erosion and sediment control plan to the City prior to the start of construction.

Once constructed, the requirements for new development or redevelopment projects include source control measures and site design measures that address stormwater runoff and would reduce the potential for erosion or siltation. In addition, Provision C.3 of the MRP would require the project to implement on-site stormwater treatment measures to contain site runoff, using specific numeric sizing criteria based on volume and flow rate. The bioretention areas will filter out sediment from the stormwater runoff.

The project would also be required to install stormwater trash capture devices that meet the requirements of the MRP. The trash capture devices must be located onsite and situated to ensure that trash carried by stormwater is collected onsite and does not flow directly into the City’s storm drain system. With implementation of these erosion and sediment control measures and regulatory provisions 128 Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers. 2018. Cupertino Storm Drain Master Plan. 891
CC 07-07-2022
891 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-60 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
to limit runoff for new development sites, the proposed project would not result in significant increases in erosion and sedimentation and these impacts would be less than significant.

In addition, the proposed development would result in a decrease in impervious surfaces as compared to existing conditions and would include on-site stormwater bioretention areas to temporarily retain peak flows prior to discharge to the City’s storm drain system. To ensure that runoff from the site would not exceed the capacity of the City’s storm drain system, the project applicant will prepare a hydrology and hydraulics report for review and approval by the Director of Public Works prior to the start of construction. The hydrology study shall include pre- and post-development flow rates and the ability of the bioretention areas to reduce the amount of runoff from the site and improve water quality. Also, the trash capture devices would be designed and sized to ensure that if the devices cause an obstruction to onsite stormwater flow, onsite flooding will not occur.

With compliance with these regulatory requirements, preparation of a hydrology/hydraulics study, and installation of on-site stormwater treatment systems to mitigate peak flows, the proposed project would not contribute to flooding on-site or off-site and impacts would be less than significant. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk the release of pollutants due to project inundation?
The project site is not located near the San Francisco Bay or the Pacific Ocean and is not within a mapped tsunami inundation zone.129 There are no large bodies of water in the vicinity of the project site; therefore, there would be no potential for seiches to impact the project site. The project site is also outside of the Stevens Creek Reservoir dam inundation zone.130 In addition, the site is in a relatively flat area of the city and is outside of the ABAG mapped zones for earthquake-induced landslides or debris flow source areas.131 Therefore, no impact would occur with respect to the release of pollutants from these types of natural hazard events.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The San Francisco Bay RWQCB monitors surface water quality through implementation of the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin, also referred to as the “Basin Plan,” and designates beneficial uses for surface water bodies and groundwater within the Santa Clara Valley. The Basin Plan also contains water quality criteria for groundwater.

As required by storm water management guidelines discussed under criterion (a), best management practices and LID measures would be implemented across the project site during both construction and 129 Association of Bay Area Governments, 2019. Interactive Tsunami Inundation Map. http://gis.abag.ca.gov/website/Hazards/?hlyr=tsunami accessed on September 26, 2019. 130 Santa Clara County Fire Department. 2012. Joint Stevens Creek Dam Failure Plan. https://www.cupertino.org/home/showdocument?id=7424 accessed on September 26, 2019. 131 Association of Bay Area Governments, 2019. Rainfall-Induced Landslides, Debris Flow Source Areas and Earthquake Induced Landslides. Accessed at http://resilience.abag.ca.gov/landslides/ on September 26, 2019. 892
CC 07-07-2022
892 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-61

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
operation of the proposed project. These measures would control and prevent the release of sediment, debris, and other pollutants into the storm drain system. Implementation of best management practices during construction would be in accordance with the provisions of the SWPPP and the erosion and sediment control plan, which would minimize the release of sediment, soil, and other pollutants.

Operational best management practices would be required to meet the C.3 provisions of the MRP. These best management practices, along with the proposed LID measures, include the incorporation of site design, source control, and treatment control measures to treat and control runoff before it enters the storm drain system. The proposed treatment measures would include the use of two bioretention areas to treat and detain runoff prior to discharge to the City’s storm drain system.

The project site is within the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin, which is covered under the 2016 Groundwater Management Plan.132 This basin has been characterized by the Department of Water Resources as a medium-priority subbasin and therefore subject to the requirements to develop and implement a Groundwater Sustainability Plan. The Groundwater Management Plan states that the total recharge to the Santa Clara and Llagas subbasins exceeds the total outflow via groundwater pumping and subsurface outflow, with excess groundwater storage of 1,500 acre-feet. This indicates that the subbasins are in long-term balance and meet the criteria for sustainable groundwater conditions. Although SJW does use groundwater as a source of water supply, the Water Supply Evaluation prepared for the General Plan EIR included new development on the project site at a greater number of units than proposed under the project (27 net new units as compared to project’s 18 new units); therefore, water supply impacts were adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR.

As discussed in criterion (b), the depth to groundwater is estimated to be 25 to 30 feet bgs and the proposed project would not require construction dewatering.

With implementation of these best management practices and LID measures in accordance with City and MRP requirements, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the Basin Plan of the Groundwater Management Plan, and potential impacts on water quality would be less than significant.

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?    
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
   
132 Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2016 Groundwater Management Plan, Santa Clara and Llagas Subbasins. 893
CC 07-07-2022
893 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-62 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.9, Land Use and Planning, of the General Plan EIR, addressed impacts to land use and planning 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 determined to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required. The following is a summary of Section, 4.9.1.2, Existing Conditions, of Chapter 4.9.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Commercial/Residential and the project site is within the (P(CG)) Zoning District. A complete description of the Commercial/Residential land use designation and (P(CG)) Zoning District is presented in Section 3.1.4, Land Use Designation and Zoning, in Chapter 3 of this Initial Study.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? Because the development of the proposed project would occur on a site that is currently developed, would retain existing roadway patterns, and would not introduce any new major roadways or other physical features through existing residential neighborhoods or other communities that would create new barriers, the project would not physically divide an established community. Therefore, no impact would occur.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The proposed project does not include a request for any modification to the existing General Plan land use designation. However, the project does include a request to modify the existing General Commercial (P(CG)) Zoning District to a General Commercial with Residential (P(CG, Res)) Zoning District to allow residential uses on the project site. This request would make the Zoning District for the project site more consistent with the Commercial/Residential General Plan land use designation, which allows for residential uses. The proposed project (at 11.5 units per acres and with a building height of 30 feet at the highest point) is within the development parameters evaluated in the General Plan EIR (25 dwelling units per acre and a maximum building height of 30 feet tall) and the General Plan EIR found land use impacts to be less than significant. The proposed mixed-use development would be consistent with the types of development envisioned in the Inspiration Heights Neighborhood, Neighborhood Center, and Other NonResidential/Mixed-Use Special Areas identified in the General Plan. Accordingly, the proposed project would also result in less-than-significant impacts with regard to conflicts with land use plans. 894
CC 07-07-2022
894 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-63

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
XI. NOISE
Would the proposed project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards?
   
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?    
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
   

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.10, Noise, of the General Plan EIR addressed the impacts from noise and vibration 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. Noise impacts were found to be significant and unavoidable in the General Plan EIR because the project-specific details for future development were not available. No feasible mitigation measures were identified to reduce noise impacts to a less-thansignificant level and project-specific noise evaluation is required to assess noise impacts from the proposed redevelopment of the site.

This section includes a summary of Section, 4.10.1.3, Existing Conditions, of Chapter 4.10, and analyzes the noise and vibration that would be generated by the construction and operation of the proposed project at a project level.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Noise is defined as unwanted sound and is known to have several adverse effects on people including hearing loss, speech and sleep interference, physiological responses, and annoyance. Based on these known adverse effects of noise, the federal government, State of California, and City of Cupertino have established criteria to protect public health and safety and to prevent disruption of certain human activities. Noise terminology and fundamentals, pertinent existing local regulations traffic noise level increase calculations, and construction noise and vibration modeling can be found in Appendix C, Noise Data, of this Initial Study.

The project site is a bounded by adjacent single-family homes to the north, west, and south. South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road are located to the east of the project site, beyond which are single-family homes. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the adjacent one-story and 895
CC 07-07-2022
895 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-64 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
two-story single-family residences approximately 20 to 50 feet from the site property lines to the north, west, and south. The principal noise source affecting the project area is roadway traffic on Stevens Canyon Road and South Foothill Boulevard and surrounding residential roadways.

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 airport is Moffett Federal Airfield, approximately 7 miles to the north. The project site is not located in within an airport land use plan.

The noise environment in the project area is approximately 60 to 70+ dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) based on the noise contour map in the General Plan Health and Safety Element (Attachment D. Community Noise), with ambient noise levels decreasing at further distance from Stevens Canyon Road.

It is important to note that with the Supreme Court decision regarding the assessment of the environment’s impacts on projects (California Building Industry Association (CBIA) v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 62 Cal. 4th 369 (No. S 213478) issued December 17, 2015), it is generally no longer the purview of the CEQA process to evaluate the impact of existing environmental conditions on any given project. As a result, while the noise from existing sources is taken into account as part of the baseline, the direct effects of existing outside (exterior) noise from nearby noise sources as it relates to land use compatibility of the project is no longer a required topic for impact evaluation under CEQA. No determination of significance is required or made in this Initial Study.

DISCUSSION
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, State, or federal standards?
A significant stationary-source impact would occur if the activities or equipment at the proposed project site produce noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors in excess of local standards.

With respect to permanent traffic-related increases, noise impacts can be placed into three categories.

The first is “audible” impacts, which refer to increases in noise level that are perceptible to humans.

Audible increases in general community noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 decibels (dBA) or more since this level has been found to be the threshold of perceptibility in exterior environments. The second category, “potentially audible” impacts, refers to a change in noise level between 1 and 3 dBA. The last category includes changes in noise level of less than 1 dBA that are typically “inaudible” to the human ear except under quiet conditions in controlled environments. Only “audible” changes in noise levels at sensitive receptor locations (i.e., 3 dBA or more) are considered potentially significant. Note that a doubling of traffic flows (i.e., 10,000 vehicles per day to 20,000 per day) would be needed to create a 3 dBA increase in traffic-generated noise levels. For the purposes of this analysis, an increase of 3 dBA CNEL is often used as the threshold for a substantial increase. 896
CC 07-07-2022
896 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-65

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Project-Related Construction Noise
In terms of the proposed construction activities, the demolition, grading, and site paving activities are expected to generate the highest noise levels, since they involve the largest and most powerful equipment. Construction equipment for the proposed project would include equipment such as concrete saws, dozers, graders, tractors, loaders, backhoes, excavators, generators, forklifts, paving equipment, rollers, and a crane.

Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction: (1) mobile-source noise from the transport of workers, material deliveries, and debris/soil hauling and (2) stationary-source noise from use of construction equipment. Construction activities are anticipated to last approximately 10 months. The following discusses construction noise impacts to the off-site sensitive receptors.

Construction Vehicles
The transport of workers and materials to and from the construction site would incrementally increase noise levels along local roadways. Individual construction vehicle pass-bys may create momentary noise levels of up to approximately 85 dBA (Lmax) at 50 feet from the vehicle, but these occurrences would generally be infrequent and short lived. Therefore, noise impacts from construction-related truck traffic would be less than significant at noise-sensitive receptors along the construction routes and no mitigation measures would be required.

Construction Equipment
According to CMC Section 10.48.053, construction is allowed during “daytime hours” (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends) and exempt from the City’s daytime and nighttime maximum noise level limits, provided that such construction activities do not exceed 80 dBA at the nearest affected property or individual equipment items do not exceed 87 dBA at 25 feet. Only one of these two criteria must be met. In addition, construction is prohibited on holidays and within 750 feet of residential areas on weekends, holidays, and during the nighttime, unless a special exception has been granted, and during nighttime hours unless it meets the nighttime noise level standards. Even with these restrictions, project construction would temporarily increase ambient noise.

However, noise levels would subside again after construction.

Noise generated by on-site construction equipment is based on the type of equipment used, its location relative to sensitive receptors, and the timing and duration of noise-generating activities. Each stage of construction involves different kinds of equipment and has distinct noise characteristics. Noise levels from construction activities are typically dominated by the loudest several pieces of equipment. The dominant equipment noise source is typically the engine, although work-piece noise (such as dropping of materials) can also be noticeable.

The noise produced at each construction stage is determined by combining the Leq contributions from each piece of equipment used at a given time, while accounting for the on-going time-variations of noise emissions (commonly referred to as the usage factor). Heavy equipment, such as a bulldozer, can have 897
CC 07-07-2022
897 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-66 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
maximum, short-duration noise levels of up to 85 dBA at 50 feet. However, overall noise emissions vary considerably, depending on what specific activity is being performed at any given moment. Noise attenuation due to distance, the number and type of equipment, and the load and power requirements to accomplish tasks at each construction phase would result in different noise levels from construction activities at a given receptor. Since noise from construction equipment is intermittent and diminishes at a rate of at least 6 dBA per doubling of distance (conservatively ignoring other attenuation effects from air absorption, ground effects, and/or shielding/scattering effects), the average noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors could vary considerably, because mobile construction equipment would move around the site with different loads and power requirements. Noise levels from project-related construction activities were calculated from the simultaneous use of all applicable construction equipment at spatially averaged distances (i.e., from the acoustical center of the general construction site) to the property line of the nearest receptors. Although construction may occur across the entire phase area, the area around the center of construction activities best represents the potential average construction-related noise levels at the various sensitive receptors.

The expected construction equipment mix was estimated and categorized by construction activity using the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model. The associated, aggregate sound levels, grouped by construction activity, are summarized in Table 4-9.

TABLE 4-9 PROJECT-RELATED CONSTRUCTION NOISE, ENERGY-AVERAGE (LEQ) NOISE LEVELS, DBA Construction
Activity Phase
Noise Level at the Closest Distance from Construction Activities, dBA Leq Residences (west)
90 feet
a

Demolition 81
Site Preparation 80
Utility Trenching 78
Grading (rough and fine) 80
Building Construction 78
Paving 81
Architectural Coating 69
Notes:
a. While the nearest sensitive receptors to the project site include the adjacent one-story and two-story single-family residences approximately 20 to 50 feet from the site property lines to the north, west, and south, this analysis is based on the distance from the acoustical center of the construction site to the nearest property line, which is 90 feet to the west.

Source: PlaceWorks, 2019.

Construction activities would increase noise levels at and near the proposed area of improvements. The highest expected construction-related noise levels, up to approximately 81 dBA Leq, would occur at the residences to the west during demolition and paving phases, which would be greater than the 80 dBA limit in the CMC. Construction noise levels would create a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure, project-related construction noise impacts to the nearby residences would be less than significant. 898
CC 07-07-2022
898 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-67

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
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 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, 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. 899
CC 07-07-2022
899 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-68 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 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.

Project-Related Operational Noise
Stationary-Source Noise
Noise from sources such as people talking and using outdoor common areas, or property maintenance may contribute to the total noise environment within the direct vicinity of the proposed project site.

However, these types of noise are commonly associated with uses that already exist on the project site. As explained above, noise sources associated with landscape maintenance activities is exempted from the provisions of the CMC, provided said activities take place between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. Therefore, impacts from occasional property maintenance activities associated with the proposed project would be less than significant.

The mixed-use building will have the mechanical HVAC equipment on the rooftop enclosed by a parapet.

The exterior mechanical and HVAC equipment associated with the proposed use are expected to be similar to the existing commercial uses. Typical HVAC units range from approximately 75 dBA Leq at a distance of 3 feet. Future rooftop mechanical equipment associated with the mixed-use building would be located at least 90 feet from the nearest residential property lines to the east according to project rooftop plans (see Figure 3-6). In addition, noise from rooftop mechanical equipment associated with the mixeduse building would be attenuated by 5.5-foot parapet walls. At this distance and assuming approximately 5 dBA reduction from the parapet walls, the sound pressure level associated with a common central air conditioning unit would be reduced to approximately 40 dBA or less. Therefore, the noise level associated with future rooftop HVAC at the mixed-use building would be below the CMC Section 10.48.040 standards, which limit nighttime noise to 50 dBA and daytime noise to 60 dBA at nearby residential uses.

Future HVAC for the proposed residential units would be located on the ground in the backyard of each unit. Because mechanical specifications for these proposed units are not yet available, it is conservatively assumed that noise from these units would be up to 75 dBA Leq at a distance of 3 feet and they could be located within approximately 15 feet from the nearest residential property lines to the west. At this distance, the sound pressure level associated with a common HVAC unit would be approximately 60 dBA.

Therefore, the noise level associated with HVAC in the backyards of the future residential units could 900
CC 07-07-2022
900 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-69

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
exceed the CMC Section 10.48.040 standards, which limit nighttime noise to 50 dBA at nearby residential.

Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant. With implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-2, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure, project-related operational noise impacts would be less than significant.

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 would be in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance.

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.

Mobile-Source Noise
The proposed project is anticipated to result in a net decrease in traffic trips when compared to existing traffic trips associated with the existing commercial building. The trip generation associated with the previous use is estimated to be 454 daily trips. The proposed project is estimated to result in 322 gross daily trips, which is a net decrease of 132 daily trips. Therefore, since the project would result in a net decrease in trips, no increase from traffic noise would occur and impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
Operational Vibration
Operation of the proposed project would not generate substantial levels of vibration because there are no known sources of vibrational energy associated with the proposed project, such as industrial machinery or railroad operations. Thus, vibration effects or impacts from operations sources would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.

Construction Vibration
Construction activities generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures, construction equipment used, and proximity to vibration-sensitive uses. The generation of 901
CC 07-07-2022
901 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-70 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Table 4-10 lists reference vibration levels for different types of commonly used construction equipment.

TABLE 4-10 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT VIBRATION LEVELS
Equipment Approximate PPV Velocity at 25 Feet (in/sec)
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small Bulldozer 0.003
Notes: PPV = Peak Particle Velocity in inches per second Source: Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, 2018.

Proposed construction would include demolition and grading, which would include equipment such as loaders and bulldozers. Paving activities may also generate construction vibration and would include equipment such as pavers and rollers. Using the vibration source level of construction equipment provided in Table 4-10 and the construction vibration assessment guidelines published by the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA), the vibration impacts associated with the proposed project were assessed in terms of potential architectural damage due to vibration.

The City does not have specific, vibration-related standards. Thus, project-related construction vibration was evaluated for its potential to cause minor architectural damage based on FTA’s architectural damage criteria. The term ‘architectural damage’ is defined as minor surface cracks (in plaster, drywall, tile, or stucco) or the sticking of doors and windows. This is below the severity of ‘structural damage’ which entails the compromising of structural soundness or the threatening the basic integrity of the building shell. Building damage is typically not a concern for most projects, with the occasional exception of blasting and pile driving during construction. No blasting, pile driving, or hard rock ripping/crushing activities would be required during project construction. Since vibration-induced architectural damage could result from an instantaneous vibration event, distances are measured from the receptor facade to the nearest location of potential construction activities.

A peak particle velocity (PPV) of 0.2 inches/second (in/sec) is used as the threshold for “non-engineered timber and masonry buildings” (which would apply to the surrounding structures). At a distance of approximately 10 feet from the existing pavement to residential structures to the west, a jackhammer (or similar pavement breaking device) would generate vibration levels of approximately 0.14 in/sec PPV, which would not exceed the threshold of 0.2 in/sec PPV. Proposed driveways would be paved within approximately 35 feet of nearby residential structures to the west. At this distance, a vibratory roller would generate vibration levels of up to 0.13 in/sec PPV. However, if grading equipment such as a large dozer operates within approximately 15 feet of a nearby residential structure, the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold may be exceeded. This is considered a potentially significant impact. With implementation of Mitigation 902
CC 07-07-2022
902 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-71

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Measure NOISE-3, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure, project-related construction vibration impacts to the adjacent residences to the west would be less than significant.

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

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 offroad 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.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of an airport. The project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive aircraft noise levels.

There would be no impact.

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unexpected population growth or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
   
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
   

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.11, Population and Housing, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to population growth and displacement 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 determined to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required. 903
CC 07-07-2022
903 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-72 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
As discussed in the General Plan EIR, the General Plan would introduce approximately 12,998 new residents133 and 16,855 new jobs134 to Cupertino. These new residents and jobs combined with existing conditions would result in 71,200 residents, 24,040 households, and 33,110 jobs at the 2040 buildout horizon.135 The proposed project is anticipated to be complete in 2022. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, according to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), Cupertino is projected to have 62,500 residents and 30,110 jobs by 2020 and 66,800 residents and 31,370 jobs by 2030.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The site is currently developed with primarily commercial uses that are partially vacant and two residential units which are vacant or used as storage for a bike shop currently operating. Applying a generation rate of 1 job to 450 square feet for commercial land uses to the existing 9,000 square feet of commercial building and 1,500 square foot bike shop, the existing businesses are capable of generating up to approximately 23 jobs.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project induce substantial unexpected population growth or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed project would construct a 4,536 square-foot commercial building and 18 residential units, which would not result in any additional new population growth or employment growth beyond what was accounted for in the General Plan EIR. Table 4-15 in Section XIX, Mandatory Findings of Significance, shows the relationship of the proposed project to the other reasonably foreseeable projects in Cupertino and shows that the proposed when combined with the other reasonably foreseeable projects in Cupertino would not exceed the maximum buildout potential evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

As described in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the operation of the project is estimated to generate up to 10 employees on the project site and the future homeowner’s association (HOA), required by the City, could employ landscape and maintenance personnel for the common areas of the development. As described above, the existing commercial buildings are capable of supporting approximately 23 employees. Construction of the proposed project would result in a decrease of 13 supported employees on the project site. The proposed project is not a regionally significant employer and it is anticipated that future employees of the HOA or the commercial uses of the proposed project would come from Cupertino and surrounding Bay Area communities. 133 Population is calculated by 4,421 units times 2.94 persons per household, which is the ABAG 2040 estimated generation rate.
134 Jobs are calculated applying the City’s generation rates as follows; 4,040,231 square feet of office allocation divided by 300 square feet equals 13,467 jobs; 1,343,679 square feet of commercial allocation divided by 450 square feet equals 2,986 jobs; and 1,339 hotel rooms at .3 jobs per room equals 402 jobs for a total of 16,855 jobs. 135 City of Cupertino, 2015. Cupertino General Plan Community Vision 2015-2040, Housing Element, Table HE-2. 904
CC 07-07-2022
904 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-73

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The proposed project would directly contribute to housing through the construction of residential units.

Based on a projected average household size of 2.87 persons,136 it is assumed the proposed project would introduce 52 residents137 to the project site, which would increase the number of residents on the site from 3 residents to approximately 52 residents at project buildout in 2022.

The 52 residents and 10 permanent jobs in combination with other future projects would not increase the overall City buildout to the year 2040 projections (see Table 4-15, Reasonably Foreseeable Development Projects in Cupertino, in Section XIX, Mandatory Findings of Significance). Therefore, the proposed project is well within the population projections considered in the General Plan EIR and adopted General Plan Housing Element. The growth occurring as a result of the project would be limited to the project site, and the project does not include infrastructure to allow indirect off-site development.

As discussed in Section X, Land Use and Planning, the project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site (Commercial/Residential), but would require a Zoning Map amendment rezoning the site from P(CG) to P(CG, Res) to make the zoning consistent with the General Plan land use designation. Accordingly, there would be no impacts related to substantial unexpected population growth or growth for which inadequate planning has occurred.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
As discussed, in in the Existing Conditions above, the project site currently has two residential units onsite; however, neither are used as habitable spaces. One is vacant and one is used for storage for a commercial business on-site. Because residents are not currently living on-site, the demolition of the existing residential structures would not directly displace housing or any residents. The project proposes the construction of 18 residential units on-site, which would not necessitate the construction of housing elsewhere. Therefore, the project would have no impact associated with the displacement of substantial numbers of housing.
136 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. 137 18 new units multiplied by 2.87 persons per unit equals 51.66 new residents. 905
CC 07-07-2022
905 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-74 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?    
Police protection?    
Schools?    
Libraries?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.12, Public Services and Recreation, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to public service providers and public parks 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 General Plan EIR estimated that 80 new residents138 could occupy the project site by 2040. Impacts were determined to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The public service providers for the project site are as follows:
 The City contracts with the Santa Clara County Fire District (SCCFD) for fire protection, emergency, medical, and hazardous materials services.
 The City contracts with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office (Sheriff’s Office) and West Valley Patrol Division for police protection services.
 The project site is within the Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD) and the project site is in the Monta Vista High School attendance area, which is located approximately 1 mile to the east of the project site.139
138 27 units times 2.94 persons per household for Cupertino in 2040 equals 79.34 persons. Note that the 2.94 persons per household rate for year 2040 was applied in the General Plan EIR. Applying the ABAG rates for population estimates is the standard approach for population and housing analysis in Cupertino. 139 Fremont Union High School District, District Boundary Maps, Monta Vista High School Attendance Boundary, https://www.fuhsd.org/about-us/general-information/district-boundry-maps, accessed November 15, 2018. 906
CC 07-07-2022
906 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-75

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
 The project site is within the Cupertino Union School District (CUSD) which includes all elementary and middle schools in the city. The project site is in the attendance area of Abraham Lincoln Elementary School, located approximately 1 mile to the east of the project site, and John F. Kennedy Middle School located approximately 1 mile east of the project site. 140
 The Santa Clara County Library District governs and administers seven community libraries, one branch library, two bookmobiles, the Home Service Library, and the online library for all library users. The closest library to the project site is the Cupertino Library located at 10800 Torre Avenue in Cupertino.

A discussion of the existing conditions for each of these service providers is included in Chapter 4.12 of the General Plan EIR.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: fire protection, police protection, schools, and libraries?
The primary purpose of the public services impact analysis is to examine the impacts associated with physical improvements to public service facilities required to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives. Public service facilities need improvements (i.e., construction, renovation or expansion) as demand for services increase. Increased demand is typically driven by increases in population. The proposed project would have a significant environmental impact if it would exceed the ability of public service providers to adequately serve residents, thereby requiring construction of new facilities or modification of existing facilities.

As discussed in Section XII, Population and Housing, above, the proposed project would result in a net increase of 18 dwelling units and approximately 52 residents, which is the approximate number of dwelling units and residents anticipated and discussed in the General Plan EIR. As described in the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would include the payment of residential development impact fees, prior to issuance of construction permits, that provide support to public services to offset the project’s fair share of impacts to public service providers. The proposed project also would include 4,536 square feet of neighborhood- serving commercial space that would result in a net decrease of 13 jobs on the project site, which is within the number of jobs anticipated and discussed in the General Plan EIR.

Because impacts to public service providers were determined to be less than significant in the General Plan EIR and the proposed project would result in a similar number of residents, employees, and residential density considered in the General Plan EIR, impacts to public service providers as a result of the proposed project would also be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required. 140 Cupertino Union School District, https://www.cusdk8.org/domain/96, accessed November 15, 2018. 907
CC 07-07-2022
907 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-76 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
XIV. PARKS AND RECREATION
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?    
b) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park and recreational facilities, or result in the need for new or physically altered park and recreational facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts?
   

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.12, Public Services and Recreation, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to public service providers and public parks associated with buildout of the General Plan including the redevelopment of the project site with up to 27 dwelling units and 80 new residents141 on the site at a program level. Impacts were determined to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures were required.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of Cupertino Recreation and Community Services and the Public Works Grounds Division and Facilities and Fleet Division are responsible for the operation and maintenance of the City’s recreational facilities within the city boundary. The City of Cupertino owns or manages 224 acres of parks, trails, creek corridors, sports fields and recreation facilities at 32 sites. 142 The City of Cupertino has an adopted
parkland dedication standard of three acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. According to the October 2019 City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan, there is approximately 3.7 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents.143
The parks nearest to the project site are Monta Vista Park, located approximately 0.3 miles to the northwest; McClellan Ranch Preserve, located approximately 0.3 miles to the northeast; and Linda Vista Park, located approximately 0.3 miles to the southeast. 141 27 units times 2.94 persons per household for Cupertino in 2040 equals 79.34 persons. Note that the 2.94 persons per household rate for year 2040 was applied in the General Plan EIR. Applying the ABAG rates for population estimates is the standard approach for population and housing analysis in Cupertino. 142 City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan, October 2019 (adopted by the City Council on February 18, 2020), page 4. 143 City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan, October 2019 (adopted by the City Council on February 18, 2020), page 51.
908
CC 07-07-2022
908 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-77

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Regional park facilities operated by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) and the Santa Clara County Parks could be used by residents of the project site. The closest Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District parks to Cupertino are the Fremont Older, Picchetti Ranch, and Rancho San Antonia, which are located just west of the city boundaries. Santa Clara County Park facilities that serve Cupertino include Rancho San Antonio County Park located south of I-280 and west of Foothill Boulevard, and the Stevens Creek County Park. Both County parks are roughly 1 mile from the project site. The privately operated Deep Cliff Golf Course is located approximately 0.3 miles to the southeast of the site.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the proposed project includes 5,691 square feet (0.13 acres) of common open space available to residents and members of the general public.

The proposed project includes a 2,657 square-foot outdoor common-use plaza and seating area on the northern section of the project site, adjacent to the ground floor commercial of the mixed-use building, for use by residents, visitors, and members of the public.

As discussed in Section XII, Population and Housing, above, the proposed project would result in 18 residential units and 52 new residents at the project site. Therefore, this would be less than what was evaluated in the General Plan EIR (80 new residents as compared to 52 new residents), which found impacts to be less than significant at General Plan buildout. The City’s parkland-to-resident ratio is three acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents144Although the proposed project is not required to provide onsite parkland, the proposed project would include the payment of City-required impact fees to contribute to the City’s parks and recreation fund. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, the proposed project would be required to comply with Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 14.05, Park Maintenance Fee, Chapter

13.08, Park Land Dedication, and Chapter 18.24, Dedications and Reservations, which require the payment of impact fees to maintain existing parks and recreation facilities and offset the project’s fair share of impacts to parklands. Therefore, considering the proposed project’s provision of 0.13 acres of residential open space, in conjunction with the collection of impact fees that support the City’s parks and recreation fund, the impacts to the City’s recreational facilities would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.

New residents of the project site would also be expected to use the regional park facilities operated by the MROSD and the Santa Clara County Parks. According to the MROSD’s Budget and Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2017-18, a portion of the District’s financing is provided by property taxes, which the project is required to pay. Because the project site would pay property taxes that fund the MROSD, the use of regional parks by the relatively small number of new residents of the proposed project would not result in substantial deterioration of those parks. The increase in usage that could potentially result from the proposed project is not likely to require the construction of new park facilities over and above the facilities 144 Cupertino General Plan Community Vision 2015 to 2040, Chapter 9: Recreation, Parks and Community Services Element, “Park Standards.”
909
CC 07-07-2022
909 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-78 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
already foreseen in the long-range planning completed for the regional parks in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact to regional parks would occur and no mitigation measures would be required.
b) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park and recreational facilities, or result in the need for new or physically altered park and recreational facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts?
As discussed in criterion (a) above, the proposed project includes open space features and would be required to pay impact fees that support the City’s parks and recreation fund, which would create lessthan-significant impacts to the City’s recreational facilities. The project does not propose the construction of a park or any physical alterations to an existing park or recreational facilities; however, the payment of impact fees would go toward supporting the City’s park fund that could be applied to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that could have an adverse physical effect on the environment. It is not known at what time or location such facilities would be required or what the exact nature of these facilities would be, so it cannot be determined what specific environmental impacts would occur from their construction and operation. Because the payment of impact fees is the City requirement to offset the project’s fair share of impacts to parklands, the City would be responsible for any environmental review in accordance with CEQA, as necessary, which would ensure that any environmental impacts are disclosed and mitigated to the extent possible for any future City project related to the expansion of or improvement to a City recreational facility. Accordingly, impacts to park and recreational facilities as a result of the proposed project would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.

XV. TRANSPORTATION
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
   
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?    
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
   
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?    
910
CC 07-07-2022
910 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-79

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.13, Transportation and Circulation, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to the transportation network in the Cupertino area 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 General Plan EIR estimated that and 80 new residents145 could occupy the project site by 2040. Impacts related to pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and emergency access were found to be less than significant and no mitigation measures were required. The General Plan EIR also found that the implementation of the General Plan would support and would not conflict with plans, programs and policies regarding bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or decrease the performance and safety of such facilities.

As discussed in the General Plan EIR, the VMT per capita is projected to increase from 10.5 (2013) to 10.9 (2040).

METHODOLOGY
The following discussion of impacts is based in part on analysis regarding sight distance on Stevens Creek Road (June 17, 2019); pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities (July 12, 2019); and existing daily and peak hour trips, and vehicle miles traveled regarding (October 16, 2019), prepared for the proposed project by TJKM Transportation Consultants, and reviewed and approved by the City of Cupertino Transportation Division. The reports are included in Appendix D, Transportation Data, of this Initial Study.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes existing conditions in the immediate project site vicinity, including bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transit facilities, and VMT.

Existing Conditions
Pedestrian Facilities
Walkability is defined as the ability to travel easily and safely between various origins and destinations without having to rely on automobiles or other motorized travel. The ideal “walkable” community includes wide sidewalks, a mix of land uses such as residential, employment, and shopping opportunities, a limited number of conflict points with vehicle traffic, and easy access to transit facilities and services.

Pedestrian facilities consist of crosswalks, sidewalks, pedestrian signals, and off-street paths, which provide safe and convenient routes for pedestrians to access destinations such as institutions, businesses, public transportation, and recreation facilities.
145 27 units times 2.94 persons per household for Cupertino in 2040 equals 79.34 persons. Note that the 2.94 persons per household rate for year 2040 was applied in the General Plan EIR. Applying the ABAG rates for population estimates is the standard approach for population and housing analysis in Cupertino. 911
CC 07-07-2022
911 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-80 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The project site does not have adequate pedestrian access, because sidewalks are present only on the one side of Stevens Canyon Road within the project vicinity. Existing pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the project site are shown on Figure 4-1.

The 2018 Cupertino Pedestrian Transportation Plan (Pedestrian Plan) contains goals, policies, and specific recommendations to increase the walkability of Cupertino, including the Pedestrian Guidelines. The Pedestrian Plan is a companion document to the City of Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan (discussed below). It includes specific recommendations to improve pedestrian conditions. Consistent with the Pedestrian Plan and any other applicable recommendations, the project applicant would be required to contribute to implementing any recommended pedestrian improvements in the project area. The Pedestrian Plan recommends walk audits be conducted at Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road through the project area. There is no further discussion of pedestrian improvements in the project area.

Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle facilities on and near the project site include the following:
 Bike Paths (Class I). Paved trails that are separated from roadways  Bike Lanes (Class II). Lanes on roadways designated for use by bicycles through striping, pavement legends, and signs
 Bike Routes (Class III). Designated roadways for bicycle use by signs or other markings may or may not include additional pavement width for cyclists
Class II Bike Lanes are provided along both sides of the roadway at South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road near the project site. There is adequate signage for the bicyclists to maneuver without confusion. Class III Route designated signs and pavement markings for shared use bikes signs are provided along McClellan Road on both sides of the roadway. Overall, existing bicycle facilities provide adequate connectivity between the project site and the adjacent residential neighborhoods. The existing bicycle facilities within the project vicinity are shown on Figure 4-1.

In 2016, the City of Cupertino adopted the Bicycle Transportation Plan (Bike Plan), which is a citywide plan to encourage bicycling as a safe, practical, and healthy alternative to the use of the family car. The Bike Plan illustrates Cupertino’s current bicycle network, identifies gaps in the network, and proposes improvement projects to address the identified gaps.146 The Bike Plan includes standards for engineering, encouragement, education, and enforcement intended to improve the bicycle infrastructure in the city to enable people to bike to work and school, to utilize a bicycle to run errands, and to enjoy the health and environmental benefits that bicycling provides cyclists of every age. The Bike Plan recommends that the existing Class II Bike Lane on South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road through the project area be improved to a Class II Buffered Bike Lane. This recommendation is a low priority compared to other proposed projects in the Bike Plan.
146 City of Cupertino, 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan, Figure 3-7: Bikeway projects. 912
CC 07-07-2022
912 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-81

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
The VTA adopted the Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan (CBP). The CBP guides the development of major bicycle facilities in the County by identifying Cross County Bicycle Corridors and other bicycle projects of countywide or intercity significance. The CBP maps one on-street Cross-County Bicycle Corridor (CCBC) along South Foothill Boulevard in the project area. This CCBC is not a high-priority corridor.

Transit Facilities
VTA operates bus services in the City of Cupertino and in the project vicinity. The closest bus stop is located within a 15-minute walk (about 0.6 miles feet) to and from the project site, providing access to local bus route 81. Bus route 81 provides transportation between Moffett Field/Ames Center and San Jose State University. Bus route 81 operates from 6:06 a.m. to 9:04 p.m. and has a peak headway of 25 to 35 minutes depending on the stop and direction.
147
Daily Trips
Based on trip generation rates recommended by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, it is estimated that the existing uses on site generate approximately 454 daily vehicle trips.148
Vehicles Miles Traveled
As previously discussed in Section 3.1.3, Existing Site Setting, the project site currently contains 10,500 square feet of existing commercial development that generates up to 23 employees when assuming one employee per 450 square feet. The project site also includes one residential unit. As shown in Table 4-11, these uses generate daily VMT of 662 and an annual VMT of 241,524. 149
TABLE 4-11 EXISTING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Type Rates Daily Annual
23 Employees 27.92 miles per worker a 642 234,388
1 Residential Unit 19.55 miles per household b 20 7,136 Total 662 241,524
Notes:
a. The Year 2020 Plan Bay Area model forecasted daily VMT of 27.92 miles per worker employed in the project area. b. The MTC model predicts a VMT of 19.55 miles per capita for households located in the project area in 2020.

Source: TJKM Transportation Consultants 2019; PlaceWorks, 2020. 147Operating hours consider earliest and latest stop at each bus lines closest stop to the project site. Headways are defined as the time interval between two transit vehicles traveling in the same direction over the same route. 148 TJKM Transportation Consultants. October 2019, Technical Memorandum (see Appendix D of this Initial Study). 149 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). 913
CC 07-07-2022
913 of 1038
Source: TJKM, 2020.

Figure 4-1
Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
0 Scale (Feet)
100
Stevens Canyon
Rd.

S. Foothill Blvd.

Mc. Clellan Rd.

St. Andrews Ave.

Santa Lucia Rd.

Riverside Dr.

Palm Ave.

Stevens Creek Blvd.
2 1
Alcalde Rd.

Santa Paula Ave.

Existing Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities
TJKM
Figure 3
Project
Site
LEGEND
Study Intersection
Stop Sign
AM Peak Hour Volumes
PM Peak Hour Volumes
Sidewalk
Class II Bike Lane
Class III Bike Lane
XX
(XX)
x
N
148-015

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

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 914
CC 07-07-2022
914 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-83

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Roadway Facilities
Operational Traffic
As previously discussed, the development of the project would not exceed the 15 dwelling units per acre currently permitted 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. As stated in Section II, Air Quality, and Section, VII, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the proposed project is not considered a 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 shown in Table 4-12, the proposed project would generate 631 daily VMT, and 3230,315 annual VMT.

As shown in Table 4-13, the proposed project would generate about 322 daily trips.

TABLE 4-12 PROPOSED VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Rates Daily Annual
10 Employees 27.92 miles per worker a 279 101,835
18 Residential 19.55 miles per worker b 352 128,480
Total 631 230,315
Notes:
a. The Year 2020 Plan Bay Area model forecasted daily VMT of 27.92 miles per worker employed in the project area. b. The MTC model predicts a VMT of 19.55 miles per capita for households located in the project area in 2020.

Source: TJKM Transportation Consultants 2019; PlaceWorks, 2020.

TABLE 4-13 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Land Use (ITE Code) Size
Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Rate Trips Rate Total Rate Total
Residential Condo Townhouse a (230) 13 DU 5.81 76 0.44 6 0.52 7 Apartments b (220) 5 DU 6.65 33 0.51 3 0.62 3
Retail c (820) 5,000 SF 42.7 214 0.96 5 3.71 19
Total Trips 322 14 29
915
CC 07-07-2022
915 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-84 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-13 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Land Use (ITE Code) Size
Daily AM Peak PM Peak
Rate Trips Rate Total Rate Total
Notes: DU = dwelling units; SF = square feet
a. ITE Trip rates per unit for residential condominium houses. b. ITE Trip rates per unit for residential apartments.
c. ITE Trip rates per 1,000 square feet for commercial use.

Source: TJKM Transportation Consultants, Traffic Impact Study Report, July 2019, Table 2.

When compared to existing conditions, the proposed project would generate both fewer daily trips (322 proposed daily trips compared to 454 existing daily trips), less daily VMT (631 proposed daily VMT compared to 662 existing daily VMT), and less annual VMT (230,315 proposed annual VMT compared to 241,524 existing annual VMT). Therefore, the project would generate fewer daily trips and fewer VMT than existing conditions and would have a net benefit with respect to roadway facilities.

The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA150 and the City’s White Paper SB 743 Implementation Decisions for the City of Cupertino151 provide guidance on evaluating transportation impacts for small projects, redevelopment projects on infill sites, and projects that are consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS). According to the OPR, the proposed project is consistent with the following scenario that concludes with less-than-significant transportation impacts:
 Where a project replaces existing VMT-generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall decrease in VMT, the project would lead to a less-than-significant transportation impact.152 In addition, according to these guiding documents, a project that generates less than 110 daily trips may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact.153 This threshold is based on CEQA’s categorical exemption154 for existing facilities (Class 1), including additions to existing structures of up to 10,000 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(e)(2)). Typical project types for which trip generation increases relatively linearly with building footprint (i.e., general office building, single tenant office building, office park, and business park) generate or attract an additional 110 to 124 average daily trips or 836 VMT per 10,000 square feet. 150 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018. 151 City of Cupertino White Paper SB 743 Implementation Decisions for the City of Cupertino, Appendix E: Appendix E, Small Project Screening for SB 743, February 2021. 152 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, page 17, December 2018. 153 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018, page 12 and City of Cupertino White Paper SB 743 Implementation Decisions for the City of Cupertino, Appendix E: Small Project Screening for SB 743, February 2021, pages 138 and 139. 154 Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, Categorical Exemptions, states that Section 21084 of the Public Resources Code requires these Guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. 916
CC 07-07-2022
916 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-85

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
A 20-unit housing project generates an equivalent number of VMT to a 10,000-square-foot nonresidential project. 155 Therefore, absent substantial evidence otherwise, OPR and the City determined that it is reasonable to conclude that the addition of 20 housing units or 10,000 square feet of non-residential space could be considered a less-than-significant impact.

Furthermore, the OPR’s Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA also recognizes that for redevelopment projects on infill sites, such as the proposed project, where a project replaces existing VMT-generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall decrease in VMT, the project would lead to a less-than-significant transportation impact.156 This is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), which states that projects that decrease VMT in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact.

On February 16, 2021, the City adopted CMC Chapter 17.08, Evaluation of Transportation Impacts Under the California Environmental Quality Act, which provides screening criteria and VMT thresholds for landuse development projects, transportation projects, and other projects pursuant to the CEQA. CMC Chapter 17.08 went into effect on April 1, 2021. Under CMC Chapter 17.08, a project would be screened out from more detailed VMT analysis if the project is consistent with applicable General Plan policies and supported by substantial evidence demonstrating cumulative VMT is declining. Project screening may be used for projects that meet one or more of the following criteria:
 A project located within one-quarter mile of a High-Quality Transit Corridor or transit stop as defined by CEQA;
 Local-serving retail of 50,000 square feet or less; or  Land-use projects consisting of 100 percent affordable housing.

Under CMC Chapter 17.08, a project would have a significant impact if:
 The total project generated VMT per service population would exceed the City’s target VMT reduction of 14.4 percent below the citywide baseline VMT rate, and  If the project increases total countywide VMT compared to baseline conditions.

As described in Section X, Land Use and Planning, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and applicable policies. The proposed project, an infill redevelopment project currently served by existing public infrastructure and not in an environmentally sensitive area, would generate 631 daily VMT, which as described above is equivalent to the standards applied to a project qualifying for a CEQA exemption.

The proposed project would generate fewer VMT than existing conditions (proposed 631 daily VMT and 230,315 annual VMT compared to existing 662 daily VMT and 241,524 annual VMT), which demonstrates a contribution to a decline in cumulative VMT. Accordingly, the proposed project would meet the 155 Using statewide average data from the 2012 California Household Travel Survey (CHTS), the amount of daily VMT associated with 10,000 square feet of non-residential space is 836 VMT. Also using statewide average CHTS data, this level of VMT is associated with 20 housing units. 156 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, page 17, December 2018.
917
CC 07-07-2022
917 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-86 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
standards to be screened out from detailed VMT evaluation under the City’s standards as well as CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), which as previously stated finds that projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less-thansignificant transportation impact. Accordingly, transportation impacts during operation of the proposed project would be less than significant.

Construction Traffic
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. During this period, the project would result in changes to existing transportation conditions. New traffic would be generated by construction employees and construction activities, including haul trucks. Construction traffic is temporary and would generate fewer trips than the projected trips during project operation. During demolition and construction, vehicle, equipment, and materials would be staged and stored on a portion of the project site. The construction site and staging areas would be clearly marked, and construction fencing would be installed to prevent disturbance and safety hazards. No staging would occur in the public right-of-way.

Therefore, no hazards for pedestrians and bicyclists in the area would occur during this phase.

Pedestrian Facilities
The proposed project is expected to increase the number of pedestrians using the existing sidewalks and crosswalks in the area. The project site and surrounding uses would continue to use the existing sidewalks along Stevens Canyon Road, McClellan Road, and St. Andrews Avenue. The project would construct new sidewalks along the west side of South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road. The proposed sidewalk would also connect to the existing sidewalk to the north of the project site on west side of South Foothill Boulevard and existing sidewalk to the south of the project. The proposed project would have 5- foot sidewalks along Stevens Canyon Road, on the project side. The proposed project is expected to improve overall pedestrian access and facilities by providing sidewalks and ADA compliant ramps at existing crosswalkswithin the project vicinity with adequate accessible design (per the ADA) that meets the City of Cupertino design standards. The proposed project provides adequate and appropriate facilities for safe non-motorized mobility. Pedestrians would have safe access to the site via the existing crosswalks marked with ladder stripping on Stevens Canyon Road connecting to McClellan Road and St. Andrews Avenue. The proposed project would contribute to the pedestrian facilities in the project vicinity and would not eliminate or impede any existing pedestrian facilities, nor would it conflict with any of the goals and policies in the City’s Pedestrian Plan.

Bicycle Facilities
Class II Bike Lanes are located along both sides of the roadway at South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project would not remove any existing bicycle facilities, nor would it conflict with any adopted plans or policies for new bicycle facilities. The proposed project would be required to provide Class 1 bicycle parking spaces (bicycle lockers or secure rooms) and Class 2 bicycle parking spaces (publicly accessible bicycle racks) for commercial users and 918
CC 07-07-2022
918 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-87

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
employees of the mixed-use building. Therefore, the proposed project would not obstruct or hinder the implementation of the City’s Bike Plan and would support the use of bicycling by providing adequate bike facilities for commercial users and employees of the mixed-use building.

Transit Facilities
VTA operates bus services in the City of Cupertino and in the project vicinity. The closest bus stop is located within a 15-minute walk (about 0.6 miles feet) to and from the project site, providing access to local bus route 81. The VTA has not established policies or significance criteria related to transit vehicle delay. The 52 residents and 10 permanent jobs that would result from construction and operation of the proposed project are anticipated to come from Cupertino and surrounding Bay Area communities and would not introduce new riders to the VTA operated bus services that serve the project area. Therefore, the new transit trips generated by the project are not expected to create demand in excess of the transit service that is currently provided.

Conclusion
In summary, the proposed mixed-use, infill project would be expected to generate 132 fewer daily vehicle trips, 31 fewer daily VMT, and 11,209 fewer annual VMT than the existing use. The proposed project would not displace modify or interfere with any sidewalk, bicycle lanes, or sidewalks. In addition, the project would not generate a demand for transit that would exceed the capacity of the system. Therefore, the project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding pedestrian, bicycle or pedestrian facilities. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, which took effect on July 1, 2020, contains new requirements for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts. As of July 1, 2020, impacts on auto delay or level of service are no longer be considered a significant impact under CEQA for land use projects.

VMT measures the overall effects of a project on the transportation system. VMT is the sum of all of the vehicle trips generated by a project multiplied by the lengths of their trips to and from the site on an average weekday. A vehicle driven 1 mile is 1 VMT. Therefore, a project with a higher VMT would have a greater environmental effect than a project with a lower VMT.

The trip lengths vary by the land use type and the trip purpose. For example, a trip from a residence to a job may be longer than the trip from a residence to a neighborhood school. The VMT values stated below represent the full length of a given trip, and are not truncated at city, county, or region boundaries.

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 urban areas with more access to transit. As discussed in the General Plan EIR, the VMT per capita is projected to increase from 919
CC 07-07-2022
919 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-88 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

10.5 to 10.9 under General Plan buildout conditions. The proposed project would construct a mixed-use project, which is consistent with the land use evaluated in the General Plan EIR and would not directly result in any additional new population growth or employment growth beyond what was accounted for in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, implementation of the project would be consistent with and would have no effect on the VMT estimates presented in the General Plan EIR.

As discussed in criterion (a), the proposed project would be consistent with the analysis conducted in the General Plan EIR, and implementation of the proposed project would reduce VMT from the existing conditions at the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) and impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The project proposes a two-lane entrance/exit circulation pattern with the access points on South Foothill Boulevard and Stevens Canyon Road, which is the same as how the site is currently accessed. As discussed in criterion (a), the proposed project would generate fewer daily trips than the existing conditions and would not create a significant impact on the expected left-turn or right-turn queues or sight distance at the study intersections.

The proposed project would not modify any design features to a public road or introduce a potentially unsafe feature that would increase hazards. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures would be required.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed project is located in a predominately residential neighborhood with residential driveways and neighborhood streets adjacent and in close proximity to the project site. There are three streets in the proposed project: McClellan Road extension, St. Andrews Avenue extension, and a new roadway on the project site to connect the streets. Service and emergency vehicles would be accommodated with two access points as well as sufficiently wide aisle ways for entering and turning. The internal circulation was reviewed for issues related to queueing, turning radii, safety and circulation aisles. All circulation aisles are 20 feet wide, and the turning radii are adequate for emergency and service vehicles. The SCCFD and City of Cupertino Building Division coordinate the review of building permits. All access driveways would be designed in accordance with City of Cupertino standards and would have to be reviewed and approved by SCCFD.

Project plans include approved fire and emergency access through all phases of construction and operation. Compliance with the provisions of the CFC and the CBC (described above), would ensure that adequate access would be provided. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures would be required. 920
CC 07-07-2022
920 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-89

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
XVI. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code Section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1.

In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of the Public Resource Code Section 5024.1 for the
purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall
consider the significance to a California Native
American tribe.
   

GENERAL PLAN EIR
As described above in Section IV, Cultural Resources, the General Plan EIR addressed impacts to cultural 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. The cultural resources study prepared for the General Plan EIR 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. The cultural resources study addressed impacts associated with archeological resources, including those of Native Americans. As shown in Table 4.4-2, Cultural Resourcesin 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, including those affiliated with Native Americans, present on the project site.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
CEQA Sections 21074 and 21084.2 contain CEQA standards of significance that relate to Native American consultation and added “tribal cultural resources” to the specific cultural resources protected under CEQA. CEQA sections 21080.3.1 requires the CEQA lead agency to begin consultation with any California Native American Tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if the Tribe requests in writing, to be informed by the lead agency through formal notification of 921
CC 07-07-2022
921 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-90 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
the proposed projects in the area. The consultation is required before the determination of whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or EIR is required. In addition, CEQA Section 21080.3.1 includes time limits for certain responses regarding consultation. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21084.3, public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural resources.

Information shared by tribes as a result of consultation shall be documented in a confidential file, as necessary, and made part of a lead agency’s administrative record. The City of Cupertino has not received a request from any Tribes in the geographic area with which it is traditionally and culturally affiliated with or otherwise to be notified about projects in the city.

CEQA Section 21074.3(a) defines a tribal cultural resource as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of size and scope, sacred place, and object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is either included or eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historic Resources or included a local register of historical resources, or if the City, acting as the lead agency, supported by substantial evidence, chooses at its discretion to treat the resource as a tribal cultural resource.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the proposed project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of the Public Resource Code Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance to a California Native American tribe? The discussion in Section IV, Cultural Resources, is applicable to impacts to tribal cultural resources. As discussed under criteria (b) and (c) in Section IV, Cultural Resources, no known archeological resources, ethnographic sites, or Native American remains are located on the project site. As discussed under criterion (b), implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1 would reduce impacts to unknown archaeological deposits, including tribal cultural resources, to a less-than-significant level. As discussed under criterion (c), compliance with State and federal regulations would reduce the likelihood of disturbing or discovering human remains, including those of Native Americans. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1, which is not a General Plan EIR mitigation measure, and compliance with State and federal regulations related to the protection of human remains would reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less-than-significant level.

Impact TRC-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse impact to an unknown Tribal Cultural Resource.
922
CC 07-07-2022
922 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-91

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1.

XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the proposed project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
   
b) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
   
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
   
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
   
e) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.14, Utilities and Services Systems, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to water supply, wastewater, and solid waste 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. The City is required to implement General Plan Mitigation Measures UTIL-6a through UTIL-6c, and UTIL-8, which were previously adopted and incorporated into the General Plan, to ensure impacts related to wastewater and solid waste are less than significant. General Plan Mitigation Measures UTIL-6a through UTIL-6c require the City to work with the Cupertino Sanitary District (CSD) to increase the available citywide treatment and transmission capacity, identify appropriate and current wastewater generation rates that are approved by CSD and establish a monitoring and tracking system for wastewater generation to better understand the City’s need for potential capacity upgrades from CSD. General Plan Mitigation Measure UTIL-8 requires the City to continue current recycling and zero-waste practices, monitor solid waste generation, and seek new landfill sites to replace the Altamont and Newby Island landfills at such time that these landfills are closed. These mitigation measures, which were previously adopted by the City and incorporated into the General Plan, will be implemented by the City.
923
CC 07-07-2022
923 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-92 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing conditions for each of the utility providers is listed below:
 The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) is the primary water resources agency for Santa Clara County. The project site is located within the San José Water (SJW) service area until 2022. SJW would supply water to the project site. Water supply for the SJW is a combination of groundwater from wells in the Santa Clara Groundwater Basin, treated water purchased from SCVWD, and local mountain surface water from the Santa Cruz Mountains.
 Cupertino Sanitary District (CSD) provides sanitary sewer services for the project site. Wastewater would be treated at the San José/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant (SJ/SCWPCP).  Recology South Bay (Recology) would provide curbside recycling, garbage, and compost and yard waste service to the residents of the project. The City has a contract with Newby Island Sanitary Landfill (NISL)157 until 2023. According to CalRecycle, the landfill had a remaining capacity of 21,200,000 cubic yards as of October 31, 2014 and a permitted maximum disposal capacity of 4,000 tons per day.158 The landfill is scheduled to operate until 2041. In 2019, the landfill accepted 582,174 tons of waste, which equates to approximately 1,940 tons/day.159 This results in a residual capacity of about 2,060 tons/day.
 Electricity and natural gas would be supplied to the project site via infrastructure maintained by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). Electricity would be supplied by Silicon Valley Clean Energy.  Telephone service would be provided by AT&T and other providers. Cable television service would be available from numerous providers, including Comcast.

DISCUSSION
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Water Treatment Facilities
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) operates three treatment plants. The Rinconada Water Treatment Plant, which serves the project site, draws water from the South Bay Aqueduct and the San Luis Reservoir, which is treated and supplied to residential and commercial water dealers, such as SJW, which serves the site. The plant can provide up to 80 million gallons of water per day. The water treatment plant 157 City of Cupertino, Garbage and Recycling Services Fact Sheet, http://www.recyclestuff.org/Guides/CityGuideCupertino.pdf, accessed May 7, 2019. 158 Calrecycle website, http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/43-AN-0003/Detail/, accessed May 29, 2019. 159 Assuming 300 operational days/year; the landfill is open six days a week. 924
CC 07-07-2022
924 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-93

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
is currently under renovation to modernize the system and will result in an increased capacity of 100 million gallons per day as well as improved water quality and greater seismic stability.160 As discussed in the General Plan EIR and criterion b) below, buildout of the General Plan including the proposed project would not result in insufficient water supplies from SJW under normal year conditions or during single-dry year and multiple-dry years, with the proposed and existing water conservation regulations and measures in place. Therefore, implementation of the project would not require any new water treatment facilities or improvements other than those currently under construction.

Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Wastewater from the project site would be discharged to the CSD sewer collection system, which the conveys the wastewater to the SJ/SCWPCP, which is jointly owned by the cities of San José and Santa Clara. The NPDES permit for this facility (NPDES No. CA0037842) is currently in the process of being renewed by the San Francisco Bay RWQCB (Tentative Order No. R2-2020-XXXX). The NPDES permit allows for dry weather discharges of up to 167 million gallons per day (mgd) with full tertiary treatment. The plant is designed to route fully treated secondary effluent in excess of the filtration design capacity around the filters (250 mgd) during extreme wet weather flow events and recombine it with filter effluent prior to disinfection. As discussed below in criterion (c), future demands from the proposed project would not exceed the design or permitted capacity of the SJ/SCWPCP that serves the project site. Future wastewater treatment demand was assessed in consultation with the City of Cupertino and includes consideration of development in the city through the 2040 buildout horizon of the General Plan. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not require any improvements not already considered, and the impact of the proposed project on SJ/SCWPCP would be less than significant.

Stormwater Drainage
Municipal storm water discharges in the City of Cupertino are subject to the Waste Discharge Requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP; Order Number R2-2015-0049, as amended by Order No. R2-2019-0004) and NPDES Permit Number CAS612008. As previously discussed in Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would be subject to Provision C.3 guidelines for stormwater control. Through C.3 compliance, the proposed project would minimize runoff from the project site as described in Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality. The proposed project also would comply with CMC Chapter 9.18, described in Section 3.1.4.2, Zoning, which implements the requirements of the NPDES permit issued to the City. Additionally, the project would submit an SMP to the City for review and approval prior to the start of construction that describes the stormwater treatment measures that would be implemented to reduce stormwater runoff to the City’s storm drain system.

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. Stormwater from the southern portion of the site would discharge to the City’s existing 18-inch storm drain that is aligned beneath St. Andrews 160 Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2020. Rinconada Water Treatment Plant. Accessed at https://www.valleywater.org/node/98 on January 11, 2021. 925
CC 07-07-2022
925 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-94 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Avenue; this storm drain does not currently have capacity issues. However, stormwater from the northern portion of the site would discharge to the City’s existing 18-inch storm drain near the intersection of South Foothill Boulevard and McClellan Road. The storm drain beneath Stevens Canyon Road/South Foothill Boulevard that continues to Stevens Creek Boulevard is currently under capacity and is designated as high priority for replacement.161 The proposed project would not exacerbate this existing condition, however, because it will increase the amount of pervious surfaces through landscaping and reduce the amount of impervious surfaces, resulting in a net reduction in stormwater runoff. Additionally, the project would provide two bioretention facilities that would collect runoff from roof areas, parking lots, sidewalks and streets for treatment and flow control prior to discharge into the internal storm drain system, which connects to the City’s storm drain system at Stevens Canyon Road/South Foothill Boulevard and St.

Andrews Avenue. The City has determined that the on-site stormwater treatment areas would meet the C.3 requirements of the MRP. In addition, a hydrology and hydraulics report will be prepared for submittal and review by the Director of Public Works prior to the start of construction to ensure that the stormwater runoff from the site does not exceed the capacity of the City’s storm drain system.

The proposed project would not require the expansion of existing stormwater facilities or the construction of new facilities, the construction of which could otherwise have significant impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Other Utility Facilities
Other utility facilities that serve the project site include electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. PG&E would supply natural gas and electricity infrastructure and Silicon Valley Clean Energy would provide electricity to the project site. AT&T and other providers would provide telephone service. Cable television service would be available from numerous providers, including Comcast.

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, which was accounted for in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project would include appropriate on-site infrastructure to connect to the existing PG&E and telecommunication systems and would not require new off-site facilities and distribution infrastructure or capacity enhancing alterations to any existing facilities. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? As described in the General Plan EIR in Chapter 4.14, the water supply for the City of Cupertino at project buildout year 2022 would be 13,078 acre-feet162 per year (afy) and at General Plan buildout year 2040 would be 16,984 afy. Buildout associated with the General Plan would result in sufficient water supplies 161 Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers. 2018. Cupertino Storm Drain Master Plan. 162 One acre-foot equals about 326,000 gallons, or enough water to cover an acre of land, about the size of a football field, one foot deep.
926
CC 07-07-2022
926 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-95

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
from SJW under normal year conditions or during single-dry year and multiple-dry years, with the implementation of proposed and existing water conservation regulations and measures. The Water Supply Evaluation prepared for the General Plan EIR included new development on the project site at a greater number of units than proposed for the project (27 net new units as compared to 18 new units for the proposed project); therefore, water supply impacts were adequately addressed in the General Plan EIR.

The proposed project’s water demand was calculated using the applicable water demand generation factors included in the Cupertino Sanitary District’s Flow Modeling Analysis. 163 For the residential
component of the project, a total indoor residential water demand of 155 gallons/day/unit was calculated.

For the commercial portion of the property, the water demand factor of 0.11 gpd/square foot from the Water Supply Evaluation prepared for the General Plan Amendment was used. The irrigation demand was based on the Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) pursuant to the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. This conservatively assumes that all the pervious area at the site will be irrigated; actual irrigation water usage will most likely be less than the calculated amount. The results are provided in Table 4-14.

TABLE 4-14 WATER DEMAND FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Development Type Water Demand Factor Size Water Demand
Residential 155 gpd/unita 18 units 2,790 gpd
Retail/Commercial 0.11 gpd/square foot 4,536 square feet 499 gpd Irrigation -- 16,602 square feet of
pervious surfaces 639 gpd
Total Water Demand 3,928 gpd
Note:
a. Water demand factor calculated as 60 gallons/resident/day x 2.87 residents per unit x 10 percent reduction for new construction and low-flow fixtures.

Sources: Water Supply Evaluation (Yarne & Associates), May 20, 2014; prepared with input from the City of Cupertino. Mark Thomas & Company, Inc, 2019.

Cupertino Sanitary District, Flow Modeling Analysis, Homestead Flume Outfall to City of Santa Clara.

The projected water demand for the project would be approximately 3,928 gpd or 4.4 AFY. This is less than 0.03 percent of Cupertino’s water supply at buildout and the proposed project was accounted for in the General Plan EIR at a higher density land use and water demand rate. There is no shortage in water supply to the City of Cupertino by SJW under normal year, single-dry year, and multiple dry years.

Accordingly, the proposed project’s water demand would not exceed the available water supply in 2022 at project buildout or General Plan buildout by year 2040 and impacts to water supply under the proposed project would be less than significant.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
The calculated wastewater demand for the proposed project is provided in Table 4-15. The proposed project with 4,536 square feet of commercial space and 18 residential units would generate approximately 2,982 gallons/day of wastewater, or 0.0030 mgd of wastewater. The wastewater demand 163 Mark Thomas & Co. Inc., December 6, 2019, Cupertino Sanitary District Flow Modeling Analysis Homestead Flume Outfall to City of Santa Clara.
927
CC 07-07-2022
927 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-96 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
calculations are based on the residential water demand factor of 155 gpd/unit and the assumption that 95 percent of the water demand would result in wastewater generation. For the retail/commercial component of the project, the wastewater demand factor of 0.073 gpd/sq ft for retail/commercial land use from the CSD ‘s Flow Modeling Analysis was used.

TABLE 4-15 WASTEWATER DEMAND FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Development Type Wastewater Demand Factor Size Water Demand Residential 147 gpd/unit a 18 units 2,651 gpd
Retail/Commercial 0.073 gpd/square foot b 4,536 square feet 331 gpd Total Water Demand 2,982 gpd
Notes:
a. Water demand factor of 155 gpd/unit x 95 percent (amount of water demand that becomes wastewater). b. From source reference for retail/commercial.

Source: Mark Thomas & Company, Inc, 2019. Cupertino Sanitary District, Flow Modeling Analysis, Homestead Flume Outfall to City of Santa Clara.

The wastewater demand under existing conditions was also calculated to determine the net increase in wastewater demand with implementation of the proposed project. Based on the CSD’s Flow Modeling Analysis, the wastewater demand factor for retail and commercial uses of 0.073 gpd per square foot, and assuming that the existing commercial buildings total 13,225 square feet, the current wastewater demand would be 965 gpd or approximately 0.0008 mgd of wastewater. The proposed project would generate up to 2,982 gpd or approximately 0.0024 mgd of wastewater.164 Therefore, the proposed project would increase wastewater generation at the site by 2,017 gpd or 0.0016 mgd of wastewater. However, the estimated project wastewater demand would be much less than that generated for the proposed buildout of the site in the General Plan, which assumed 27 new units for a wastewater demand of 3,969 gpd. In addition, the wastewater demand calculations are conservative, because no credit is taken for water conservation measures that would be applicable with new construction, thus reducing the amount of wastewater generated.

The SJ/SCWPCP’s projected peak wet weather capacity stated in The San Jose Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant Master Plan, November 2013, is 450 mgd. The proposed project’s wastewater generation (0.0030 mgd) and the existing wastewater generated in the SJ/SCWPCP’s service area (110 mgd) would not exceed the SJ/SCWPCP’s current total peak wet weather capacity of 450 mgd. The ADWF capacity is 167 mgd pursuant to the most recent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the SJ/SCWPCP (Order No. R2-2014-0034, NPDES No. CA0037842). Combined, the proposed project’s wastewater generation (0.0030 mgd) and the existing wastewater generated (110 mgd) would not exceed the SJ/SCWCP’s current ADWF capacity limits (167 mgd).

The CSD has a contractual maximum treatment allocation of 7.85 mgd with the SJ/SCWPCP. At the time of the General Plan EIR, the CSD estimated the existing wastewater generation rate for the City of Cupertino 164 Mark Thomas & Co. Inc., December 6, 2019, Cupertino Sanitary District Flow Modeling Analysis Homestead Flume Outfall to City of Santa Clara.
928
CC 07-07-2022
928 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-97

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
to be 5.3 mgd and the proposed General Plan build-out would generate 7.2 mgd of wastewater.165 Combined, the existing wastewater flow (5.3 mgd) plus the proposed project (0.0030 mgd) would not exceed the City’s contractual allocation limits (7.85 mgd). Furthermore, the proposed mixed-use development was included within the 4,421 residential units and the 1,343,679 square feet of commercial land use evaluated in the General Plan EIR. Furthermore, as demonstrated in Table 1.1 in Section 1.2, Tiering Process, the and the site was originally assumed to have a higher density land use. Therefore, the project would not result in an exceedance of the City’s contractual agreement with SJ/SCWPCP and there would be no significant impact with respect to wastewater treatment capacity.

However, the CSD’s wastewater flows through a portion of the City of Santa Clara’s sewer system. The contractual agreement between CSD and the City of Santa Clara, for this portion of the Santa Clara sewer system, allows the City 13.8 mgd of capacity in the sewer system during peak wet weather flows. The existing CSD peak wet weather flow into the Santa Clara system is 13.14 mgd.166 However, the estimated wastewater generation from the proposed project and from other potential projects in Cupertino, as established by the General Plan and other approved projects, is approximately 14.61 mgd, which is the total capacity needed to serve the General Plan buildout.167 Therefore, the proposed project, and other approved and potential projects as established by the General Plan buildout, will require a reduction in sewer generation from the CSD system prior to flowing into the City of Santa Clara system, or additional capacity rights will need to be acquired from the City of Santa Clara.

Until such corrections to the system can occur, future projects in Cupertino, including the proposed project would exceed the 13.8 mgd contractual limit through the City of Santa Clara sewer system resulting in a potentially significant impact.

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:

2. Reduce inflow and infiltration in the CSD system to reduce peak wet weather flows; or 165 City of Cupertino, General Plan (Community Vision 2015–2040, Appendix B: Housing Element Technical Report, 4.3 Environmental, Infrastructure & Public Service Constraints, page B-93. 166 Mark Thomas & Co. Inc, December 6, 2019, Cupertino Sanitary District Flow Modeling Analysis Homestead Flume Outfall to City of Santa Clara. 167 Mark Thomas & Co. Inc, December 6, 2019, Cupertino Sanitary District Flow Modeling Analysis Homestead Flume Outfall to City of Santa Clara.
929
CC 07-07-2022
929 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-98 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT

3. 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.

Alternatively, if the prior agreement between CSD and the City of Santa Clara that currently limits the permitted peak wet weather flow capacity of 13.8 mgd through the Santa Clara sanitary sewer system were to be updated to increase the permitted peak wet weather flow, this impact would then be less than significant. If this were to occur prior to the City’s approval of building permits, then Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 would no longer be required to be implemented.

Significance with Mitigation: Less than significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 would guarantee that no development on the project site could occur that would exceed the 13.8 mgd peak wet weather flow contractual limit through the City of Santa Clara and CSD by ensuring that no building permit would be issued for any structures or units that result in the contractual limit being exceeded until: (1) additional capacity is available through the City of Santa Clara’s sewer system; (2) improvements are made to the CSD sewer system that reduce the peak wet weather flows that enter the City of Santa Clara system; (3) improvements are made on the project site that ensure the contractual limit is not exceed; or (4) the completion of any combination of these approaches that adequately addresses potential capacity issues. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? The City contracts with Recology to provide solid waste collection services to residents and businesses in the city. The City has a contract with Newby Island Sanitary Landfill (NISL) until 2023, but has not secured a new landfill contract for landfill disposal after that date. However, according to the Integrated Waste Management Plan, the landfills in the County (including NISL where the City’s collected solid waste is currently being landfilled) have adequate disposal capacity beyond 2026 and NISL’s’ operational life has recently been extended to 2041.
168 The City, therefore, has options for landfill service once the City’s existing contract with NISL ends in 2023. In addition to the Newby Island Landfill, solid waste generated in Cupertino can also be disposed of at the Altamont Landfill and Resource Recovery facility, the Corinda Los Trancos Landfill, Forward Landfill Inc., Guadalupe Sanitary Landfill, Kirby Canyon Recycling and Disposal Facility, the Monterey Peninsula Landfill, Recology Hay Road, the Vasco Road Sanitary Landfill, the Zanker Material Processing Facility, and the Zanker Road Class III Landfill. 168 Santa Clara County Integrated Waste Management Plan, County of Santa Clara Environmental Resources Agency, 1996. 930
CC 07-07-2022
930 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-99

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Waste management for the proposed project includes recycling and composting. Solid waste generated by construction of the proposed project would largely consist of demolition waste from the existing buildings as well as construction debris. The project would be required to comply with CMC Chapter 16.72, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste, and the City’s Zero Waste Policy, which requires the recycling or diversion of at least 65 percent of all construction and demolition (C&D) waste by salvage or by transfer to an approved facility.169,170 Prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading, and/or building permits, the applicant is required to submit a properly completed Waste Management Plan to the Cupertino Public Works Department, Environmental Programs Division. The Waste Management Plan shall do the following:
 Identify the materials to be diverted from disposal by recycling, reused on the project, or salvaged for future use or sale.
 Specify if materials would be sorted on-site or mixed for transportation to a diversion facility.  Identify the diversion facility where the material collected will be taken.  Identify construction methods employed to reduce the amount of waste generated.  Specify that the amount of materials diverted shall be calculated by weight or volume, but not by both.

Compliance with CMC Chapter 16.72 and the City’s Zero Waste Policy would reduce solid waste and construction-related impacts on landfill capacity.

Once the project is operational, there would be 52 residents and 10 employees at the site. In 2019, the City of Cupertino’s disposal rate for residents was 3.5 pounds per day (PPD) and for employees was 3.4 PPD. This is much than lower than the CalRecycle’s target rate of 4.3 PPD for residents and 8.1 PPD for employees.171 The City of Cupertino’s disposal rates for residents and employees have been below target rates and decreasing since 2007, with the exception of 2014, when the rate (9.8 PPD) exceeded the target (8.10 PPD).172 Applying these disposal rates, the project would generate approximately 211 PPD or 0.11 tons per day of new waste. The Newby Island Sanitary Landfill has a permitted daily disposal capacity of 4,000 tons per day and in 2019, the average daily disposal rate was approximately 1,940 tons/day.

Therefore, the residual daily landfill capacity of 2,060 tons/day is more than sufficient to meet the solid waste generation rate for the project of 0.11 tons/day. Additionally, the proposed project would comply with the City’s current recycling ordinances and zero-waste policies, which would further reduce solid waste disposed of in the landfill. Therefore, implementation of the project would not generate solid waste 169 Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 16, Buildings and Construction, Chapter 16.72, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste, Section 16.72.040, Diversion Requirement. 170 City of Cupertino, Public Works, Garbage & Recycling, https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/environmentsustainability/waste, accessed May 30, 2019. 171 CalRecycle. 2017. Jurisdiction Per Capita Disposal Trends. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/ReviewReports, accessed May 30, 2019. 172 CalRecycle. 2017. Jurisdiction Per Capita Disposal Trends. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/ReviewReports, accessed May 30, 2019. 931
CC 07-07-2022
931 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-100 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
in excess of State or local standards, or excess the capacity of the landfill, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals and would be less than significant. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The City’s per capita disposal rate for residents and employees in 2018 was 3.1 PPD and 3.2 PPD, respectively, which is below the 4.3 PPD and 8.1 PPD target rate established by CalRecycle.173 As part of the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan to address waste management conditions within Santa Clara County, Cupertino adopted a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE)174 and Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE)175 in compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act.176 The City has gone beyond the SRRE by implementing several programs, including the City’s and Recology’s organics or food waste collection program, and Environmental Recycling Day events offered to residents three times per year by Recology.

In December 2017, the City adopted a Zero Waste Policy.177 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. In 2019, the City’s solid waste diversion rate was 69 percent. These programs will be sufficient to ensure that future development in Cupertino, including the proposed project, would not compromise the ability to meet or exceed the State mandated target.

Construction and any demolition debris associated with the project would be subject to CMC Chapter

16.72, requiring that a minimum of 65 percent of C&D debris be diverted from landfill.178 In addition, the City’s Zero Waste Policy requires that all private construction projects that come through the City’s permitting process, and all City projects (through contract requirements), recover and divert at least 65 percent of the construction waste generated by the project. Compliance with applicable statutes and regulations would ensure that the impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
173 CalRecycle. 2017. Disposal Rate Calculator. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting /DisposalRate Calculator, accessed May 30, 2019. 174 City of Cupertino, Public Works. 1992. Source Reduction and Recycling Element, September 21, 1992. 175 City of Cupertino, Public Works. 1992. Household Hazardous Waste Element, September 21, 1992. 176 Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 9, Health and Sanitation, Chapter 9.6, Solid Waste, Non-Organic Recycling and Recycling Areas, Section 9.16.010(a), Purpose. 177 City of Cupertino, Public Works, Garbage & Recycling, https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/environmentsustainability/waste, accessed May 30, 2019. 178 Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 16, Buildings and Construction, Chapter 16.72, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste, Section 16.72.040, Diversion Requirement. 932
CC 07-07-2022
932 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-101

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
XVIII. WILDFIRE
If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?    
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
   
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
   
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?    

GENERAL PLAN EIR
Chapter 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the General Plan EIR, addressed the impacts to wildfire hazards 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. This section of the Initial Study also addresses additional questions regarding wildfire related impacts pursuant to the updated CEQA Guidelines that were adopted by the California Natural Resource Agency in December 2018.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Wildland fire protection in California is the responsibility of either the State, local government, or the federal government. State Responsibility Areas (SRA) are the areas where the State of California has the primary financial responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildland fires. The SRA includes a 31-million-acre area, in which the State Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) provides a basic level of wildland fire prevention and protection services. Local Responsibility Areas (LRA) include lands within incorporated cities, cultivated agriculture lands, and portions of the desert. LRA fire protection is typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, counties, or by CAL FIRE under contract to local government.179 CAL FIRE determines fire hazard zones within the LRA using an extension of the SRA Fire Hazard Severity Zone model as the basis. The LRA hazard rating reflects flame and ember intrusion from adjacent wildlands and from flammable vegetation in the urban area. 179 California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CAL FIRE). Frequently Asked Questions. http://www.fire.ca.gov/firepreventionfee/sra_faqs, accessed May 30, 2019. 933
CC 07-07-2022
933 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-102 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
CAL FIRE designates fire hazard severity zones (FHSZs) as authorized under California Government Code Sections 51175 et seq. CAL FIRE considers many factors such as fire history, existing and potential fuel (natural vegetation), flame length, blowing embers, terrain, and typical weather for the area. There are three types of FHSZs: moderate, high, and very high.

According to the California Office of Emergency Services, a Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) is defined as any area where structures and other human development meet or intermingle within wildland vegetation.180 Developments in the wildland-urban interface exacerbate fire occurrence and fire spread in several ways, including:
 Increased numbers of human-caused wildfires.
 Wildfires become harder to fight.
 Firefighting resources are diverted from containing the wildfire to protecting lives and homes.  Letting natural fires burn becomes impossible; leading to buildup of fuel, increasing wildfire hazard further.181
The project site is located within an LRA and the SCCFD currently provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the city and project site. The nearest SRA is approximately 0.5 miles to the west and is designated as a High FHSZ. The nearest Very High FHSZ within the Cupertino LRA is located approximately

1.5 miles to the southeast. The project site is not located within the Cupertino designated WUI.182 However, it is located within the CalOES defined WUI, which is an area of transition between wildland (unoccupied land) and land with human development (occupied land).; 183 therefore, impacts related to
wildfire are discussed below.

DISCUSSION
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Services is responsible for coordinating agency response to disasters or other large-scale emergencies in the City of Cupertino with assistance from the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services and the SCCFD. The Cupertino EOP establishes emergency planning, mitigation, response, and recovery policies within the city.

As described in Section VIII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, emergency vehicle access would be provided at two points on the project site and the proposed project would not block roads or impede emergency access to surrounding properties or neighborhoods during either construction or operation of the project. The Emergency Circulation Plan includes a fire truck circulation route in addition to designated fireman access routes to reach the rear of the structures. During demolition and construction, 180 Cal OES. 2018. California State Hazard Mitigation Plan. 181 Radeloff, Volker; Helmers, David; Kramer, H., et al. 2018. Rapid Growth of the US Wildland-Urban Interface Raises Wildfire Risk. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS): Volume 115 No. 13. Accessed May 30, 2019 at https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/13/3314.full.pdf. 182 Cupertino Municipal Code, Section 16.74, Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area. 183 CAL FIRE. 2018. Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Threat. http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=d45bf08448354073a26675776f2d09cb, accessed May 7, 2019. 934
CC 07-07-2022
934 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-103

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
vehicles, equipment, and materials would be staged and stored on a portion of the project site and no staging would occur in the public right-of-way.

As stated in Section VIII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the proposed project would not interfere or impair with an adopted emergency response plan, or emergency evacuation plan; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? As stated in Section 3, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the project site is classified as “urban area” under the CALVEG classification system and is surrounded by residential and other urban uses. The site is characterized as generally flat and surrounding by low topographic relief. Prevailing winds in Cupertino derive from the west from February to November, and from the north from November to February, with the windier part of the year occurring from March to July with wind speeds averaging 7.6 miles per hour.184 The project site is not located within an SRA or Very High FHSZ in an LRA. The project site is also not located within the Cupertino Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area as defined in CMC Chapter 16.74, Wildland Urban Interface Area Adopted.

The proposed landscaping includes a variety of low water use plants with shrubs and trees surrounding the exterior of the site, as shown in Figure 3-13. The proposed buildings and landscaping would be required to comply with CMC Chapter 9.22.020, Property Maintenance, which requires the upkeep of vegetation and landscaping on the properties to prevent fire and health hazards. CMC Chapter 16.40, Fire Code, would also require the proposed project to comply with the 2019 California Fire Code and 2015 International Fire Code, which provide specific regulations governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or explosion. Therefore, the proposed project would have fire prevention and management measures and would not expose occupants and the surrounding neighborhoods to pollutant concentrations or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

Require the installation of maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
As discussed in Section 3.1.1, Existing Site Character, of the Project Description, the project site is fully developed with commercial buildings and associated parking, and utility infrastructure already serves the project site. The proposed project would not include new roads, fuel breaks, or sources of emergency water. Overhead power lines are currently located above the eastern edge of the project site, and new power lines are not proposed as part of the project. Minor alterations such as water, natural gas, and sewer line piping would be installed to connect existing utilities to the proposed residential units.

Therefore, installation and maintenance of infrastructure would not exacerbate wildfire risks and new 184 Weather Spark. 2019. https://weatherspark.com/y/504/Average-Weather-in-Cupertino-California-United-States-YearRound, accessed June 3, 2019. 935
CC 07-07-2022
935 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-104 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
infrastructure would not cause temporary or ongoing impacts on the environment. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Expose people or structure to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire instability, or drainage changes? As stated in criterion b), the project site is characterized as generally flat and is surrounded by low topographic relief. The project site is not located within a floodplain or an area that has a high potential for landslides. As discussed in Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would result in a 4,556 square foot decrease in the amount of impervious surface and provide 267 additional square feet of water treatment area through two bioretention areas that would hold and treat stormwater before it is released into the City’s off-site storm drain infrastructure, which will reduce runoff on the project site.

Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to flooding or landslides that result from post-fire instability and runoff, and impacts would be less than significant.

XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
   
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
   
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
   

DISCUSSION
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a 936
CC 07-07-2022
936 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-105

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
The project site is in an urbanized and extensively developed area of Cupertino. The project site and surrounding area is entirely built out with existing commercial and residential development and associated surface parking. The project site is currently developed with commercial buildings that are partially vacant, and a vacant single-family home. Landscaping currently consists of a few green spaces with trees surrounding the buildings and the eastern edge of the project site. There are no identified sensitive natural communities, no areas of sensitive habitat, and no areas of critical habitat on the project site. In addition, there are no buildings currently listed or eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources, no recorded archaeological sites, and no known paleontological resources located on the project site. The implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, BIO-1, CULT-1, GEO-1, NOISE-1, NOISE-2, TCR-1, and UTIL-1 would serve to protect the quality of the air, nesting birds, and unknown cultural and tribal resources, as well as ensure adequate services are provided and that no additional physical impacts would occur elsewhere. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact to the quality of the environment, wildlife, and major periods of California history or prehistory.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
CEQA Guidelines Section 15355 defines cumulative impacts as two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.

Cumulative impacts may result from individually minor, but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b) advises that a discussion of cumulative impacts should reflect both the severity of the impacts and the likelihood of their occurrence. To accomplish these two objectives, CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 permits two different methods for completion of a cumulative impact analysis and allows for a reasonable combination of the two approaches:
 The ‘list’ approach permits the use of a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including projects both within and outside the city; and  The ‘projections’ approach allows the use of a summary of projections contained in an adopted plan or related planning document, such as a regional transportation plan, or in an EIR prepared for such a plan. The projections may be supplemented with additional information such as regional modeling.

Table 4-16 shows the other reasonably foreseeable projects in Cupertino and how they relate to the maximum buildout potential evaluated in the General Plan EIR. 937
CC 07-07-2022
937 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-106 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 4-16 REASONABLY FORESEEABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN CUPERTINO Hotel Residential Commercial Office
General Plan EIR: Maximum
Development Potential 1,339 4,421 1,343,679 4,040,231
Reasonably Foreseeable Projects
Marina Plaza a 122 188 23,000
The Hamptons Redevelopment a 600
The Forum a 23
The Village Hotel a 185
De Anza Hotel a 155
Westport a 267 20,000
Public Storage a, d 209,485
Scandinavian Design a 2,235
Vallco a ,c 2,402 400,000 1,810,000
Loc-N-Stor b, d 96,432
22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard 9
Total Foreseeable Development 463 3,443 764,381 1,810,000 General Plan EIR: Remaining
Development Potential 876 978 579,298 2,230,231
Notes:
a. The project has been approved or is under construction. b. The project is under review.
c. The buildout numbers are for the Vallco SB 35 Application (0 hotel rooms, 2,402 units, 1,810,000 square feet commercial, and 400,000 square feet commercial).
d. The storage facility sites currently have existing storage facilities and the square footage shown in this table is the net new.

Source: City of Cupertino, 2019.

The General Plan EIR evaluated the cumulative effects of the General Plan Amendments, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning using the summary of projections approach provided for in CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(B). The General Plan EIR took into account growth from the General Plan within the Cupertino city boundary and Sphere of Influence (SOI), in combination with projected growth in the rest of Santa Clara County and the surrounding region, as forecast by ABAG.

As provided for by CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the cumulative context considered in the General Plan EIR varies, depending on the nature of the issue being studied, to best assess each issue‘s geographic extent. For example, the cumulative impacts on water and air quality can be best analyzed within the boundaries of the affected resources, such as water bodies and air basins. For other cumulative impacts, such as hazard risks, traffic, and the need for new public service facilities, the cumulative impact is best analyzed within the context of the population growth and associated development that are expected to occur in the region or the public service providers’ jurisdiction.

The General Plan EIR included an assessment of the redevelopment of the project site with mixed-use, with commercial and residential projects. The residential assumptions included a residential density of 25 dwelling units per acres with a 30-foot height maximum, which would result in up to 27 residential units.

Therefore, as shown in Table 4-16, when combined with the other reasonably foreseeable projects in Cupertino the project would not exceed the maximum buildout potential evaluated in the General Plan 938
CC 07-07-2022
938 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-107

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
EIR. The impact discussions in Section I through Section XVIII above describe the proposed project‘s relationship to and consistency with the scope of development, land use designations, population projections, and cumulative impacts analyses contained in the General Plan EIR. As shown, the project’s cumulative impacts were determined to be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation in the cumulative context.

Since the certification of the General Plan EIR, the City has considered new development at the Vallco project site. While, as shown in Table 4-16, this development at the Vallco site is consistent with the maximum buildout potential in the General Plan EIR for citywide cumulative discussions (e.g., population and housing, water supply, etc.), the General Plan EIR did not evaluate the specific amount of buildout at the Vallco site that is shown in Table 4-16, therefore, localized cumulative impacts such as traffic, traffic related noise, and utilities infrastructure were not captured in the General Plan EIR. Due to the distance between the proposed Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project and the Vallco project site, the proposed project’s impacts would result in no localized cumulative impacts related traffic, noise, or utilities in combination with development of the Vallco site.

As described in the environmental checklist, the impacts of the proposed project would be mitigated to less-than-significant levels. The proposed project would incrementally contribute to, but would not exceed, the cumulative impacts analyses included in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to contribute to significant cumulative impacts when considered along with other impacts under the General Plan.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
As discussed previously, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact that could not be mitigated to a less-than-significant level, thus the proposed project’s environmental effects would be less than significant.
939
CC 07-07-2022
939 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-108 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
This page intentionally left blank.
940
CC 07-07-2022
940 of 1038
PLACEWORKS 5-1

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Canyon Crossings Mixed-Use Project. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure the implementation of project-specific mitigation measures identified as part of the environmental review for the proposed project. The MMRP includes:
 The full text of the mitigation measures;
 The party responsible for implementing the mitigation measures;  The timing for implementation of the mitigation measures;  The agency responsible for monitoring the implementation; and  The monitoring action and frequency.

The City of Cupertino must adopt this MMRP, or an equally effective program, if it approves the proposed project with the mitigation measures that were adopted or made conditions of project approval. 941
CC 07-07-2022
941 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
5-2 DECEMBER 2021

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 (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.

Applicant During construction City of Cupertino
Public Works
Department
And Building
Department
Plan Review and
Approval
During scheduled
construction site
inspections
942
CC 07-07-2022
942 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PLACEWORKS 5-3

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 5-1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measures
Party Responsible
for Implementation
Implementation
Timing
Agency Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Action
Monitoring
Frequency
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.

Applicant During construction City of Cupertino
Public Works
Planning & Building
Department
Plan Review and
Approval
During scheduled
construction site
inspections

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
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 Applicant Prior to construction
During construction
Qualifying biologist
in consultation with
California
Department of Fish
Preconstruction
Survey
Once for survey;
ongoing if nesting
birds identified
and until they
have left the nest
943
CC 07-07-2022
943 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
5-4 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 5-1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measures
Party Responsible
for Implementation
Implementation
Timing
Agency Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Action
Monitoring
Frequency
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 birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified biologist only in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
and Wildlife as
needed
944
CC 07-07-2022
944 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PLACEWORKS 5-5

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure CULT-1: 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 Applicant During construction Consulting
archeologist and
City of Cupertino
Public Works &
Building Department
Plan Review and
Approval
As needed if
resources are
unearthed
945
CC 07-07-2022
945 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
5-6 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 5-1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measures
Party Responsible
for Implementation
Implementation
Timing
Agency Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Action
Monitoring
Frequency
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
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.

Applicant During construction City of Cupertino
Public Works &
Building Department
Plan Review and
Approval
During scheduled
construction site
inspections
946
CC 07-07-2022
946 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PLACEWORKS 5-7

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 5-1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measures
Party Responsible
for Implementation
Implementation
Timing
Agency Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Action
Monitoring
Frequency
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.
 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 Applicant Prior to issuance of
building permits
City of Cupertino
Public Works
Department
Plan review and
approval/site
inspections
Once for plan
review/ during
scheduled
construction site
inspections
947
CC 07-07-2022
947 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
5-8 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
TABLE 5-1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measures
Party Responsible
for Implementation
Implementation
Timing
Agency Responsible
for Monitoring
Monitoring
Action
Monitoring
Frequency
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, 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, 948
CC 07-07-2022
948 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
PLACEWORKS 5-9

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.

Applicant Prior to and during
construction
Qualified acoustical
consultant and City
of Cupertino Public
Works & Building
Department
Plan review and
approval/site
inspections
Once for plan
review/ during
scheduled
construction site
inspections
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.

Applicant During construction Qualified acoustical
consultant and City
of Cupertino Public
Works & Building
Department
Plan review and
approval/site
inspections
Once for plan
review/ during
scheduled
construction site
inspections

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1.

Applicant During construction Consulting
archeologist and
City of Cupertino
Plan Review and
Approval
As needed if
resources are
unearthed
949
CC 07-07-2022
949 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
5-10 DECEMBER 2021

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:

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.

Applicant Prior to construction Cupertino Sanitary
District, City of
Cupertino Public
Works and Building
Departments
Plan Review and
Approval
During scheduled
construction site
inspections
950
CC 07-07-2022
950 of 1038
PLACEWORKS 6-1

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
Organizations and Persons Consulted
This Initial Study was prepared by the following consultants and individuals:

LEAD AGENCY

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Benjamin Fu …………………………………………………………………….………………. Director of Community Development Piu Ghosh…………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………… Principal Planner Erick Serrano…………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………. Senior Planner Chad Mosley…………………………………………………………………….………….……..…… Assistant Director of Public Work David Stillman…………………………………………………………………….…….………………….………. Transportation Manager Winnie Pagan…………………………………………………………………….…….…………………………………. Senior Civil Engineer

REPORT PREPARERS
PlaceWorks
Terri McCracken …………………………………………..………………………….……. Associate Principal, Principal-in-Charge Jacqueline Protsman …………………………………………………………………….………………… Associate, Project Manager Nicole Vermilion …………………………………………..…. Principal, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Practice Leader Cathy Fitzgerald …………………………………………………………………….………………………………………. Principal Engineer Steve Bush …………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………. Senior Engineer John Vang ………………………………………………………..Senior Associate, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Josh Carman …………………………………………………………………….……………………. Senior Associate, Noise Specialist Alejandro Garcia…………………………………………………………………….……………………………Associate, Noise Specialist Kristie Nguyen ……………………………………………………Project Scientist, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Torina Wilson …………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………….……. Associate Grant Reddy …………………………………………………………………….……………………………………..……. Graphics Specialist 951
CC 07-07-2022
951 of 1038

CANYON CROSSINGS MIXED - USE PROJECT INITIAL STUDY

CITY OF CUPERTINO

ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
6-2 DECEMBER 2021

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
This page intentionally left blank.
952
CC 07-07-2022
952 of 1038
953
CC 07-07-2022
953 of 1038
Berkeley, California | 510.848.3815
www.PlaceWorks.com
954
CC 07-07-2022
954 of 1038

MEMORANDUM
DATE June 29, 2022
TO Erika Poveda, Associate Planner
City of Cupertino, Community Development Department
FROM Terri McCracken & Jacqueline Protsman Rohr
SUBJECT 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard Project Modified Noise Mitigation Addendum to the Approved Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Introduction and Purpose
This document is an Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard Project, approved on January 13, 2022 (herein referred to as the “Approved Project”). This Addendum serves as the environmental review for a proposed modification to conduct noticing regarding construction noise pursuant to the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.04.050(G)(1)(a)(i) rather than Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 in the IS/MND. This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. and the State CEQA Guidelines.

This Addendum documents that none of the conditions described in CEQA Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15164 calling for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Cupertino is the lead agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether or not to approve the proposed action. This Addendum analyzes the proposed minor changes to the Approved Project.

Standard for Preparation of an Addendum
Pursuant to Section 21166, Subsequent or Supplement Impact Report; Conditions, of CEQA and Section 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations, of the State CEQA Guidelines, when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines that one or more of the following conditions are met:
 Substantial project changes are proposed that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
 Substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or  New information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified was adopted shows any of the following:
 The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR. 955
CC 07-07-2022
955 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 2
 Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than identified in the previous EIR.
 Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.  Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.

Where none of the conditions specified in Section 15162 are present,1 the lead agency must determine whether to prepare an Addendum or whether no further CEQA documentation is required (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[b]). An Addendum is appropriate where some minor technical changes or additions to the previously certified EIR or IS/MND are necessary, but there are no new or substantially more severe significant impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration).

In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined that an Addendum to the approved IS/MND is the appropriate environmental document for the Modified Project. This Addendum reviews the changes proposed by the Modified Project and examines whether, as a result of any changes or new information, a subsequent MND may be required. This examination includes an analysis pursuant to the provisions of Section 21166 of CEQA and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines concerning their applicability to the Modified Project.

Project Description

LOCATION AND SETTING
The project site is located at 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard on the southwest corner at the intersection of Stevens Creek Boulevard and South Foothill Boulevard. As shown on Figure 3-2, the project site is surrounded by residential and office uses to the north, residential uses and a gas service station with an auto repair shop to the east, residential uses to the south, and residential uses and the Monta Vista Fire Station to the west.

South Foothill Boulevard to the east of the project site, Stevens Creek Boulevard to the north of the project site, and Camino Vista Drive to the west of the project site are both two-lane roadways.

The site is in the Other Non-Residential/Mixed-Use Special Area2 and a Neighborhood Center.3 The site is at the northeast corner of the Inspiration Heights Neighborhood at the four-corner intersection where the Oak Valley, Creston-Pharlap, the Monta Vista North Neighborhood meet. 4 The site has a General Plan land use
1 See also Section 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which applies the requirements of Section 15162 to supplemental EIRs. 2 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, page PA-15. 3 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 3, Land Use and Community Design Element, Figure LU-1, Community Form Diagram, page LU-17. 4 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, Figure PA-2, Neighborhoods, page PA-18.
956
CC 07-07-2022
956 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 3
designation of Commercial/Residential and a zoning district designation of Planned Development with General Commercial with Residential uses (P(CG, Res)).5
The site is currently developed with a single structure: a single-story, approximately 2,400 square-foot commercial building with a convenience store and an associated paved and unpaved (gravel) surface parking adjacent to South Foothill Boulevard.

PROPOSED PROJECT
This section describes the proposed modification to the Approved Project.

The approved the IS/MND for the Approved Project determined that eight topic areas would potentially cause significant impacts that could occur from construction and operation of the proposed project and identified mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. These topic areas included Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazard Materials, Noise, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems. Impacts from construction noise were found to be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1. This mitigation included a requirement that all off-site businesses and residents within 300 feet of the project site be notified of the planned activities at least 90 days prior to the start of any construction, demolition, or grading activities.

In November 2021, the City adopted CMC Section 17.04.050(G)(1)(a)(i), which requires that at least 10 days prior to the start of any demolition, ground disturbing, or construction activities, a project applicant shall send notices of the planned activity by first class mail to off-site businesses and residents within 500 feet of the project site. In this specific section of the CMC, the 500-foot distance applies to projects on sites that are more than 0.5 acres or contain four or more residential units, and would therefore apply to the 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard Project (0.68 acres and nine residential units) absent Mitigation Measure NOISE-1. The noticing procedures under both requirements (approved IS/MND and CMC) require the notification to 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 is also required to include the telephone numbers of the contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. However, the CMC also requires that the project applicant provide the City with evidence of mailing of the notice, upon request. The complete mitigation measure and CMC text are included in Attachment A.

The proposed modification would be to comply with the construction noise noticing requirements in CMC Chapter 17.04 (i.e., 10 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 500 feet), instead of the requirements in Mitigation NOISE-1 of the approved IS/MND (i.e.,90 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 300 feet).
5 City of Cupertino Land Use Map adopted November 15, 2005 and amended August 20, 2019. 957
CC 07-07-2022
957 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 4
Environmental Analysis
As described in the section above, Standard for Preparation of an Addendum, this Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 to determine whether implementation of the Modified Project would result in any new impacts or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than were previously analyzed in the approved IS/MND. Accordingly, this Addendum only considers the extent to which the proposed changes could result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts; it does not reevaluate impacts that would remain consistent with the analysis in the approved MND. The environmental topic areas analyzed in the approved IS/MND include:
 Aesthetics
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural Resources
 Energy
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Land Use and Planning
 Noise
 Population and Housing
 Public Services
 Parks and Recreation
 Transportation
 Utilities and Service Systems
 Wildfire
 Hydrology and Water Quality
The Modified Project would not change site-specific designs or proposed development, when compared to the Approved Project. The Modified Project would not require any revisions to the environmental conclusion contained in the approved IS/MND. The proposed change to the noticing requirement does not change the amount of development, alter the active construction timeline, or result in any new information of substantial importance affecting the physical impacts to the environment (e.g., the construction noise generated from the project would be the same). Although the change to the requested noticing requirement would result in the notification occurring closer to the start of construction (10 days compared to 90 days), it would also increase the noticing distance by 200 feet, thus reaching a greater portion of the surrounding community. In addition, the notification would achieve the same objective of informing the nearby community of the pending construction activity. Lastly, the requested change would result in the 22690 Stevens Creek Boulevard Project using the same notification procedures that the City has deemed adequate for all other construction projects in the city, specifically for projects similar to the Modified Project (i.e., more than 0.5 acres and containing four or more residential units).

Table 1, Comparison of Impacts of the Approved Project and Modified Project, summarizes the impacts of the proposed modifications to the approved IS/MND compared to Approved Project. 958
CC 07-07-2022
958 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 5
Table 1: Comparison of Impacts of the Approved Project and Modified Project Topic
Environmental Impacts of the Modified Project, as Compared to Impacts in the Approved IS/MND:

Same Impact as
Approved IS/MND
Less Impact than
Approved IS/MND
New Significant Impact or
More Substantial Impact
Aesthetics X
Air Quality X
Biological Resources X
Cultural Resources X
Energy X
Geology and Soils X
Greenhouse Gas Emissions X
Hazards and Hazardous Materials X
Hydrology and Water Quality X
Land Use and Planning X
Noise X
Population and Housing X
Public Services X
Parks and Recreation X
Transportation X
Utilities and Service Systems X
Wildfire X
Based on the information provided in this Addendum, and the absence of site-specific design changes in the Modified Project, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts analyzed in the approved IS/MND. The proposed modifications to the Approved Project would not result in a substantial change to the project and, therefore, additional environmental review is not necessary.

Conclusion
As summarized below, and for the reasons described in the section above, Environmental Analysis, of this Addendum, the City of Cupertino has concluded that the Modified Project would not result in any new significant impacts not previously identified in the approved IS/MND; nor would it result in a substantial increase in the severity of any significant environmental impact previously identified in the approved IS/MND.

For these reasons, a subsequent EIR is not required, and an Addendum to the approved IS/MND is the appropriate CEQA document to address the Modified Project. This section provides an evaluation of the Modified Project in light of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 959
CC 07-07-2022
959 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 6

SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE PROJECT
The proposed changes under the Modified Project would be to comply with the existing construction noise noticing requirements in CMC Chapter 17.04, Standard Environmental Protection Requirements, of 10 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 500 feet, instead of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 in the approved IS/MND of 90 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 300 feet. As stated above, this is not a substantial change to the Approved Project analyzed in the approved IS/MND.

Consequently, there are no substantial changes proposed to the Approved Project that will require major revisions of the previous IS/MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES
As described above in the environmental analysis above, the Modified Project would not result in new significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in the approved IS/MND, would not substantially increase the severity of significant environmental effects identified in the approved IS/MND, and thus would not require major revisions to the approved IS/MND. The Modified Project, therefore, is not substantial and does not require major revisions to the approved IS/MND or a subsequent IS/MND. In addition, the physical conditions within the project area have not changed substantially since the approval of the IS/MND.

NEW INFORMATION
No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known when the approved IS/MND was approved, has been identified which shows that the Modified Project would be expected to result in: 1) new significant environmental effects not identified in the approved IS/MND; 2) substantially more severe environmental effects than shown in the approved IS/MND; 3) mitigation measures or alternatives previously determined to be infeasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project sponsor declines to adopt the mitigation or alternative; or 4) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those identified in the Certified EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project sponsor declines to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. 960
CC 07-07-2022
960 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 7
Attachment A: Mitigation Measure and CMC Text
APPROVED PROJECT: 22690 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURE 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 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, 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. 961
CC 07-07-2022
961 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 8
 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.

CUPERTINO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17 (ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS) Chapter 17.04, Standard Environmental Protection Requirements, Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements, requires that every project shall implement the following standard environmental protection permit submittal requirements prior to the issuance of permits by the City unless they are not applicable to the project as demonstrated by a written explanation of why any standard environmental protection permit submittal requirement is not applicable to the project, subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development and/or the City Engineer, or his or her designee, as appropriate.

1. Notice and Signage:
a. At least 10 days prior to the start of any demolition, ground disturbing, or construction activities, the project applicant shall send notices of the planned activity by first class mail as follows:
i. For projects on sites that are more than 0.5 acres or four or more residential units the notices shall be sent to off-site businesses and residents within 500 feet of the project site; ii. For projects on sites between 0.25 to 0.5 acres, or two or three residential units (not including Accessory Dwelling Units) notices shall be sent to off-site businesses and residents within 250 feet of the project site; or
iii. For projects on sites less than 0.25 acres or one residential unit, the notices shall be sent to off-site businesses and residents within 100 feet of the project site.

The notification shall 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 shall provide the City with evidence of mailing of the notice, upon request. If pile driving, see additional noticing requirements in subsection 3(b) below.
b. At least 10 days prior to the start of construction activities, a sign shall 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 shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action to the City within three business days of receiving the complaint. 962
CC 07-07-2022
962 of 1038

MEMORANDUM
DATE June 29, 2022
TO Jeff Tsumura, Associate Planner
City of Cupertino, Community Development Department
FROM Terri McCracken & Jacqueline Protsman Rohr
SUBJECT Canyon Crossing Mixed-Use Project Modified Noise Mitigation Addendum to the Approved Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Introduction and Purpose
This document is an Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Canyon Crossing Mixed-Use Project, approved on January 13, 2022 (herein referred to as the “Approved Project"). This Addendum serves as the environmental review for a proposed modification to conduct noticing regarding construction noise pursuant to the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.04.050(G)(1)(a)(i) rather than Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 in the IS/MND. This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. and the State CEQA Guidelines.

Standard for Preparation of an Addendum
Pursuant to Section 21166, Subsequent or Supplement Impact Report; Conditions, of CEQA and Section 15162, Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations, of the State CEQA Guidelines, when an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines that one or more of the following conditions are met:
 Substantial project changes are proposed that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
 Substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or  New information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified was adopted shows any of the following:
 The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR. 963
CC 07-07-2022
963 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 2
 Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than identified in the previous EIR.
 Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.  Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponent declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.

Where none of the conditions specified in Section 15162 are present,1 the lead agency must determine whether to prepare an Addendum or whether no further CEQA documentation is required (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[b]). An Addendum is appropriate where some minor technical changes or additions to the previously certified EIR or approved IS/MND are necessary, but there are no new or substantially more severe significant impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration).

Project Description

LOCATION AND SETTING
The project site is located at 10625 South Foothill Boulevard2 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. 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.

The site is located in the Other Non-Residential/Mixed-Use Special Area3 and a Neighborhood Center.4 The site is located in the Inspiration Heights Neighborhood abutting the Monta Vista North Neighborhood.5 The site 1 See also Section 15163 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which applies the requirements of Section 15162 to supplemental EIRs. 2 There are several addresses assigned to the project site, but for the purposes of this Addendum, a single address (10625 South Foothill Boulevard) is used to represent the entire project site. 3 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, page PA-15. 4 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. 5 City of Cupertino General Plan (Community Vision 2015-2040), Chapter 2, Planning Areas, Figure PA-2, Neighborhoods, page PA-18.
964
CC 07-07-2022
964 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 3
has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial/Residential and a zoning district designation of Planned Development with General Commercial with Residential uses (P(CG, Res)).6 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 twostory 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.

PROPOSED PROJECT
This section describes the proposed modification to the Approved Project.

The approved IS/MND for the Approved Project determined that seven topic areas would potentially cause significant impacts that could occur from construction and operation of the proposed project and identified mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level. These topic areas included Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems. Impacts from construction noise were found to be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1. This mitigation included a requirement that all off-site businesses and residents within 300 feet of the project site be notified of the planned activities at least 90 days prior to the start of any construction, demolition, or grading activities.

In November 2021, the City adopted CMC Section 17.04.050(G)(1)(a)(i), which requires that at least 10 days prior to the start of any demolition, ground disturbing, or construction activities, a project applicant shall send notices of the planned activity by first class mail to off-site businesses and residents within 500 feet of the project site. In this specific section of the CMC, the 500-foot distance applies to projects on sites that are more than 0.5 acres or contain four or more residential units, and would therefore apply to the Canyon Crossing Mixed-Use Project (1.57 acres and 18 residential units) absent Mitigation Measure NOISE-1. The noticing procedures under both requirements (approved IS/MND and CMC) require the notification to 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 is also required to include the telephone numbers of the contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. However, the CMC also requires that the project applicant provide the City with evidence of mailing of the notice, upon request. The complete mitigation measure and CMC text are included in Attachment A.

The proposed modification would be to comply with the construction noise noticing requirements in CMC Chapter 17.04 (i.e., 10 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 500 feet), instead of the requirements in Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 of the approved IS/MND (i.e., 90 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 300 feet).
6 City of Cupertino Land Use Map adopted November 15, 2005 and amended August 20, 2019. 965
CC 07-07-2022
965 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 4
Environmental Analysis
As described in the section above, Standard for Preparation of an Addendum, this Addendum has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 to determine whether implementation of the Modified Project would result in any new impacts or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts than were previously analyzed in the approved IS/MND. Accordingly, this Addendum only considers the extent to which the proposed changes could result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts; it does not reevaluate impacts that would remain consistent with the analysis in the approved MND. The environmental topic areas analyzed in the approved IS/MND include:
 Aesthetics
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural Resources
 Energy
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Land Use and Planning
 Noise
 Population and Housing
 Public Services
 Parks and Recreation
 Transportation
 Utilities and Service Systems
 Wildfire
 Hydrology and Water Quality
The Modified Project would not change site-specific designs or proposed development, when compared to the Approved Project. The Modified Project would not require any revisions to the environmental conclusions contained in the approved IS/MND. The proposed change to the noticing requirement does not change the amount of development, alter the active construction timeline, or result in any new information of substantial importance affecting the physical impacts to the environment (e.g., the construction noise generated from the project would be the same). Although the change to the requested noticing requirement would result in the notification occurring closer to the start of construction (10 days compared to 90 days), it would also increase the noticing distance by 200 feet, thus reaching a greater portion of the surrounding community. In addition, the notification would achieve the same objective of informing the nearby community of the pending construction activity. Lastly, the requested change would result in the Canyon Crossing Mixed-Use Project using the same notification procedures that the City has deemed adequate for all other construction projects in the city, specifically for projects similar to the Modified Project (i.e., more than 0.5 acres and containing four or more residential units).

Table 1, Comparison of Impacts of the Approved Project and Modified Project, summarizes the impacts of the proposed modifications to the approved IS/MND compared to Approved Project. 966
CC 07-07-2022
966 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 5
Table 1: Comparison of Impacts of the Approved Project and Modified Project Topic
Environmental Impacts of the Modified Project, as Compared to Impacts in the Approved IS/MND:

SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE PROJECT
The proposed changes under the Modified Project would be to comply with the existing construction noise noticing requirements in CMC Chapter 17.04, Standard Environmental Protection Requirements, of 10 days in 967
CC 07-07-2022
967 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 6
advance of commencing construction at a distance of 500 feet, instead of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 in the approved IS/MND of 90 days in advance of commencing construction at a distance of 300 feet. As stated above, this is not a substantial change to the Approved Project analyzed in the approved IS/MND.

NEW INFORMATION
No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known when the approved IS/MND was approved, has been identified which shows that the Modified Project would be expected to result in: 1) new significant environmental effects not identified in the approved IS/MND; 2) substantially more severe environmental effects than shown in the approved IS/MND; 3) mitigation measures or alternatives previously determined to be infeasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project sponsor declines to adopt the mitigation or alternative; or 4) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those identified in the Certified EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project sponsor declines to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. 968
CC 07-07-2022
968 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 7
Attachment A: Mitigation Measure and CMC Text
APPROVED PROJECT: CANYON CROSSING MIXED-USE PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURE 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 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, 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. 969
CC 07-07-2022
969 of 1038
June 29, 2022 | Page 8
 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.

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10974 Agenda Date: 7/7/2022
Agenda #: 13.

Subject: Consider an update on drought conditions and the City of Cupertino's ongoing water conservation measures for City operations and provide input on potential further water conservation measures.

Staff recommends that the City Council take the following action:

1. Receive staff presentation on continued drought conditions; and

2. Provide input to staff on implemented water conservation restrictions for City operations.

Presenter, Jimmy Tan, Assistant Director of Public Works, Operations CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 7/1/2022
powered by Legistar™971
CC 07-07-2022
971 of 1038

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: July 7, 2022
Subject
Consider an update on drought conditions and the City of Cupertino’s ongoing water conservation measures for City operations and provide input on potential further water conservation measures.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council take the following action:
1) Receive staff presentation on continued drought conditions; and 2) Provide input to staff on implemented water conservation restrictions for City operations.

Background
The State of California, including Santa Clara County (County), is in its third consecutive year of a drought. The May 2022 U.S. Drought Monitor reports that most of the County is now in a situation of “Severe” drought. The year 2021 was the third driest year on record and the driest since 1977. In addition, the combination of 2020 and 2021 were the second driest back-to-back years on record. Local watershed runoff in the County has been substantially limited since 2019 due to extremely dry conditions. As a result, Santa Clara Valley Water District’s (Valley Water) current local surface water storage is at 26 percent.

In addition to the low reservoir storage and imported water allocations, Valley Water is impacted by the unavailability of Anderson Reservoir as a surface water storage facility for the duration of the Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit Project, which is expected to last 10 years. Anderson Reservoir was drained in 2020 for public health and safety reasons, as ordered by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Anderson Reservoir is Valley Water’s largest surface water reservoir and holds more water than all of Valley Water’s other nine surface water reservoirs combined.

The availability of Coyote Reservoir, Valley Water’s second largest reservoir, is also limited because of the California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams storage limits. The unavailability of Anderson Reservoir and limited availability of 972
CC 07-07-2022
972 of 1038
Coyote Reservoir significantly limit Valley Water’s ability to store water locally for groundwater recharge and use at Valley Water’s three water treatment plants.

Half of the County’s water supply comes from outside the County, and with Sierra Nevada snowpack at zero percent, a significant reduction in the amount of imported water will be received this year. Valley Water is addressing this shortfall by working to withdraw previously banked supplies and by purchasing emergency water from partners outside the County as well as increasing water conservation messaging and programs.

Groundwater storage has been declining but is currently within normal levels. However, this may drop rapidly due to limited recharge and increased pumping due to drought conditions. Using groundwater as a majority supply is an option, however, it would greatly increase the risk of land subsidence in northern Santa Clara County and could cause salt-water intrusion into the aquifer.

On June 9, 2021, Valley Water held a special meeting to discuss the drought condition.

They considered a resolution declaring a water shortage emergency condition within the County and a call for retailers to achieve a water use reduction target equal to 15 percent of 2019 water use (33 percent of 2013 water use.) The resolution passed unanimously.

However, through March of this year, only 3% savings has been achieved compared to 2019, so increased efforts are needed. In fact, this March, the County used 30% more water than in March 2019. In order to meet the reduction target, Valley Water has enacted Stage 3 of their Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

Completed Regulatory Actions
The State, Valley Water and the two urban water suppliers in Cupertino are collectively responding to this emergency. Below is a chronological summary of actions completed:
 April 21, 2021, the Governor issued a proclamation directing State agencies to take immediate action to bolster drought resilience and prepare for impacts on communities, businesses, and ecosystems, and proclaiming a State of Emergency to exist in Mendocino and Sonoma counties due to severe drought conditions in the Russian River Watershed
 May 10, 2021 - the Governor expanded the drought proclamation to 41 counties, including Alameda County. However, Santa Clara County was not included at that time
 May 25, 2021 - the US Drought Monitor report indicated Santa Clara County to be in Extreme Drought stage
 June 9, 2021 – Valley Water held a special meeting to discuss the drought and approved a resolution to declare a water shortage emergency condition  June 14, 2021 – California Water Services (CWS) filed updated versions of Rule

14.1 and their Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) with California Public 973
CC 07-07-2022
973 of 1038
Utilities Commission (CPUC) and requested implementation of Stage 1 of the WSCP
 June 18, 2021 – San Jose Water (SJW) Company filed Advice Letters 563 and 564 with CPUC
 June 22, 2021 – The County adopted a Resolution ratifying the proclamation of a local emergency due to the drought
 July 8, 2021 – The Governor issued an Executive Order and called on Californians to voluntarily reduce water use by 15% compared to 2020 levels  July 18, 2021 - Stage 1 of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan becomes effective for CWS
 October 15, 2021 – SJW filed Advice Letter 569 requesting authorization to implement Schedule 14.1 (drought surcharges)
 October 20, 2021 – CWS files with the CPUC for implementation of Stage 2 of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan
 December 13, 2021 – SJW implemented Schedule 14.1.
 December 14, 2021 – Stage 2 of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan becomes effective for CWS
 January 18, 2022 - the State’s water conservation emergency regulation became effective. It will remain in effect for one year from the effective date, unless the State Water Board acts to end, modify, or readopt it
 April 12, 2022 – Valley Water’s call for no more than two days of irrigation in a week for lawns and ornamental landscapes and prohibit excessive runoff and midday irrigation
 May 24, 2022 – Valley Water considers an ordinance to enforce outdoor water use restrictions
The City of Cupertino relies on water retailers regulated by the CPUC, SJW and CWSs, to deliver the services. The water retailers water conservation measures enforce those restrictions. San Jose Water and CWSs have conducted extensive outreach to the residents to inform them about the water restrictions.

Discussion
City Operations
The City has a long history of conserving water across its operations, leading by example through its practices, and encouraging businesses, residents, and schools to do the same.

Upon Valley Water’s June 2021 call to conserve 15% of 2019 levels, staff implemented water conservation restriction measures for City facilities similar to the drought in 2015.

Based on the current restrictions imposed by Valley Water, City Municipal Operations are currently at Stage 4 of water conservation measures (Attachment A.) Under the Stage 4 measures, the City will follow the guidelines shown below:
 Reduce water programming for all outside irrigation for trees/shrubs, having them be at a minimum according to the conservation amount. 974
CC 07-07-2022
974 of 1038
 No watering of turf used passively.
 Limited watering (consistent with two days/week watering or similar) of turf areas used intermittingly at City permitted events.  A minimum of 20 percent reduced watering of turf areas by City or school recreation events.
 No operation of the interactive fountain at Community Hall.  No water used to clean asphalt areas/sidewalks/plaza areas.  Water used for street sweeping to be minimized while complying with Santa Clara Valley Air Board requirements.

In order to achieve the largest reduction, the City is focusing on restricting water use across parks, sports fields, and school sites. The City has adjusted the irrigation schedule to two days a week at areas of turf programmed by the Parks and Recreation Department and at sport fields to generally stay green. The non-programmed turf areas are not watered and allowed to significantly change with the occurrence of warm weather.

Additional water conservation measures focus on replacing the existing irrigation controllers with smart controllers, which allows the system to perform irrigation efficiently and reduce water waste. To date, the City’s Grounds Division has replaced 33 of 48 irrigation controllers with smart controllers. The Trees and Right of Way (ROW) Division has installed a total of 45 smart controllers. The controllers are capable of performing evapotranspiration (ET) adjustments, shutting off on high flow alert, and during rain events. For instance, after rainfall events, staff is able to log in remotely to access the controllers via an app to turn off all the controllers if needed.

Based on the City’s water conservation efforts at City facilities, the City has reduced an estimated 6% below the 2019 consumption. Although water saving is less than the desired percentage reduction, the City is continuing to look for opportunities to decrease water consumption. The majority of the street medians have been converted to drip irrigation and indoor water equipment has been upgraded to low water usage since the previous drought in 2015, there are minimal additional changes that can be implemented to increase water savings.

The City of Cupertino promotes and provides matching rebates for property owners who apply for incentives provided by Valley Water and the two water retailers. Since 2019, Cupertino property owners have utilized incentives to install 115,102 square feet of drought-tolerant landscapes, 20 rain barrels, 93 weather-based irrigation controllers, and two rain cisterns.

Below is a summary of the rebates that Cupertino property owners have successfully received in exchange for water reduction investments on their property in the last year. 975
CC 07-07-2022
975 of 1038
Cupertino Participation in Valley Water Conservation Programs 2019 2020 2021 2022*
eCart (no-cost water efficiency equipment such as
aerators) 2 2 304 184
Greywater System Rebates 0 0 3 1
Water Wise Outdoor Surveys 0 0 1 1
Submeters 0 0 0 0
Irrigation Equipment Rebates 27 27 17 4
Landscape Conversion Participants 10 24 35 34
Weather-Based Irrigation Controllers 26 26 24 17
*2022 data is year-to-date as of May 15
Water Retailers
City staff has been in discussion with both water retailers, SJW and CWSs, regarding the drought restrictions in their respective agency. Currently, SJW and CWS has implemented Stage 3 and Stage 2, respectively, of their Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Like the drought in 2015, the current restrictions center on outdoor water usage, which typically accounts for the majority of the residential customer’s consumption. However, the restriction measures can escalate over time such as drought surcharges and enforcement actions if the drought worsens.

Beginning December 13, 2021, SJW implemented its CPUC-approved mandatory conservation plan. This plan differs from the previous efforts in 2015 in that individual 0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
2019 2020 2021 2022*
Square Feet
Turf Removed and Replaced with DroughtTolerant Using Rebate Programs in Cupertino 976
CC 07-07-2022
976 of 1038
usage is the focus as opposed to blanket allocations. Customer monthly allocations are based on a 15% reduction of their individual 2019 usage. By having minimum allocations, it also takes into consideration “super savers,” and does not require those customers who use less than six centum cubic feet (CCF) per month to reduce further. Customers who exceed their allocations receive a drought surcharge for each unit of water over. The per unit surcharge is the Tier 3 rate for water, currently $7.13. An appeals process is available.

In Cupertino, enforcement of these regulations is the primary responsibility of Valley Water, SJWC and CWS. For instance, CWS will perform the following actions for noncompliance with water use restrictions:
 First offense – customer notification
 Second offense – $50 penalty
 Third offense – $100 penalty*
 Fourth offense – installation of flow-restricting device  Egregious violations – installation of flow-restricting device *CWS must verify non-compliance to assess a penalty from the second offense forward.

The water retailers and Valley Water are emphasizing quick and effective ways to reduce water consumption in the short term, providing conservation tips and promoting rebates/incentives to residents which can be accessed through the retailer’s websites. All residents/businesses should be conscientious about the drought and are encouraged to always conserve and use water wisely. More permanent measures such as landscape conversions are also encouraged to conserve water to meet future water demands for consumption and fire protection.

Online Resources
Water conservation information can be found through the following websites:

City of Cupertino
https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/environmentsustainability/water/water-conservation Valley Water
https://www.valleywater.org/water-conservation-programs https://www.valleywater.org/watersavingsorg
San Jose Water Company
https://www.sjwater.com/drought
https://www.sjwater.com/conservation
977
CC 07-07-2022
977 of 1038
https://www.sjwater.com/customer-care/help-information/rebates-incentives California Water Service
https://www.calwater.com/conservation/drought/
https://www.calwater.com/conservation/resources/
https://www.calwater.com/conservation-rebates/
Next Steps
Staff will work with Cupertino urban water suppliers and Valley Water to do outreach to community members, notifying them of new drought restrictions and associated tariffs.

Sustainability Impact
Actions taken to conserve water across the City’s municipal portfolio directly implement Cupertino’s Climate Action Plan Measure M-F-7: Conserve Water through Efficient Landscaping and enable the City to advance its emissions reduction goals arising from onsite water use. Further, these visible actions showcase the City’s commitment to protecting this diminished limited resource with the goal of spurring similar water conservation actions across the community, above and beyond minimum requirements.

Fiscal Impact
Staff will monitor water use and expenses and will provide a report in future drought updates. During the 2015 drought, the City browned out several landscaped areas to conserve water. Those areas have remained browned out through the present. _____________________________________
Prepared by: Jimmy Tan, Assistant Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Matt Morley, Director of Public Works
Reviewed and Approved for Submission by: Dianne Thompson, Acting City Manager Attachments:

A – City of Cupertino Water Conservation Restriction Measures for City Operations 978
CC 07-07-2022
978 of 1038
Cupertino Water Conservation Restriction Measures 2021

RESTRICTION MEASURE PURPOSE
Collective impacts of drought, climate change, increased population demands, and potential natural disasters require the conservation and efficient use of water. The purpose of these measures are to conserve and efficiently use water at all City owned facilities while maintaining safe conditions for employees and the public.

Improvement of City owned facilities to reduce water use, other than those typical for normal operation or maintenance, are not covered in these measures.

RESTRICTION MEASURES
At all times the use of water at City facilities is to be as efficient as practically possible. During periods of drought, water conservation procedures will be followed at all City facilities. Wasting of water is to be avoided at all times of the year.

Annually, every City facility* is to have water use quantified in volume and dollars as follows:

Amount of water use for buildings
Amount of water use for landscape shrubs and/or trees
Amount of water use for turf utilized by recreation programmed by the City or Cupertino Unified School District
Amount of water use for turf utilized by permitted City events Amount of water use for remaining turf
Amount of water used in ponds and/or fountains
*Metering of water at City facilities may or may not be separate for each identified water use.

When one meter services several uses, amounts of individual water use is to be interpolated.

Annually, water used for City operation shall be analyzed cumulatively and separately for each facility. Comparisons will be made to prior years.

Facilities included are:

1. Blackberry Golf Course

2. Canyon Oaks Park

3. Collins Elementary School / Portal Park

4. Creekside Park

5. Eaton Elementary School

6. Faria Elementary School

7. Franco Park

8. Garden Gate Elementary School

9. Hoover Park

10. Hyde Middle School

11. Jollyman Park

WATER CONSERVATION RESTRICTION MEASURES FOR CITY

OPERATIONS

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

ROGER LEE, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
(408) 777-3254 • FAX (408) 777- 3333• www.cupertino.org 979
CC 07-07-2022
979 of 1038
Cupertino Water Conservation Restriction Measures 2021

12. Kennedy Middle School

13. Library Field / Civic Center

14. Lincoln Elementary School

15. Linda Vista Park

16. McClellan Ranch Community Gardens

17. Memorial Park / Quinlan Community Center

18. Monta Vista Recreation Center

19. Oak Valley Park

20. Regnart Elementary School

21. Sommerset Square Park

22. Stevens Creek Elementary School / Varian Park

23. Sterling Barnhart Park

24. Three Oaks Park

25. Wilson Park
Attachment A to these measures shall identify each of the above facilities with an aerial site plan prepared and annually updated as site conditions change. Each site plan shall indicate:

Area of all existing turf
Area of existing turf intermittingly used by City permitted events Area of existing turf programmed by for City or school recreation events When conservation measures are implemented and it is likely that the public is impacted by the measures, educational signage shall be erected at every facility.

PROCEDURES
Drought conservation measures may be required individually or collectively by the State, Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), San Jose Water Company (SJWC) or California Water Service Company (CWSC). Water conservation measures recommended or mandated by SCVWD shall be followed for all City operations. If State requirements, specific to the Cupertino area, are more onerous than SCVWD measures, then State requirements shall be followed for all City operations. Water conservation rules, as implemented by either SJWC or CWSC and in support of either State and/or SCVWD requirements, shall be followed. Due to the limited area of the City serviced by CWSC, the rules implemented by SJWC shall be applied City-wide unless otherwise prohibited.

The description and action to be taken for various stages of drought are as follows:

Stage # Condition Action
1 No drought conservation
measures required.

None
2 Reduction < 10% * Reduce water programming of
all outside irrigation by a
minimum of the conservation
amount.
3 10% < Reduction < 20% Reduce water
programming of all
outside irrigation by a
minimum of the
conservation amount.
980
CC 07-07-2022
980 of 1038
Cupertino Water Conservation Restriction Measures 2021
No filling of ponds at
Memorial Park.

Reduce operational
hours of interactive
fountain at Community
Hall from 10AM – 8PM
to Noon – 6PM.

Water used to clean
asphalt areas /
sidewalks / plaza areas
to be minimized and
follow stormwater
requirements.
4 20% < Reduction < 40% Reduce water
programming of all
outside irrigation for
trees / shrubs by a
minimum of the
conservation amount.

Large and/or
desirable species
to have priority
over less
desirable species
No watering of turf
used passively.

Limited watering
(consistent with 2 days /
week watering or
similar) of turf areas
used intermittingly by
City permitted events.

A minimum of 20%
reduced watering of turf
areas programmed by
City or school
recreation events.

Each facility will be managed
in accordance with the areas
defined in Attachment A.

No filling of ponds at
Memorial Park.

No operation of the
interactive fountain at
Community Hall.

No water used to clean
981
CC 07-07-2022
981 of 1038
Cupertino Water Conservation Restriction Measures 2021
asphalt areas /
sidewalks / plaza areas.

Water used for street
sweeping to be
minimized while
complying with Santa
Clara Valley Air Board
requirements.
5 Reduction > 40% Reduce water
programming of all
outside irrigation for
trees / shrubs by a
minimum of the
conservation amount.

Large and/or
desirable species
to have priority
over less
desirable species
No watering of turf
unless required to
maintain safe
conditions.

No filling of ponds at
Memorial Park.

No operational of the
interactive fountain at
Community Hall.

No water used to clean
asphalt areas / streets /
sidewalks / plaza areas.

Water used for street
sweeping to be
minimized while
complying with Santa
Clara Valley Air Board
requirements.
*All reduction percentages are relative to water consumption in 2013.

Blackberry Farm Golf Course (BBGGC) and McClellan Ranch Community Gardens (MRCG) watering is not subject to the Stage 1-4 reductions. BBFGC and MRCG shall follow at a minimum the conservation requirements of SJWC.

Unless prohibited by water authorities, watering of all trees and desirable shrubs may occur during all stages of drought as necessary.
982
CC 07-07-2022
982 of 1038
Cupertino Water Conservation Restriction Measures 2021

RESPONSIBILITY
All employees of the Public Works Department are responsible for the implementation of these measures.

APPROVED
_______________________
Roger Lee
Director of Public Works

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A
983
CC 07-07-2022
983 of 1038

ATTACHMENT A
Water Conservation Restriction Measures for City Operations

1. Blackberry Golf Course

2. Canyon Oaks Park

3. Collins Elementary / Portal Park

4. Creekside Park

5. Eaton Elementary

6. Faria Elementary

7. Franco Park

8. Garden Gate Elementary

9. Hoover Park

10. Hyde Middle School

11. Jollyman Park

12. Kennedy Middle School

13. Library Field / Civic Center

14. Lincoln Elementary

15. Linda Vista Park

16. McClellan Ranch Community Gardens

17. Memorial Park / Quinlan Community Center

18. Monta Vista Rec Center

19. Oak Valley Park

20. Regnart Elementary School

21. Sommerset Square Park

22. Stevens Creek Elementary / Varian Park

23. Sterling Barnhart Park

24. Three Oaks Park

25. Wilson Park
984
CC 07-07-2022
984 of 1038
BlackBerry Golf Course
599916.18 SF

GRANADA AVE

MINAKER CT

STEVENS CREEK BLVD

SCENIC BLVD
ADELH
EID CT

BYRNE AVE

STOCKLMEIR CT

DEAN CT

HERMOSA AVE

LOMITA AVE

ALMADEN AVE

SAN FERNANDO AVE

BYRNE CT
Irrigation Area
Programmed
Layer
Twenty irrigation heads to be turned
off resulting in reduction of
141,300 SF
0 90 180 45 US Feet
985
CC 07-07-2022
985 of 1038
Canyon Oaks Park
1416.35 SF
6598.38 SF
1661.93 SF

ST MARY'S DR

CANYON OAK WAY
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
0 10 205 US Feet
986
CC 07-07-2022
986 of 1038
Civic Center
2828.75 SF
10383.62 SF
3297.9 SF
805.6 SF
23124.25 SF
10907.21 SF
5046.33 SF
3968.15 SF

TORRE AVE

TOWN CENTER LN

RODRIGUES AVE
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Drip Irrigation
0 30 60 15 US Feet
987
CC 07-07-2022
987 of 1038
Collins Elementary / Portal Park
37094.95 SF
5497.49 SF
69049.63 SF
100878.96 SF

TWILIGHT CT

N PORTAL AVE
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 40 80 20 US Feet
988
CC 07-07-2022
988 of 1038
Creekside Park Soccer Field
4119.05 SF
4207.1 SF
123880.09 SF
184448.36 SF

PHIL LN

LA MAR CT

MILLER AVE

HOWARD CT
Irrigation Area
Brown Turf Area
Drip Irrigation
Programmed
0 60 120 30 US Feet
989
CC 07-07-2022
989 of 1038
Eaton Elementary
3454.94 SF
133180.35 SF

FARALLONE DR

JOHN DR

SUISUN DR
Irrigation Area
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 40 80 20 US Feet
990
CC 07-07-2022
990 of 1038
Faria Elementary School
115744.6 SF
Irrigation Area
Programmed Area
0 25 50 12.5 US Feet
991
CC 07-07-2022
991 of 1038
Franco Park
1103.6 SF
2491.53 SF XXX

FRANCO CT
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
0 10 20 5 US Feet
992
CC 07-07-2022
992 of 1038
Garden Gate Elementary
107246.15 SF
Irrigation Area
Programmed
0 25 50 12.5 US Feet
993
CC 07-07-2022
993 of 1038
Hoover Park
150955.2 SF
11642.38 SF
29687.97 SF
2081.79 SF
608.82 SF

GALWAY DR BARNHART PL

LEEDS AVE

DONEGAL DR
Irrigation Area
Brown Turf Area
Drip Irrigation
Programmed
0 40 80 20 US Feet
994
CC 07-07-2022
994 of 1038
Hyde Middle School
77961.7 SF
112329.34 SF

STENDHAL LN

DISNEY LN

HYDE AVE
Irrigation Area
Programmed
0 50 100 25 US Feet
995
CC 07-07-2022
995 of 1038
Jollyman Park
128150.42 SF
107504.03 SF
123070.67 SF DUMAS DR

TUSCANY PL

S STELLING RD

ORLINE CT
RT 85

COLONY HILLS LN

JOLLYMAN DR

HEATHERWOOD DR

JOLLYMAN LN

DE FOE DR

ELDERWOOD CT
Irrigation Area
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 60 120 30 US Feet
996
CC 07-07-2022
996 of 1038
Kennedy MIddle School
21789.05 SF
73786.91 SF
60366.74 SF
180289.76 SF

HYANNISPORT DR

OLD TOWN CT

NEW HAVEN CT

PROVIDENCE CT

LIBERTY CT

ROSARIO AVE

RONALD WAY

BUBB RD

MARIA ROSA WAY

FORT BAKER DR

EDWARD WAY
Irrigation Area
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 80 160 40 US Feet
997
CC 07-07-2022
997 of 1038
Library field
105169.89 SF
29818.28 SF
10383.62 SF

PACIFICA DR

WHITNEY WAY

TORRE AVE
Irrigation Area
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 30 60 15 US Feet
998
CC 07-07-2022
998 of 1038
Lincoln Elementary School
98067.33 SF

PRESIDIO DR
Irrigation Area
Programmed
0 30 60 15 US Feet
999
CC 07-07-2022
999 of 1038
Linda Vista Park
9386.58 SF
5992.7 SF
9986.18 SF
8243.79 SF
67029.67 SF

BAXLEY CT
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
0 50 100 25 US Feet
1000
CC 07-07-2022
1000 of 1038
McClellan Ranch Gardens
59085.28 SF
SCENIC
CT

CLUB HOUSE LN

MCCLELLAN RD
RAE LN

SCENIC CIR

TRESSLER CT

MIRA VISTA AVE

SCENIC BLVD

PAR THREE DR
Irrigation Area
Programmed
0 75 150 37.5 US Feet
1001
CC 07-07-2022
1001 of 1038
Memoria Park /Quinlan
15008.99 SF
8924.47 SF
29764.2 SF
9291.58 SF
5337.87 SF
10646.29 SF
6213.4 SF
6137.81 SF
13217.83 SF
8912.03 SF
815.85
1727.76 SF SF
776.53 SF
1831.71
SF
78150.01 SF
55873.11 SF
6168.5 SF
2177.94 SF
1261.5 SF
737.81 SF
284.05 SF
2542.93 SF
25468.09 SF
19149.15 SF 9634.67 SF
6770.61 SF
4204.24 SF
63036.64 SF
1259.09 SF
3176.19
SF
3948.72 SF
437.59
SF
4410 SF
4974.6 SF 3174.73 SF
576.94
SF 3307.06 SF
3054.25 SF
6768.15 SF
2649.23 SF
581.38 SF
5065.7 SF
3254.07 SF

ALVES DR

FENWAY CT

STEVENS CREEK BLVD CONGRESS PL

UNITED PL

FREEDOM DR
F
R
E

EDOM PL
XXX

CHRISTENSEN DR

S STELLING RD
N

STELLING
RD

SENATE WAY

LAURETTA DR
MARY
AVE

ANTON WAY

PATRIOT WAY
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Drip Irrigation
Programmed
0 80 160 40 US Feet
1002
CC 07-07-2022
1002 of 1038
Monta Vista Rec Center
40592.61 SF
7284.21 SF
3295.01 SF
61479.53 SF
8564.87 SF
6391.44 SF
2259.93 SF
13565.92 SF

5.91 SF
2025.44 SF

WOODRIDGE CT MERRIMAN RD

MCKLINTOCK LN

VOSS AVE
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Drip Irrigation
Programmed
0 40 80 20 US Feet
1003
CC 07-07-2022
1003 of 1038
Oak Valley Park
1701.62 SF
2217.14 SF

BLACK OAKWAY

OAK VALLEY RD
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
0 10 20 5 US Feet
1004
CC 07-07-2022
1004 of 1038
Regnart Elementary
111389.59 SF
4903.18 SF
6128.4 SF
1647.7 SF
4551.24 SF

YORKSHIRE DR ELMSFORD
DR
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 30 60 15 US Feet
1005
CC 07-07-2022
1005 of 1038
Sommerset Square Park
4864.69 SF
22351.51 SF
718.92 SF

STOKES AVE

MADERA DR
RT 280
RT 280 SB TO RT 85 SB TRANS
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Drip Irrigation
0 30 60 15 US Feet
1006
CC 07-07-2022
1006 of 1038
Stevens Creek Elementary
43814.44 SF
28754.46 SF
2634.25 SF
2619.07 SF
77975.13 SF
7216.72 SF

AINSWORT
H DR

VARIAN WAY

AMELIA CT

STONYDALE DR
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 50 100 25 US Feet
1007
CC 07-07-2022
1007 of 1038
Sterling Barnhart
2263.05 SF
568.62 SF
1384.24 SF
1139.36 SF
801.73 SF
2564.73 SF

STERLING BLVD
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Drip Irrigation
0 10 20 5 US Feet
1008
CC 07-07-2022
1008 of 1038
Three Oaks Park
134071.5 SF
4133.69 SF

SHADOWHILL LN

CANDLELIGHT WAY

RUPPELL PL

MOLTZEN DR
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
0 30 60 15 US Feet
1009
CC 07-07-2022
1009 of 1038
Wilson Park

64.24 SF
3651.84 SF
554.44 SF
3656.45 SF
2838.61 SF
2665.34 SF
34783.8 SF
3036.5 SF
8414.75 SF
92253.43 SF
40501.98 SF
40876.35 SF
9114.49 SF
70317.61 SF
3867.78 SF
S
PO
RTAL
AVE

HALL CT

MALVERN CT

RODRIGUES AVE

LINDSAY AVE

LANSDALE AVE

WINTERGREEN DR

PARKSIDE LN

PRICE AVE

GLENVIEW AVE

LA MAR DR
Irrigation Area
Limited Irrigation
Brown Turf Area
Programmed
0 60 120 30 US Feet
1010
CC 07-07-2022
1010 of 1038

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-11152 Agenda Date: 7/7/2022
Agenda #: 14.

Subject: Consider conducting a first reading of an ordinance amending Municipal Code Chapter 2.84:

Environmental Review Committee (continued from June 21) Conduct the first reading and approve the introduction of Ordinance No. 22-2242: "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Municipal Code Chapter 2.84: Environmental Review Committee" Presenter: Chris Jensen, City Attorney
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 7/1/2022
powered by Legistar™1011
CC 07-07-2022
1011 of 1038

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: July 7, 2022
Subject
Consider conducting a first reading of an ordinance amending Municipal Code Chapter

2.84: Environmental Review Committee
Recommended Action
Conduct the first reading and approve the introduction of Ordinance No. 22-____: an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending Municipal Code Chapter

2.84: Environmental Review Committee
Discussion
The Environmental Review Committee (“ERC”) reviews all discretionary projects which are not categorically exempt or otherwise exempted from further environmental assessment to determine if the project may have a significant impact on the environment and determine whether an Environmental Impact Report is required for the project. The Committee is currently comprised of one City Council person, one Planning Commissioner, the City Manager, the Director of Public Works, and the Director of Community Development or their designated alternates. The structure of Cupertino’s Environmental Review Committee, which includes both City staff and elected and appointed officials, is uncommon and possibly unique among jurisdictions in California.1 On February 15, 2022, the City Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to the Municipal Code Chapter 2.84 to change the composition of the Environmental Review Committee, such that it would be comprised of two members of the City Council and one member of the Planning Commission. The City Council also referred to the Committee the question of what scope of subject matter the Committee should review.

1 Among cities and counties in California that have committees with a jurisdiction focused on the environmental review process, the standard composition is a committee of staff members appointed from different departments. No cities or counties identified rely on a committee with membership similar to Cupertino’s ERC. 1012
CC 07-07-2022
1012 of 1038
The proposed Ordinance would make changes to the composition of the Environmental Review Committee consistent with the prior direction of Council. In addition, the proposed Ordinance includes minor non-substantive revisions to the appeals provision of the Ordinance.

Sustainability Impacts
No impact.

Environmental Impacts
The adoption of the proposed Ordinance is not a project under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et. seq. (collectively, “CEQA”), because it has no potential for resulting in physical change in the environment. Even if the project were found to be a project under CEQA, it would be subject to the CEQA exemption contained in CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty to have no possibility that the action approved may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA applies only to actions which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. In this circumstance, the proposed action, the adoption of the proposed Ordinance, would have no or only a de minimis effect on the environment.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Christopher D. Jensen, City Attorney
Reviewed by: Dianne Thompson, Assistant City Manager
Approved for Submission by: Jim Throop, City Manager
Attachments:

A - Draft Ordinance
1013
CC 07-07-2022
1013 of 1038
1 ORDINANCE NO. __________________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 2.84: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, in 1990, the City Council of the City of Cupertino adopted Ordinance No. 1535 establishing the Environmental Review Committee; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Committee Ordinance, as amended, is codified in Chapter 2.84 of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Chapter 2.84 to improve oversight of the environmental review process as set forth therein.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Adoption.

The Cupertino Municipal Code is hereby amended as set forth in Attachment A.

SECTION 2: Severability and Continuity.

The City Council declares that each section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this ordinance is severable and independent of every other section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase of this Ordinance. If any section, sub-section, paragraph, sub-paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is held invalid, or its application to any person or circumstance, be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful, unenforceable or otherwise void, the City Council declares that it would have adopted the remaining provisions of this ordinance irrespective of such portion, and further declares its express intent that the remaining portions of this Ordinance should remain in effect after the invalid portion has been eliminated. To the extent the provisions of this Ordinance are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Cupertino Municipal Code, these provisions shall be construed as continuations of those provisions and not as an amendment to or readoption of the earlier provisions. 1014
CC 07-07-2022
1014 of 1038
Ordinance No. __________

Page 2 ends

Cupertino City CouncilJuly 7, 2022

Cupertino City Council
July 7, 2022